[spectre] Symp. Art Oriented Programming, Paris, 19-20 March 2004

[Andreas Broeckmann]

programme below, and at http://www.creca.org



RELEASE n°2

"ART ORIENTED PROGRAMMING"
DECODING AND CRITICISM

International Symposium
PARIS, 19 - 20 MARCH 2004

Symposium organised by
Centre de Recherches d'Esthétique du Cinéma et des Arts Audiovisuels (CRECA)

Université Paris 1, Panthéon-Sorbonne
Amphithéâtre Richelieu, 17 rue de la Sorbonne, 75005 Paris
19 mars 2004 de 14h00 à 21h30
20 mars 2004 de 9h30 à 21h30
Admission free

with the support of
L'École doctorale Arts plastiques, esthétique et sciences de l 'art
and
Délégation aux arts plastiques, ministère de la Culture et de la Communication.

Press contact: creca.presse at voila.fr
Informations: creca.poa.inf at voila.fr ou www.creca.org
Symposium's organisation: david-olivier.lartigaud at univ-paris1.fr



------------------------------------------- Presentation 
-------------------------------------------


Since the late 1990s, a new label, "Software art", has appeared in 
the artistic computing research field and was largely circulated on 
the Internet. The label "Software art" is intended to describe a new 
artistic tendency - programming as part and parcel of the work of 
art, programming as art. The advantage of speaking of 
"Software art" is to highlight the question of programming, usually 
evaded in the 1990's as attention was drawn to the "spectacular" 
aspect of some of the so-called "digital" artworks. Is it simply an 
updated version of the 1960's-70's "Computer Art"? It may well be. 
But our technological context is however radically different from 
that of "Computer art." If in the 60's, working on a computer was a 
marginal activity, in 2004, it is most banal. More so, as computers 
are standardised and widely used, millions have new visual and 
auditory habits and practices. And this is probably where to find the 
true origin of "Software art" - that is, in a wish to go against 
standards and formats ever more massively spread and in a refusal to 
submit to the machine on the one hand, and to the industry's economic 
imperatives on the other.
By working on software and practising computing languages, the artist 
can entirely devise and develop his/her own programme or revel in a 
"hijacking" of existing application programmes beyond all constraints.
The symposium "Art Oriented Programming" is thus born of the 
necessity to come back upon the question of programming in order to 
understand its incidence on the creation and the public reception of 
artworks. Is the label "Software art" relevant? Isn't this falling 
once again into the snare and constraints of a technical 
classification of artworks hardly adapted to an accurate description 
of contemporary practices?
Much is at stake in the practice of artistic programming and this 
symposium, bringing together artists and theoreticians from around 
the world, will be an occasion to deal with the seven following 
points: 


Art / Criticism

Why should working on a computer, inasmuch as one's work is artistic, 
be an excuse to ignore the history of art? This mistake, inherited in 
part from "digital art", applies to "Software Art" as well. There are 
usually two critical reactions to this puzzle - on top of which there 
is the controversial question of the definition of art. On the one 
hand, some adopt a normative point of view and seek to define the 
boundaries of art in order to admit or not "programme works". On the 
other hand, others, carried away by enthusiasm, propose to widen the 
boundaries in order to admit all forms so far judged inartistic. The 
symposium will take into account this tension between two poles in a 
way to bring about, thanks to the works and theoretical reflections 
presented, a more dialectical way of understanding the status of 
these objects.
The question of judgment is therefore the heart of the matter as it 
seems obvious that assessment criteria widely differ according to 
which domain (art/technology) they apply. Isn't there a fundamental 
incompatibility between programming and art? Are new critical tools 
to be worked out?


Programme / Language

"Programme", from the Greek programma, means "what is in advance 
written," "a set of utterances describing a forthcoming action [Š] / 
a set of operations to be implemented in order to get a result." But 
from politics to entertainment, together with science and 
mathematics, "programme" and "programming" have widely differing 
meanings. Are there programming languages specific to art? Is 
therefore the programme to be understood as a work's "score"? Has 
time management anything to do with cinematic editing for example? 
Can all languages give birth to artworks? Are the programme and its 
result inseparable? How is the programmer's role to be assessed?

Aesthetic Experience

Some programmes not specifically considered "artistic" also provide 
ground for an aesthetic experience. This may be the case with video 
games, for example, or with music software or even with viruses and 
screen-saversŠ All computer practices, including programming, 
generate situations that can be examined from an aesthetic 
standpoint. Yet there is a difference between artistic and aesthetic 
experiences. Isn't this swing towards art due to a confusion between 
art and aesthetics which is widely the case with all "digital works"?

Reception/Interactivity

How are the works to be perceived? What is a spectator expected to do 
in order to understand them? The question should not be shocking as 
spectators of contemporary art at large have become accustomed to 
puzzling pieces that require a certain effort. Spectators of 
interactive works readily yield to a "recreational syndrome" and 
transform themselves into players. Yet, if some artists do not balk 
at describing their works as toys, others endeavour to fight this 
phenomenon by creating "illogical" or "disobedient" interaction. 
Aren't such cases of simulated "deprogramming" signs of the essential 
place of the addressee? However, isn't "deprogramming" a good device 
to make things "look artistic"? Is it enough to suppress the main 
function of an application (as in "détournements" of video games) to 
make it "artistically appreciable"?

System/Calculation/Chance

The question of imitation is particularly keen in the domain of 
programming as it is to be found at the core of programmes in the 
form of algorithms. Numerous artists draw their inspiration from 
physical theories, biological descriptions and many other research 
works of fundamental sciences, to programme the moves and sounds 
produced by their works. Yet laboratories are now working on 
programmes of materials, life or AI simulations. Does that mean 
consequently that such works produced for scientific and technical 
use are artistically superior? All the more so that some of them are 
worth contemplating aesthetically speaking! Doesn't this example show 
that artistic qualities and technical qualities have nothing in 
common? And the "programme" proves its plasticity insofar as it can 
be adapted to meet scientific as well as artistic demands and is 
worth nothing independently from its given finality.

Graphic Design

Many programmed works have visual qualities. But are electronic 
images to be considered as images in their own right or as simple 
indicators of a programme's activity? Some artists voluntarily limit 
graphic signs in order to promote the programme's activity as such. 
One may also wonder about the success of "listings" as visual 
"codes". From "ASCII art" to the film The Matrix, lines of programme 
seem to be established as a major source of imagesŠ

"Hacktivism"

Part of the production of "programmed artworks" is inherited from the 
hacker's attitude. Once rid of clichés of crime largely relayed by 
the press, there remains a spirit of protest, in particular against 
the mass media. Numerous artists use to critical ends this principle 
of "hijacking" of technology or exploitation of some programmes' and 
systems' flaws. The Internet also gave birth to many protest or 
activists sites or sites that analyse social problems and that are 
far more reactive thanks to the electronic medium. This attitude will 
focus our attention during a panel in order to assess its relevance 
and artistic interest.

David-Olivier Lartigaud



------------------------------------------- Abstract 
-------------------------------------------


PROGRAMMING: NEW ARTISTIC CODES?

Does the programmer interpret the work according to the artist's 
desire? Does he partially create it? What are the artistic practices 
brought about by programming? Should the programme be taken into 
account for an aesthetic judgement of computer artwork? It is 
necessary to tackle the question of what is aesthetically at stake in 
the essential role played by programming in the creation of computer 
artworks. This symposium will be an occasion to make every effort to 
propose new critical approaches. During two days, theoreticians, 
programmers and artists shall present their own approach. Lectures 
will alternate with work presentations. Invited artists will present 
creations in which programming is ground for specific research. They 
will explain some aspects of their work on programming. Each 
presentation will be followed by a public debate. Two round table 
talks to deal with "hacktivism" and with "programming aesthetics" 
will also complement the symposium.



« Art Oriented Programming »  March 19-20, 2004   Amphithéâtre 
Richelieu Sorbonne


FRIDAY March 19

2 pm : Introduction
Anne-Marie DUGUET, Professor at the University of Paris 1, Director 
of the CRECA
David-Olivier LARTIGAUD, University of Paris 1, in charge of the symposium

Moderator : Anne-Marie DUGUET

Bernard STIEGLER (Director of IRCAM) : « Programmable et improbable »

Charles SANDISON (Artist) : « Paragraphs on Computer Art » (after Sol 
LeWitt's « Paragraphs on Conceptual Art »)

Jean-Pierre BALPE (Professor at the University of Paris 8) : « Du 
programme en littérature »

Olga GORIUNOVA (Independent curator) : « Runme.org software art 
repository : What you believe is what you get »

4:40 pm : BREAK

Matthew FULLER (Reader in Media Design at the Piet Zwart Institute, 
Rotterdam, Director of I/O/D) : « Freaks of Number »

Andreas BROECKMANN (Art Director of the Transmediale, Berlin) : « 
Questioning software art »

Panel.  Moderator : Nathalie MAGNAN , Professor at the Art School of Dijon :
« Hacktivism » with Christophe BRUNO, Matthew FULLER, Frédéric MADRE, 
Isabelle VODJDANI.

7 :20 pm  : BREAK

8 :45 pm : Demo Téléférique « <Errare programma est> »



SAMEDI 20 MARS

9H30 : Moderator : Marion HOHLFELDT, University of Rennes 2

Richard KRIESCHE (Professor, Artist) : « Datawork : man »

Hugues VINET (Scientific Director of IRCAM) : « De la partition aux modèles »

11H15 : BREAK

Gérard CHAZAL (Professor at the University of Bourgogne) : « De 
l'usage des machines programmées dans l'art à une esthétique de la 
programmation »

Woody et Steina VASULKA (Artists)

12:45 pm : LUNCH

2 :00 pm : Moderator : Annick BUREAUD (Critic, Director of Leonardo/Olats)

Simon PENNY (Professor of Arts and Engineering. UCI Director, Arts, 
Computation and Engineering (ACE)) and Andre BERNHARDT, programmer : 
« Making Culture Machines »

Paul DEVAUTOUR (Artist, Professor at the Art School of Marseille, 
coordinator of the Collège Invisible) : "Dialogue homme-machine et 
dialogue artiste-développeur"

Florian CRAMER (Lecturer at the Freie Universität, Berlin) : « Ten 
Theses about Software Art »

Frédéric DURIEU (Graphic designer) : « Poésie algorithmique »

4:40 pm : BREAK

Inke ARNS (Independent curator) : « Read_me, run_me, execute_me : 
Software art and its discontents »

Antoine SCHMITT (Artist - programmer) : « Art programmé : langage de 
l'action, esthétique de la cause » et présentation du collectif 
Transitoire Observable.

Geoff COX (Artist, Professor in  Computer Science at Plymouth 
University) : « Reconsidering the Aesthetics of Generative Code »

Robin FERCOQ (Artiste, Member of Téléférique) : « Microlangage expérimental »

7 :30 pm : Moderator : David-Olivier LARTIGAUD

Stéphane SAUTOUR (Artist)

JODI (Artists) : « Dress%CODE »

Panel : Moderator David-Olivier LARTIGAUD :
  « Art Oriented Programming ? » with  Stéphane SAUTOUR, Antoine 
SCHMITT, Douglas Edric STANLEY, Š