|
The
FACTORY.....2000-01 |
|
INTERVIEW Interview. Menene Gras Balaguer and Marisa González.
This period of time has been especially fruitful for her in that she has been able to cast a critical eye upon her work and at the same time immerse herself in a new project. Her personal testimony provides a presence which I consider of special interest in that it allows us to learn of her intentions directly without the interpretative aspect which all recipients add in the communication process. We have tried to review her career briefly and at the same time place the work exhibited here in context pointing out its unifying factors. The terms recover, recycle, manipulate, transform are key factors necessary to understand her work as is evidenced in the development which has taken place since her early abandoning of painting in favor of the exploration of the instruments provided by the new technologies included in customary artistic practices in the 60´s and 70´s. The fact that she belongs to the generation which explored the possibilities of Copy Art and Fax Art and which moved on from analogical means to digital tools, allows us to place her in an international context in which art forms cannot be understood without the inclusion of the technical aspect. An inclusion which has consequences when experimentation is defended even if art practices become alternative practices carried out beyond the normal market circuits. Sonia Sheridan´s comments about the artist included in this catalogue provide the necessary information to place the artist at the beginnings of her career in the Chicago Art Institute where she carried out research based on the discoveries of a new technology which was just beginning. Marisa González has never given up the inquisitive spirit and exploration of resources which technology brings to the world of information and the communication process and which at the same time ties the artist to the historical present. No conversation is ever definitive, no affirmation nor negation is unique. Nevertheless, in reproducing this conversation held in her laboratory, to which we could add fragments from many other conversations which took place during the processes of conception and development of this project, we have tried to reveal, as much as possible, the underlying intentions of the project, while at the same time recognizing the failings of language which are made even more obvious by the power of the image. Q> At first glance the images included in this exhibition deviate from the more recognizable iconography of your work. Even though it might be difficult taking into account what we assume is the result of your personal evolution, how can we identify the theme which serves as the unifying element? A> The theme of this exhibition begins with the need to capture an event, the razing of a building which served as a symbol of the Basque Country´s industry. This event cannot be separated from my own life, and this perhaps adds to my interest in it. I am referring to the factory which was built at the end of the 19th century to produce flour and bake bread for the city using the latest European technological advances. The factory was one of the most advanced in Europe at that time using the most modern machinery and production techniques. A century later, this very same technology made it obsolete. Its survival being threatened for some time, and in spite of various attempts to modernize it, it was decided to demolish it. Q> What factors were decisive in not only bringing the factory to your attention but also in causing you to begin this project which you have just ended? A> By chance I was in Bilbao when I learned that the factory was going to be demolished for the reasons I mentioned before. I felt a certain curiosity to visit it and I decided to go in order to look over areas that I was not familiar with. Behind a close-knit group of several buildings of varying architectural styles appeared a building of monumental aspect. Even though I had heard about it I had never actually seen it. With the passing of the years it was now located in the center of the city. The very state and condition of the building along with its imminent disappearance to be carried out shortly transmitted a powerful impulse. The exterior of the building as well as the desolation of its interior, with its machinery and devices no longer used, formed a new vision for me made complete by the final loss resulting from its destruction. This was the decisive stimulus for me to begin the corresponding recording and filing of images. Q> What was your original intention when you began the photographic "hijacking" of the models offered by reality? Did you think it was the beginning of an exhibition project as it ended up being and which you now offer us? A> Along with the first photographic records I made of the factory I gathered objects which I stored in my studio. I did so conscious that I was rescuing something which could disappear. When I had all the material in my workplace and I began to go over it I became more and more excited; I then realized that this was going to be theme for my exhibition. I went back several times to Bilbao to be present during the development of the events leading up to the knocking down of the building. Surprisingly, two years ago, when I stepped foot in the factory for the first time, it was still functioning. In reality, it did not stop working completely until December 31, 1998 when it had been in existence for a hundred years. Afterwards, with its razing, elements which had remained hidden began to be discovered; which is what happened with the fall of the gray wall surrounding the white silos where the train wagons unloaded the tons of wheat which piled up there. Behind a neutral facade, seven silos each approximately seven stories high appeared. When I found out that they were going to be knocked down I immediately returned to Bilbao in order to capture their slow destruction, silo by silo, day by day, until they were completely gone. The rhythm of collapse of these monumental metallic cylinders was overwhelming. The cold, the rain, the noise of the wrecking cranes in action squashing them one by one all contributed to the desolation of the scenery. My work at the "site" finished with the registering of this astounding unique spectacle. Q> Returning to the first point, with respect to the separation which appears to have been produced between the architectural images which refer to a place and to specific areas, and those which constitute the origin of the work which precedes them, what explanation can be offered? On the other hand, an immediate and obvious relationship between the origin of a work and its later development does not always appear. A> Apparently, it does appear that I vary from the models which form the basis of my other works in which the human aspect predominates, but before turning to the human figure, I work with the object. What I did was to give the object human life, which allowed me to link elements or artefacts to each other as if they were almost human beings. This happened at the beginning of the 80´s even though in the 70´s I was already working with human figures either using an actual photograph which I manipulated or patterns which I drew myself. In 1986 while I was working on the musical scores of contemporary composers I took a trip to Onil to visit the doll factory which became a place of reference for my series on dolls. I took a few shots with the camera of that enthralling universe which I later left aside. I didn´t touch them again until 1991 when I included them in my work. The first series is from the early 90´s. This series and those that followed it served as the pretext for returning to the images of The Rape taken in 1971 in a Chicago dump with a doll. I took a second trip to Onil in 1993 in order to expand the photographic documentation which I had amassed on the production process and the molds themselves. I even brought to my studio sacks full of doll pieces, head, limbs, material which I used to a great extent employing Sonia Sheridan´s Lumena digital system. I studied with her at the Chicago Art Institute where we established a solid friendship which continues even today. Q> Effectively, the human figure is present in all your career even in the series of "deviations" in which the shapes of fruit, lemons, strawberries, kiwis, take on shapes of the human body which are very suggestive. To what point did you think architecture would distance you from your previous artistic interests? A> The main goal of my work has always been, as I just mentioned, the human aspect, and this venture into architecture, while it attracted me, seemed to be cold and distant, in comparison to my prior work. Nevertheless as I continued to investigate this context, it began to appear more exciting and I felt that, in effect, my growing interest was due to the possibility of projecting myself personally. Until this happened I had limited myself to documenting it, and only from that point on did I begin to work with the material that I had amassed with the intention of using it as the basis for my next work. Q> What tools did you use to create the images that you offer in this exhibition? In what proportion do you use photography, video, or the computer? A> Each new exhibition is an opportunity to review your previous work and to start on new paths of exploration. In this present case, this seems obvious to the extent that I am developing a new theme, and in that, for the first time, I am going to include real objects instead of their representation. I mean elements such as the silo, the lamps, a clock, some signs, but also including a series of photos I have created for this project and a video installation. The photograph and the photocopier have constantly been my tools in my work; the video camera, to a lesser extent, despite the importance I have always given it. On the other hand the computer has been absolutely essential to me since 1986 when I presented along with Sonia Sheridan, the new Lumena system in the exhibition titled AProcesses, Culture and the New Technologies, which was the inaugural exhibition at the Reina Sofia that year. In "The Factory", I incorporate digital photography, video and computer. Without this latter instrument I couldn´t have gotten the results I wanted as can be seen in the spread-out landscape scenes. Q> I think it interesting to keep in mind that this exhibition was preceded by an elaborate process of creation which required a great amount of work compiling information and documentation, and at the same time, that this project has been in the works for two years. A> In the successive trips I have taken to Bilbao during this time I have carried both photographic and video cameras to not only capture open and closed spaces but also to rummage through all items. The imminent disappearance of all of this was sufficient motive in itself to make me feel on all of these trips the need to create the maximum amount of visual and written documentation. This factory had many personal connotations for me related to my own life. From the outside I saw it as an enormous and mysterious area, inaccessible. Up to 1975 it had the monopoly on baking bread in Bilbao. The rapid development of the events which led up to the demolishing of the building stimulated my curiosity which produced even more excitement in me. I was able to recover part of the written documents, balances, personnel reports, mock-ups, blueprints, signs, well aware that a great number of these documents contained confidential information which was now useless but still of interest to me because it allowed me to reconstruct the history of the economic power of the city, albeit a reduced part of that power. I was also able to rescue various industrial lamps which allowed the installation of the lamps exhibition and one silo, which has been re-mounted here. The idea is to physically reconstruct a cubicle which is inhabitable, metaphorically speaking, in the form of a cell guarded by a clock equally real. I want to make it clear that in no way was it my desire to incorporate these elements of reality by making use of an antique dealer´s retro viewpoint, nor through a melancholic viewpoint, but rather based on an aspect of personalization, on the organization of space, in order to create a very intense personal experience that I wanted to share. None of the elements which are so to speak real and have been incorporated here have been chosen arbitrarily. They are the result of not only a personal interest in that they form part of this exhibition but also of my desire to recover, recycle, manipulate, and transform them. They are procedures which in some way can lengthen the permanence of things. The gathering of materials, information, and documents which I used was followed by a rigorous selection process and the corresponding synthesis before taking any action. Q> What role does photography have in this exhibition? It seems to me that it has been absolutely essential in recording information about the factory building and to initiate the manipulation of icons using the computer. A> Photography has always been a complementary tool in my work. At the beginning of my stay in Chicago in 1971 my work seemed to make use of a somewhat pictorial vision; nevertheless, since the early stages of my career photography has been essential for me. It was the tool which allowed me to capture the moment I wanted to retain. While I was following the Master program at the Chicago Art Institute, I gave up painting entirely in order to dedicate myself completely to the exploration and experimentation of new technologies. Photography took on the function of a data base and image bank which I have made use of constantly. My customary method of work means using this arsenal which I have been accumulating throughout my life in various ways. Q> Nevertheless, not all of the work which was the result of that desire to experiment with new technologies was limited to the use of photography, not even as a foundation or starting point. A> The use of the technological tools at my disposal allowed me to ignore photography. I obtained images through other less orthodox means, such as placing objects or models directly on the glass part of the photocopier. By controlling space/time and light I was able to build the generative sequences. I called that painting by light because the intervention took place in the moment the machine captured the image. I worked with the photocopier until the early 90´s when I began to use the computer as my almost exclusive processing tool, although my first work using the computer was done in 1986. Q> What was the extent or reach of electrography in Spain? Did it occur much later compared to the U.S.? And how long did its period of experimentation last? A> In Spain in the 70´s there were only isolated attempts to use the photocopier as a creative tool. The proliferation of paradigms began when color photocopiers were made generally available in the 80´s. We artists are generally interested in discovering the possibilities of incorporating new tools to our repertoire. As far as I´m concerned I clearly tend to use the tools which are part of the time I am living in. The photocopier at that time was a magic machine, in that, for the first time, it produced results in seconds. Before putting it into action you had to conceive of and define what you were going to do. Image capturing was instantaneous and its representation almost simultaneous. For the first time it was possible to generate images and sequences immediately thanks to the speed at which the result was obtained, thus making the development of new means of expressions possible. We hated the word "copy" because the final image was not a copy and also because changes occurred due to error or chance as a result of the very process of image generation. This was the great attraction of this tool. With the appearance of the computer, I predicted, nevertheless, that the photocopier would be relegated to second place. I believe that we artists use the tools and new means that technology provides us with to increase our individual expression resources. The photocopier has become just another resource, which can be added to the inventory of the ones which already exist. Q> The replacing of the photocopier, whose limitations would become apparent sooner or later, by the computer happened because of the need to expand the resources available for artistic practices. It is not very common, however, to rescue machines which have been put out of circulation, and even less common to adapt them so that they can continue to function. A> The computer is a very powerful resource, capable of absorbing multiples of information input. For years I carried out the image capturing process using the original configuration of the Lumena system. This system consists of a digital palette and captures the image in closed circuit. Through almost all of the 90´s it was my main resource. With the corresponding video camera I took images of fellow artists who visited the studio. I created the setting for the clonal dolls with this camera. It was a very exciting period : the computer, almost obsolete, taking into account the rapid pace of advances in technology, had some peculiar characteristics intrinsic to the software which were very surprising. It´s a clone from the early 80´s with only 512K: one of the first PC-XT compatible personal computers, which through the analogical capture process allows for instantaneous image-capturing. You access the menu sing the digital palette and then you can begin work.. Despite being accustomed to the immediacy of the photocopier, this system kept returning the image to me instantly. The catch was in printing the image. Since we were dealing with a computer from the 80´s none of today´s printers were compatible. That is why I captured the image processed by the computer by taking pictures of the screen, and in many cases, I then continued on to another intervention while taking the photograph. Again, here the photograph becomes essential as you can see. At the same time to continue being able to use this computer I installed the universal disk drive of the 90´s, the 3.5" drive, and with a special program I can transfer these images to today´s computers thus combining resources from the past with those of the present. I´ve managed to recycle this machine which was considered an antique, proving at the same time that the powerful software produced by John Dunn continues to be irreplaceable in some aspects. Q> Adapting the "system" has enabled you to use a computer which was taken off the market a long time ago and which is in disuse. What benefit can you get from a machine that is completely out of circulation? A> Today, the
printing aspect is not a problem. With the machine I have in my studio
I have been able to recycle this computer as I mentioned a minute ago
in that same way that I recycle images, objects, elements, things, which
I modernize in different ways and so build a new reality. Q> When did you
incorporate digital photography into your work and what advantages does
it offer with respect to conventional photography? Is the replacing
of one by the other definitive? A> In the first place, the concept of digital photography is very broad. As for me, my involvement with it goes back to the photographs I took of the Lumena computer screen which were already digital. Although I made use of analogical capture, in other words the video camera, the register was digital. The procedure consisted of a combination of analogical and digital components : with the video camera I shot the object, and with the optical stylus I registered and manipulated the information. Likewise, with other computers, I have scanned photographs of mine which I have on file and then transformed them in the computer. A third resource I am working with now is the digital camera, which I used both in the series on transgenetic fruit and in the project about the factory. Nevertheless, I need to alternate the use of this camera with that of the traditional ones because there are certain aspects which can only be captured with these latter devices. Q> I imagine that the digital camera has been an important element in creating the work which you are now presenting, not only because of its possibilities but also because it allows you to save resources. However, to what extent can it be considered decisive in the further processing of the images. A> The digital camera is a magnificent instrument for the gathering of information, but it doesn´t permit you to use large formats without the pixels appearing, and I´m not interested in leaving any traces of them. Even so, I have used it as a complementary resource. The photographs which are exhibited here were taken analogically but they had to be read through the computer to decode and de-signify the elements constituting the interior and exterior of the factory which were too obvious in order to create new territories. Q> How was the computer involved in this manipulation of images in order to achieve the effects you managed to achieve starting from models that were seemingly inalterable? A> The computer has been essential in creating the expanded views of the scenery and in altering the habits of ordinary perception. This implied the exploration of the existing motifs in the images taken and the organization of the new scenery whose artificiality is confused with reality. This confusion was produced originally through making these photos in certain places or locales, which, because of, their fragmentation lent themselves to ambiguous identification. For example, there were areas on the roof tile that were true water terraces. I discovered them after climbing up through some surprising entrance-ways that led to these aquatic-like terrace roofs from which you got a panoramic view of the city and the nearby hills. The water had brought forth accidental vegetation as well as the existence of aquatic fauna and the presence of pigeons which flew over the landscape ceaselessly. They served as the model for the series of wet landscapes which I include among the exterior shots of the factory. Q> I think that one of the aspects of these photographs which we should highlight is the format which cannot be understood as accidental by any means, but rather, obviously, as being sought deliberately in order to obtain certain appearances. A> I chose to make use of a horizontal format basically to give the impression that the landscape could be extended indefinitely. The limit is only that of physical space, to which we have tried to adapt the photographic images. This is due to the desire to maintain an unreal format, to contribute to the panoramic vision of a scenery that appeared to be existing for the first time when I captured it with the photographic cameras and the video camera. On the other hand, the manipulation which I carried out digitally almost demanded it in order to make the image and the means of presentation suitable since each seemed to determine the other. It wouldn´t have made any sense to maintain a conventional format just to limit myself to standard formats. Instead, I saw it as a chance to test and experiment with other measures and I am glad I did it that way. The justification is in my desire to decode the perceptual keys of the real landscape which meant de-organizing its forms to reinvent them. Q> What role did audio have in this exhibition? Each installation is autonomous in this sense. Each has its recording which introduces the narration in the constructed scenery, and, consequently, also the action. A> The use of audio is inherent to the presentation of my work as can be seen in almost all of my exhibitions. I think that music and image empower one another and in this present case even more so, with respect to the installations I am presenting. The sound resources that I add are of different aspects: the voice that intone the names of the factory workers whose marriage licence are projected on the back wall of the closed-in area where the lamps have been placed; or the sounds recorded in situ during the demolishing of the factory, the fall of the silos and the action of the wrecking-cranes while the images are projected simultaneously. The power of the actual sounds was so intense that I decided to include them as part of the recordings and to which I have added the music of that great contemporary composer, Francisco Guerrero. Q> At one point you have stated your intention of extending this experience by making use of Net Art in order to reach a wider public and because it would allow you to design a more complete project. A> For me, this benefits any attempt at compiling different experiences in communication and exchange. Net Art, given its possibilities, is going through a period of great development. With respect to art produced using technology the very availability of technological tools creates one set of possibilities instead of another. The never-ending search for new means of expression by artists who seek to fit their artistic production to the tools available encourages investigation and the use of these resources. Some years ago, I would have offered a Fax Art piece of work, in keeping with the work I did in the early 90´s, for an exhibition in which numerous international artists intervened, in a real present, based on themes previously set up in a participation call. The result was a great shared experience which I consider a model of interaction due to the interchange it created. Q> Nevertheless, what is your proposal for making use of the facilities offered by Net Art to reach that anonymous public which visits or surfs the net, many of whom could be virtual visitors to this exhibition? A> It is obvious that today the interactive tool par excellence is the net. My idea is to launch on the net an interactive piece of work; something I think of as a strategy for participation and for communication. The aim is to take advantage of the existing means to turn this event into a collective experience for the virtual community. My proposal becomes a call to send images and texts that tell the story of factories, representative of a certain type of industrial architecture, going through a process of destruction, and to which the participant feels some sort of tie either because of proximity, family, or a special interest. This way we will be able to document and add to the various stories. During the exhibition a computer will be available to the public so that all those who wish to contribute will be able to do so. All participation will be recorded and in that way it can be visited on the net. Q> Unlike other artists who suddenly appear in the system as if the possibility of accessing the Net was the most natural thing and has always been around, you are one of the artists who has worked the most and much earlier than others in the little known environment of Fax Art. I´d like you to look back on some of the more relevant events or experiences which took place just a few years ago even though it seems farther in the past. A> In the early 90´s a group of artists "not part of an organized group" from different countries (including myself) were extremely active in this field, in which we saw in the fax a machine which allowed immediate communication, which in turn favored interaction almost in real time. Among other experiences I would like to point out the project "People to People" which originated in Prague, and the series of "City Portraits" shown in the Donguy Gallery in Paris. This latter exhibition was the result of a call put out by the Art Réseaux group from Paris. Among the other proposals formulated by this group of doctoral candidates from the Sorbonne directed by Karen O´Rourke we can mention "Parcours d´Images", "AParis-Télépatie", "Le Banquet télématique", "Infest", "Réseau du Nouveau Monde" and the exhibition in-progress "Machines à communiquer" held in the Cité des sciences et de l´Industria de la Violetta in Paris. Among the participants at that time we can find Eduardo Kac, Peter Weibel, Roy Ascot, Macias Fuchs, Gilbertto Prado, just to name a few of the better known ones; all of whom have carried out an even more relevant artistic and theoretical production since then. A call went out and a meeting was set for a specific day and time and we were all prepared to act. The idea was to work with images which were manipulated and worked on directly and vice-versa. The activities of the "Art Réseaux" group were carried out over a period of three consecutive years. A selection of their calls for exhibitions and proposals and the results were published in a two-volume book in the series Editios de l´Atelier Mimématique. In 1992 for the Documenta exhibition another international call-to-exhibit was sent out under the theme "Binarization Performance/Human Memory of the XX Century". I also took part in the exhibition proposal titled "The Longing of the Electronic Media for Nature" sent out from Gmund, Cologne. Q> You yourself announced several calls-to-exhibit and you were very active in that sector. In truth, you have never said no to the conception of art as a communicative experience requiring participation. Perhaps for that reason you had a major role in this little explored environment which has been so quickly replaced by Net Art. What projects would you emphasize? A> Among the proposals which I offered during that period I would mention the Fax Station exhibition which I organized at the Círculo de Bellas Artes in Madrid in 1993 along with my students for the working group Arte Actual which I directed in 1992. And also the exhibition which I organized in 1995 as part of Bilbograf at the Sala Rekalde in Bilbao which dealt with the themes of "crisis in culture", "individual body/infected body", "social body/polluted body". The Fax Station at the Círculo was an interactive installation which was open from five in the afternoon to eight in the morning and which involved a great deal of international participation. The book Elektrographie, Analogie und digitale Bilder by Klaus Urbons, published by Handbucher und Lexica in Cologne in 1994 mentions the Fax Station at the Círculo and even includes a photograph of the installation as one of the most representative pieces of Fax Art work. Q> Fax Art was preceded by Mail Art which was one of the first attempts at transcending the individualness and the isolation of the artist and his work. In fact, you participated in a tribute to Mail Art in the "Art Travels" exhibit at the Civilization Museum in Quebec (Canada.) What relationship do you see between Mail Art, Fax Art, and Net Art all of which become popular as each of the new information and communication technologies became available? A> The truth is all systems use the same reference keys of interaction, what varies is the measure of time and space. The work done in these environments has always been non-commercial and above all as alternative experiences a fact which has promoted communication among artists. The replacing of Mail Art by Fax Art in itself was extremely significant in that ordinary mail was replaced by a much faster and more immediate means of communication and resulted in various types of discoveries. The simultaneousness of communication was a new factor which introduced a vast number of possibilities. Net Art, however, added simultaneousness to the virtual space of the net making possible means of communication that just a few years ago were merely wishful thinking. Q> Among the international exhibitions in which you have participated I would like to bring to mind "What Happened to the Pioneers?" which took place at the New Technologies Center in Montreal in 1995. Monique Brunet, the curator, seemed to be suggesting that the pioneers, 25 years later, belonged to the past taking into account the speed with which new technologies have replaced one series of instruments with another. What piece of work did you present there? A> I offered a piece of work dating from 1972 done with the first color photocopier which had only appeared on the market two years earlier. It was titled "At the End" and represented my first process of technological investigation. It consisted of a sequence of four photocopies of human figures which was the first theme I worked on during those years. I came up with it because of my personal experience upon arriving in Chicago and finding myself diluted by the depersonalization which being anonymous creates. There were twelve of us exhibiting and our presence was justified because of the work we had done in the 70´s and our current work. The majority of these artists have continued in their investigation of adapting the computer to their objectives. In the 70´s the high tech element available was the photocopier; the computer was only available in large university research centers. In the 90´s, in only twenty years, its use has become so common that it has become a tool used daily for work and pleasure, something absolutely essential. Q> How is this adaptation to the new technological resources available produced? Resources which, at the same time, are becoming increasingly sophisticated produced. Surely, the more you expand the possibilities, the more difficult it must become to fit the means and programs to artistic output. A> In the past, we controlled the technological tools that we knew about because their development was slower. In 1992 when I directed the workshop mentioned earlier at the Círculo de Bellas Artes I called it "The Poetry of Technology". I wanted to propose that we weren´t technology "mechanics". I mean that we weren´t mere technicians. The fascination that some of us feel for technological systems can´t divert us from our fundamental goal, individual artistic creation, nor from the language that each one has developed. If, today, I had to put a name to a workshop I would call it "Technology Vertigo". A feeling of impotence faced with the out-of-control acceleration of technology development has replaced the feeling of mastery of the means. Those artists of us who normally work with technological tools find that we are increasingly subject to the acceleration of the consumption and complexity of the systems; as a result we need an increasing number of technicians. Q> This situation leads to an obvious separation between the artist and the computer programmer, and, as Arlindo Machado insinuated years ago, the artist will have to become a programmer or engineer who understands the "black box" of the computer in order to make full use of all its possibilities. A> The symbiosis of the computer artist is beginning to appear in the new generations, while in my generation we had to learn by ourselves little by little at a quick pace and almost completely alone. For that reason, when I manage to become comfortable with a program, in other words, to be confident of its results, I try to take full advantage of all the resources useful for me to undertake a project. Q> I imagine that the project you offer here has allowed you to explore certain programs which maybe you weren´t particularly interested in or which you didn´t need as much as those that you did make use of. A> Yes, of course. I have explored to the limit computers and programs which I normally work with. However, for this exhibition, I wanted to go beyond what I can do with the digital equipment I have and I had to have a technician by my side whose collaboration was absolutely essential throughout the entire process of creating this exhibit. In this way I was able to use different software depending on the needs that appeared as the project grew. Although the resources are many, the identity and individualness of this work is not manifested so much in the programs or tools used but in how they are used and the final results. Q> The relationship between artist and technology is often precarious with respect to the possibilities the "machines" offer in that their potential is much greater than the use made of them, and for that reason they can be considered underused. A> In the conferences I give I usually say ironically that I used to consider myself a "high-tech" artist, when little technology was available to us, and now, paradoxically, I find myself using high technology but nevertheless I consider myself to be "low-tech". It seem incomprehensible but it´s a consequence of the excessive offer there is in the market. Due to this excessive offer we are not able to make use of everything completely, so we are never satisfied. The breadth and the pace of development is such that we end up resigning ourselves to the fact that it´s impossible to be completely up-to-date. Q> Could that be one of the reasons why we confuse the value of the "means" used to achieve certain results with the artistic and esthetic value of a specific artistic output? A> The ideal
would be that there be a balanced relationship between the two, I mean
between "high tech" and "high content", but since
that´s not always possible it´s better to turn it around
and have the content always superior to the means used to achieve it.
In that respect, it seems that the most acceptable solution is "low
tech" and "high content". The opposite often occurs;
we see high technology and very poor content. Some work becomes a mere
display of technical resources: fireworks, flashiness, and nothing else.
The relationship between art and technology is strained. |