|
Cancelleremo
l’ostilità apparentemente
insuperabile che separa la nostra
carne dal metallo dei motori Filippo
Tommaso Marinetti
The body overcomes its biological and cultural boundaries as
if in the aftermath of an explosion: from this standpoint Stelarc, the
Australian, Cyprus-born performance artist active since the Seventies,
attempts a reconstruction of the body (see Macrì, pp.
138-139), using video as his tool of choice. In the Nineties,
Stelarc’s performances were concerned with capturing the
innards of the body, most famously in Stomach Sculptures
(1993). There, a microscopic sculpture in silver, gold, steel and
titanium was inserted in the artist’s empty stomach. By
emitting light or sound, either expanding or shrinking, the small
sculpture (inorganic, translucent) countered the biological status of
the body (Macrì, pp. 148-150). Stelarc’s journey
through the immateriality of the body is aimed to the inner beauty,
something that lies beyond Renaissance canons and the aesthetics of
outward appearance, to fathom the very core of the external perception.
The body, as if it were the performer’s exhibition space, is
well suited to the esploration of the invisible. What we have here is
technology invading the body but not in the form of a prothesis, rather
as a cosmetic accoutrement; once emptied, the body is turned in to a
container, of the scupture though, not of the soul (Stelarc, p. 70). As
a matter of fact, Stomach Sculptures followed in
the same explorative and alternative path of previous performances. The
Body Suspension (1976-1988) stood as an attempt to counter
gravity. Bothered by the constraint of gravitational force and in order
to prepare his body for an extraterrestrial experience, Stelarc had
himself suspended from the ceiling (at first dangling from ropes, then
from steel wires hooked onto his skin) in art galleries, exhibition
spaces and urban areas, in the course of 27 performances along ten
years (Macrì, pp. 141-142).
Advanced
technology, though, is the field Stelarc’s researches has
been most focused on. The Third Hand (1981-1994),
which started out as a concept and was later concretized, represents
the symbiosis between body and technology and a trespassing toward
forms of sensitivity yet unknown. The third hand is an artificial hand
and doesn’t stand in place of the natural limbs; it
complements them, with autonomous movements, after stimuluses from
abdomen and legs which allow it, by means of mechanisms and tactile
feedback, to open and close the fist, to grasp, to rotate the wrist
(Macrì, pp. 142-144). In Ping Body,
(1995), we see Stelarc, half naked, the third hand firmly fastened onto
his right arm, coming across as a cyborg.
In the
pursuit of a new body geography, of a new map of perceptions to sort
anew the system of perception of reality, Stelarc brought forth the
human body and its transformations, incorporating the prothesis and
turning them into additional organs. We stand at the end of physiology,
is Stelarc’s statement, because we stand at the end of
natural evolution; technology generats ideas, human memory is bound to
decline and to separate from man, who will live in a new evolutionary
habitat. The body often finds itself hardly fit to its environment,
weak, slow, ill-equipped for the technological world, worn out by time.
Furthermore, the body lacks a modular project for simple
troubleshooting. The only way out of all of these inadequacies is a
thorough re-design: such an endeavour would be the grandest of human
accomplishments. The re-design will result in an body autonomous,
self-sufficient, cerebrally more capable; a better equipped body, apt
to stand any atmospherical or gravitational condition. Damaged parts
won’t have to be repaired, merely replaced. Fetuses will be
on an artificial life support systems, since the womb won’t
be required for conception and feeding; better set for physical labour,
bodies won’t get old and will attain immortality through
continuous renewal and reactivation (Stelarc, pp. 70-71). A creature
both organic and mechanical, of unlimited potentialities, stranger to
human sensitivity but a “sentient thing”
nonetheless (Perniola, p. 68), a post-human entity, subject solely to
technological evolution: this is Stelarc’s aim, maybe. Or is
it?
This is what we questioned him about.
Do you think human brain could be reproduced by
technology? Or a brain reproduction might be improbable
because man himself projects this technology?
Well,
an artificial intelligence means just that. But perhaps the best way to
describe it would be an artificial life. In other words intelligence is
not simply what happens in the brain (or in a computer) but rather what
is generated by the body of a human or a robot interacting in its
environment. In other words an intelligent entity needs to be
appropriately embodied and embedded in the world. If it can effectively
and appropriately respond to particular situations then we might
consider it intelligent. Interesting behaviour is the result of what
happens between you and me in the medium of language with which we
communicate, in the social institutions in which we operate, in the
culture in which we have been conditioned and the technologies that we
have constructed. The complexity of our behaviour is not simplistically
due to an internal agency, but rather by the complexity of our
interaction and environment.
Do you still say that natural evolution is replaced
by technological one? How much technological evolution could do for
obsolete body? Will it “save” the body?
The
issue is not about saving the body, but rather what kind of embodiment
is necessary to amplify our awareness and better operate in the
technological terrain in which we now inhabit. It’s not that
the body evolved but rather that the process of evolution results in a
body that now augments and amplifies itself with its instruments and
machines.
You support remodulation and rebuilding of body by
technology and replacement of body with machine. Do you think that is
still possible, or shall we resign to the concept of adaptation to
surroundings and body weakness?
Rebuilding and
replacement of the body might occur. But more likely there’ll
be a proliferation of hybrid constructs of bodies (including insects
and animals), machines and virtual systems in diverse bodily
architectures. The mythical chimera was a human-animal construct.
Alternate bodily architectures of sensory, cerebral and operational
capabilities now become possible. It’s not that new or
alternate systems will totally replace and erase the old. Rather they
will be incorporated, remodulated.
In the 1994 you affirmed that cyber body is a system
that exalts practicality and cleverness. From 1981 to 1994 you worked
at Amplified Body, Laser Eyes
and Third Hand, fractal body seemed to be upcoming:
what’s the situation now?
Well, the
obsolete body, augmented and invaded is now performing involuntarily.
It seems now that the body best performs as its image, as its avatar.
Bodies and machines are ponderous needing to perform in gravity with
friction. Images are ephemeral, avatars have no organs.
You affirmed that “the fundamental freedom
is for individuals to determine their own DNA destiny”,
technological body invasion leads to the end of evolution and mankind
split-up, every man will evolve by himself: this post-evolutionary
loneliness could lead to mankind’s end? Which role do human
relationships have in post-human concept?
Individuals
should determine their own DNA destiny. And biological evolution is
overtaken by human design and engineering. What it means to be human
involves interacting with others. There will be no Post-human
loneliness. Quite the contrary. Not only will you be able to interact
with others in proximity but also connect up to people
remotely. Perhaps what becomes meaningful now is not the
biological other but the phantom other. A phantom generated by remote
presences, electronically connected over the internet.
In the 70’s you presented your initial
performances. Which were your expectations and how did audience respond
to? Nowadays do your performances still have the same impact on the
audience or did it change in time?
Well,
the Suspension performances of the 70’s
and 80’s were mostly done in private gallery spaces or remote
locations. There was no invited audience. The people who saw the
performances were the few other artists assisting. There were times
that people unexpectedly saw the suspensions. For example there were a
group of fishermen on another outcrop of rocks who saw the body being
suspended about 300 metres from shore- as did some fishing boats that
went past. The 2 important exceptions were the NY event, between 2
buildings over E 11th Street (4 stories up).
Most of the people below did not know it was an art performance,
although others had been invited. The other public performance was the
City Suspension in Copenhagen. That was well-publicized and thousands
were in the vicinity of the to see the body hoisted up almost
60 metres above the Royal Theatre. Some people have reacted with
curiosity, with concern but sometimes with aggression. Responses have
varied immensely…
A lot of your performances are extreme challenges of
pain and effort endurance, beside the hard training before every single
performance, is your life style change by your artistic needs?
Although
I did Yoga all the time I lived in Japan and also coached and played
competitive Squash, this was not done directly for any conditioning or
physical preparation for the performances. Certainly, the body had to
be generally fit but not especially so. But certainly my art practice
affected my day to day life. It usually took a week to fully recover
from a suspension performance. I had to be monitored in a clinic after
the Stomach Sculpture insertion. It took over a
year to recover from the surgery and subsequent infection with the Ear
On Arm project. I guess the body performs with a posture of
indifference. Indifference as opposed to expectation. When actions
happen with expectation possibilities quickly collapse into
actualities. The performance becomes predictable. By performing with
indifference the event is allowed to unfold in its own time and with
its own rhythm. I guess that idea of indifference is how I live my life
now.
In your performances you violate biological limits:
in The Body Suspensions (1976-88) you fought
against gravity, in The Stomach Sculptures (1993)
you emptied body and technologies invaded it, in Fractal Flesh
(1995) body had satellite dimension and distance interact with it was
possible; development turns you into a technological shaman, do you
identify yourself in this role? Does your art have a mystical side?
Well,
there is no necessity to use words like “shaman”
and “mystical”. This kind of language is misleading
as it refers to outmoded metaphysical notions, completely unrelated to
the intention, theoretical and art practice of the artist. Rather than
clarifying what is happening this kind of interpretation confuses what
is trying to be achieved. I guess these words are used in trying to
describe activities not fully understood. There is no spiritual
dimension in these artworks. They merely explore the intuitive and the
aesthetic.
Your started to perform about forty years ago. Do you
think is there, in the actual artistic contest, a performer see fit to
become your artistic heir?
Oh, I’m sure
there are a number of artists who are experimenting and performing with
machines and interactive media. What’s important are not
artists who might perpetuate your performances, but rather artists that
have alternate ideas with radically different trajectories.
Are you still confident technology will be safe or
unforeseen results might threaten human evolution?
We
can’t guarantee a completely safe world. Curiosity and
experimentation will lead to unpredictable outcomes. The element of
surprise is what delights us as humans. Having said that, its an
indictment of our species that we seem to be aggressive and destructive
and new technologies amplify both our abilities to pursue meaningful
research and our potential to annihilate ourselves. Note that with
every new technology there is generated unexpected information and
images that undermine our present paradigms and destabilize our
experience and affirmation of the world.
Could new sensory levels trap mankind?
Being
able to experience a wider spectrum of the electromagnetic spectrum
will provide us with additional sensory information. I can’t
imagine this would be a negative thing. Rather than trap human-kind, it
will create a more meaningful window to the world, enhancing and
enriching our experience, awareness and operation of the body.
Your started to perform about forty years ago. Do you
think is there, in the actual artistic contest, a performer see fit to
become your artistic heir?
Oh, I’m sure
there are a number of artists who are experimenting and performing with
machines and interactive media. What’s important are not
artists who might perpetuate your performances, but rather artists that
have alternate ideas with radically different trajectories.
Are you going to arrange a new performance?
At
present I am trying to fully realize and my Extra Ear: Ear on Arm
project. There have been 2 surgical procedures to construct a left ear
on my left arm. It is still only a relief of an ear. The next steps are
to lift the helix of the ear to create a more 3D structure and also to
grow a soft ear lobe using my own extracted adult stem cells. An
implanted microphone connected to transmitter will enable wireless
connection to the internet in any wifi hotspot. It becomes a publicly
accessible organ that enables people in other places to listen to what
my ear is hearing, where they are and wherever I am. We have evolved
soft organs to better function in the world. Now we can engineer
additional organs to better function in the technological terrain that
we inhabit.
(*) With A Little Help From Linda De
Feo - Traductions by Marco Bertoli and Mauro Vargiu (the questions)
:: bibliography ::
- Macrì T. Il corpo postorganico, Genova, Costa & Nolan, 2006 (I edizione, 1996).
- Perniola M. Il sex appeal dell’inorganico, Torino, Einaudi, 2004, (I edizione 1994).
- Stelarc, Da strategie psicologiche a cyberstrategie: prostetica, robotica ed esistenza remota, in Capucci P. L. (a cura di), Il corpo tecnologico. L’influenza delle tecnologie sul corpo e sulle sue
facoltà, Bologna, Baskerville, 1994
|
