require many tens of hours of experimenting just to have a fundamental knowledge of how they can function in a work.
I’ve also been working a great deal with more algorithmically defined musical compositions using the Python library Abjad. It, along with Python’s innate abilities, is incredibly powerful, much more so than other algorithmic composition tools. I’m excited to continue to work with and develop pieces using it; it’s quite promising.
With regard to EEG-based art, I’m beginning a PhD at the University of California, San Diego in the fall and I hope to collaborate with their fantastic neuroscience department there. I’ve already met with some researchers, taken a look at the facilities, and I’m very excited. There is great potential in EEG-based art; it’s a relatively unexplored field and what I’ve seen usually is not very impressive. It’s a classic case described before: intellectually fascinating but aesthetically lacking. They’re fun experiments in art but they are not very good art. In fact, they’re often terribly boring and I strongly question the actual role EEG plays in their work. Anyway, I digress…
Thanks again for having me here. I should get back to work anyhow. So many projects, so little time…
effects. Of course, these mappings were rarely 1-to-1; I often multiplied or added with other channel’s frequency bands, combined with lines I used that mapped to the entire duration of the animation, or did whatever else was necessary to find interesting results, always utilizing the EEG information. The specifics of the mappings were ultimately arbitrary: I would poke around an electrode’s frequency bands until I found something that was producing something interesting, or if it wasn’t, I would move on. Before this, though, I would often play with the images using hardcoded values and lines to find things that worked and where in terms of input values they worked. Then I would tweak the EEG signals to roughly the same place and the effect would follow the contour of the changing power band in that particular electrode.
In the end, the computer functions as a sort of psychological interpreter, taking my raw thoughts and expressing them as animations. This places the algorithm and program (and myself, as the creator of the interpreter and creator of the interpretation) in an philosophically interesting place. This place specifically is for someone else to figure out or for me to figure out down the line. I’m far more interested in creating new things than interpreting my own work.
Overall, I’m fairly happy with the piece. I hope to make another version one day where someone else can create the inkblots and slideshow, such that I do not have any pre-viewing of the images. This would make the exercise more akin to an actual Rorschach test.
Before leaving this conversation we would like to pose a question about the nature of the relationship of your art with your audience. Do you consider the issue of audience reception as being a crucial component of your decision-making process, in terms of what type of language is used in a particular context?
The audience is never a component of my decision making process. Their reception of a work is none of my business and the artist has no responsibility towards them. This also applies to the type of language used in a particular context: I use language (in the broadest sense of the word) that is appropriate for the artwork in that context. An audience must meet any work on its own terms if they want anything out of it and I am not willing to change or water down a work to suit a particular audience.
Moreover, it is not my place to attempt to have the audience feel or think anything in an attempt to change the way they receive a work. I make the work, present it, and it is up to them to decide what to do from there. First and foremost, I want to be happy with a piece myself. I’ve found that the happier I am with a piece, the better reception it tends to receive. If, however, I’m happy with something and it is not well received, that is just as well. Despite presenting a work in public, it is not made for anyone but myself (and other performers, as in the case of a music composition).
There are dozens of pieces stowed away in boxes and on hard drives that I am happy with to different extents, some of which I think are actually quite good. But I have no interest in showing these. Sometimes I don’t think they’re very good or interesting; other times they bare too much and I’m not yet ready for it to be public.
Since we relvovle around the issue of communication this time, we have one more question: in yur opinion, can art change the future for inter-human communication? How can art help us make sense of these complex histories?
To refer once more to Morton Feldman: “Art in relation to life is nothing more than a glove turned inside out. It seems to have the same shapes and contours, but it can never be used for the same purpose. Art teaches nothing about life, just as life teaches us nothing about art.”
While I would not necessarily go as far as Mr. Feldman, I do not believe that art can change the future for inter-human communication in and of itself. Developing technologies and changing cultures will play a far more prominent role in that regard. That being said, the hallmark of great artwork is it’s ability to transcend eras. It is timeless and its appeal broad enough to be valuable in many different cultures and times. It does not necessarily, though, help us make sense of any histories. They are just wonderful objects to experience, nothing more.
Thanks a lot for your time and for sharing your thoughts, Jacob. Finally, would you like to tell us readers something about your future projects? How do you see your work evolving?
There are several pieces I’m working on at the moment, but none have really held my full attention as of yet. Most of these are musical projects and my visual works have been on the back burner while I write some commissioned pieces.
One of my major concerns for the next year or so is further developing and refining my data bending program for visual work. There are dozens of avenues to explore and I’ve hardly touched them with Thoughts on Rorschach or alone in the machine. I’ve experimented in cross-image manipulation, manipulation of animations, movie scenes, strange combinations of data from different images, and operating on individual colors but each of these require many tens of hours of experimenting just to have a fundamental knowledge of how they can function in a work.
I’ve also been working a great deal with more algorithmically defined musical compositions using the Python library Abjad. It, along with Python’s innate abilities, is incredibly powerful, much more so than other algorithmic composition tools. I’m excited to continue to work with and develop pieces using it; it’s quite promising.
With regard to EEG-based art, I’m beginning a PhD at the University of California, San Diego in the fall and I hope to collaborate with their fantastic neuroscience department there. I’ve already met with some researchers, taken a look at the facilities, and I’m very excited. There is great potential in EEG-based art; it’s a relatively unexplored field and what I’ve seen usually is not very impressive. It’s a classic case described before: intellectually fascinating but aesthetically lacking. They’re fun experiments in art but they are not very good art. In fact, they’re often terribly boring and I strongly question the actual role EEG plays in their work. Anyway, I digress…
Thanks again for having me here. I should get back to work anyhow. So many projects, so little time…
unc erat velit, aliquet non consectetur non, placerat eget sapien. Donec pellentesque, enim ac gravida congue, lorem velit aliquet turpis, non adipiscing mauris dui at nisi. Nulla lobortis sagittis ligula, nec tristique nisl iaculis a. Proin cursus mi a nunc bibendum fermentum. Integer ultricies arcu et nunc interdum id sagittis mauris pharetra. Duis elementum aliquam eros, nec egestas orci laoreet eget. Nunc erat velit, aliquet non consectetur non, placerat eget sapien. Duis elementum aliquam eros, nec egestas orci laoreet eget. Nunc erat velit, aliquet non consectetur non, placerat eget sapien. Duis elementum aliquam eros, nec egestas orci laoreet eget. Nunc erat velit, aliquet non.Fusce sit amet sem nibh. Phasellus rhoncus imperdiet egestas.
Nunc erat velit, aliquet non consectetur non, placerat eget sapien. Duis elementum aliquam eros,
Maecenas elit nunc, porttitor non tincidunt nec, scelerisque vel dolor. Suspendisse consectetur ma-uris vitae odio semper euismod. Curabitur in enim augue. Curabitur vel tincidunt odio. Integer volu-tpat tempus nunc, sed molestie velit pellentesque eu lacinia purus.