Golan Levin and Collaborators

Flong Blog + News

An Open Letter to the NEA

2 December 2014 / reflection, studio

Dear NEA Grants Officers,

Today I had the pleasure to review the NEA’s latest group of grantees. I wish you my heartiest congratulations on selecting such a large, diverse and unquestionably deserving group of grantees.

In reviewing the grantees of the “Media Arts” category it became exceedingly clear that our proposed project would have had no chance. I therefore express my sincere gratitude to you for transferring our application into a category in which it had any sort of fighting chance at all. Thank you.

I am, notwithstanding, concerned about the purview of the current category and the use of the term “media arts” to describe it. Of the 61 awards in this category, not less than 50 went to curated film festivals. Only five awards had any connection to interactive or computer-based arts whatsoever (BAVC, CAAM, NAMAC, Parallel Studios, and Tribeca Film Festival), and none of these have an exclusive or even predominant focus on digital arts, particularly digital arts research and production, with the possible exception of the hackathon hosted by… the Tribeca Film Festival… that is concerned with helping filmmakers “interpret their work in digital platforms”. It is not an exaggeration to say that the awards in this category overwhelmingly went to organizations devoted to the presentation and maintenance of what I might call “mature 20th-century recorded media” — namely film, cinema, video, television, audio, and radio.

While the NEA’s grantees are unquestionably deserving, as I have said, I am concerned about who is not listed. Specifically, I am concerned that there is no NEA grants program which supports the work of the many United States artists working in the discipline(s) of emerging media. Such artforms might be things like (without an attempt to be comprehensive) interactive art, generative art, mechatronic and robotic arts, game arts, biological arts, app art, online & networked arts, and so on — and naturally, this list of media is constantly evolving.

I believe that the emerging media of today will become the “mature media” disciplines of the next century. Just as film and radio were born some 100 years ago, the interactive media being developed now are the hatchlings of what are rapidly developing into the rich art forms of the very near future. As an investment in the future of American arts, I hope that the NEA could realize the value of supporting these nascent forms and their struggling vanguard of practitioners. Just as the invention of film led to the multi-billion-dollar economy of Hollywood, the economic justification for such an investment in emerging media arts (if one requires it) should be clear, especially as the United States enters an era of increased global competition.

I believe it is essential to know where we have come from, yet also see where we are going. The NEA visibly supports and promotes the former, with (for example) a program dedicated to “Traditional Arts”; yet where is (by analogy) a grants program dedicated to “Emerging & Future Arts”? I fret that the only project in the Visual Arts category to even mention the word “computer” or “software” (among 70 grantees) is dedicated to restoring a 30-year-old sculpture by Nam June Paik.

If a consideration of emerging media is anywhere on the NEA’s table, I would be very glad to assist or consult in any way that I can, and/or to direct the NEA to others with expertise in these artistic disciplines.

Yours sincerely,

Golan Levin
Director, Frank-Ratchye STUDIO for Creative Inquiry
Associate Professor of Electronic Art
Courtesy Associate Professor of Design
Courtesy Associate Professor of Computer Science
Courtesy Associate Professor, Entertainment Technology
Carnegie Mellon University
Twitter: @golan


Computing (almost) without Computers (Eyeo Code+Ed Session)

25 June 2014 / external, pedagogy, reference

Links and Notes from the Eyeo Festival Code+Ed SessionJune 10, 2014 

The following is a list of resources which you may find helpful in teaching introductory programming concepts and computational thinking. Wherever possible, these links list resources which are “computerless”, relying instead on paper and cardboard constructions, physical performances, etcetera. This list was compiled from a discussion session on “Teaching Computing without Computers,” held at the Eyeo Festival’s Code+Ed unconference, June 2014.

I apologize that this list is not more richly annotated. If you have additional suggestions, I’d be happy to hear about them for possible compilation here. Please contact me @golan on Twitter, or by email at golan at flong dot com. 


FORMAL EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS

CS Unplugged

From 0 to C Workshop by Ubi de Feo

Adventures in Modeling by Mitchel Resnick et al.
From “Adventures in Modeling: Exploring Complex Dynamic Systems with StarLogo” 


ALGORITHMIC DRAWING

Sol Lewitt Wall Drawings
There are hundreds and hundreds of these. Executing them has terrific pedagogic value.

Conditional Design & their Manifesto
Tons of instructional pencil-and-paper artwork/assignments

The Poster Factory by Studio Moniker (Jonathan Puckey and Luna Maurer)

Processing.A4 by Basil Safwat
A pencil-and-paper version of a classic Processing artwork

Peg Programming by Ed Burton

Wolfram’s CA Rules
A cellular automaton which can be executed with pencil & paper… initially anyway.

Paper Computing and PaperCamp by James Bridle


COMPUTATIONAL THINKING GAMES

Zoom Schwartz Profigliano
A metalinguistic, possibly Turing-complete spoken-word game.

Eleusis
A card game in which the players must guess or infer the rules. 

Lightbot 2.0
An interactive computer game that teaches programming concepts.

Code Monkey (Kickstarted game)
A family-friendly board game that introduces kids to programming concepts.

Mastermind (board game)

FermiPicoBagel
A mathematics digit game

Fluxx (card game)
Another card-game with rules that continually change

Kaxxt! Card game by Why the Lucky Stiff (@_why)
A card game which teaches programming concepts. 

African Pebble Games (Mancala)

Othello, Reversi, Go


OBJECTS

The Descriptive Camera by Matt Richardson

Cubelets by Modular Robotics

Cardboard Computer, Cardboard Plotter by Nicholas Roy

A Computational Model of Knitting, by @bitcraftlab
Alex McLean: “Textiles deserves a place as the origin of computation.”
Mitchel Whitelaw: “Free memory usually takes the form of the yarn ball.”

Binary adding machine sculpture
Math with Marbles, no electronics necessary.

“Push-pull” mechanical logic gates, built from LEGO

“System Blocks” by Oren Zuckerman, MIT Media Lab:

The Mechanical Facebook by Russell Davies

Sphero, Robotic ball


PERFORMANCES

Human-Powered Computer, by John Maeda (1993)
An accurate (if slow :) re-enactment of a computer’s operating system

The MP3 Experiment, by ImprovEverywhere (Charlie Todd et al., annually since 2005)
Emergent behaviors arise in a large-scale crowd, given synchronized audio instructions.

Flock Logic, by Susan Marshall and Naomi Leonard (2010, Princeton)
Dancers are given simple rules, emergent behaviors result.

The Human Cellular Automata, by Matthew Fuller (2000)
“Like a Mexican Wave in two-dimensions” 

AlgoRythmics
Sorting algorithms in dance.

The emergent behavior of synchronized crowd clapping


OTHER & MISCELLANEOUS REFERENCES

Visual sorting algorithms

Cooking for Engineers

“Draw it With your Eyes Closed” ed. by Paper Monument
Compilation of provocative, often conceptually-oriented arts assignments

IFTTT
Useful for configuring simple but powerful data relationships.

Rubik’s speed-cubing algorithms

Obkique Strategies by Brian Eno & Peter Schmidt

Mechanical Turk in the Classroom
Assignments e.g. Have students sign up and make the most money, etc. 


Sight and Insight

28 May 2014 / reflection

Written for the inaugural issue of HOLO magazine, August 2013.

Somewhere in an airport, a machine vends a free cup of coffee when it sees someone yawn. Two hundred astonished people get a hot drink! – and a quarter million more watch the perky video online. I suppose I’m a little surprised at their surprise. It’s advertising, but it could be a lot of other things, too. A debug screen flashing at 1’04” reveals the telltale wireframe of a familiar éminence grise: Jason Saraghi’s military-grade face tracker – the intelligence behind a thousand art-school projects, and (we might reasonably surmise) a piece of the FBI’s new NGI “Next Generation Identification” database as well. Use it to collect some portraits, and it might just get your laptop confiscated by the Secret Service, as happened to artist Kyle McDonald.

It is the summer of 2013 and my Umwelt is now reeling from the Snowden Effect. For many, this cascade of dystopic revelations about our privacy (and lack thereof) has instilled a vexing mixture of rage, disbelief and nonchalance. Hey, you remember that whacked-out, paranoiac conspiracy theory we scoffed at? – well, *cough* obviously, we always knew that stuff was true all along. Maybe. To make sense of our situation, we ascribe to the NSA and kindred organizations the metaphors of a sensate body: it “slurps and burps” our emails and Skype calls; it sniffs our communication packets like a “Carnivore” (an NSA surveillance system). It even gets some “backdoor action” (although the big companies, blushingly, deny it). But the overweening preoccupation of the surveillance state, predictably, is its sense of sight. The NSA is looking at us. It’s been revealed that it uses a “PRISM”, and a “Magic Lantern”, and has (we are told) a “Fairview”. So what is the nature of this gaze?

In Discipline and Punish, Michel Foucault describes how, in the evolution from the medieval era to the Enlightenment, observation became co-extensive with control. This was epitomized in Jeremy Bentham’s 1791 Panopticon, a (prison) architecture optimized for the one-way surveillance of its occupants. Well, the panopticon is here again, and it’s a family affair. Big Brother is hovering at 18000 feet, in an ARGUS-IS drone that records 1.8-gigapixel video at 12 frames per second (that’s all?), and can tell what I’m eating. Little Sister is lurking just behind my iPhone camera, peer-pressuring me to gossip about annotate our junk shots and selfies and Instagrams and… well, she knows what we just ate, too. If Edward Snowden revealed anything genuinely new, it was that these nosy siblings are sharing their observations behind our backs.

Snowden refreshed an old lesson as well, one that has never been truer than in our current era of asymmetrical conflict: the power of a single individual to change the world. Like Saraghi’s ubiquitous face tracker, the same tools available to governments and corporations are now in the hands of individuals as well. Those with courage can conduct remarkably effective redress with surprisingly economical means.

As artists and designers, we know something about the language and idioms of seeing. Now, because of networked systems and ubiquitous capture, perception and representation are changing faster than ever before. For the artists, designers, and culture operators who work with technology – especially imaging and information technologies – our job, or jobs, are clear.

We may work to predict the cultural consequences of new technologies, warning us of dangerous futures, or speculating about interesting ones.

We may author whimsical, provocative and illogical tools that liberate minds, connect hearts, creatively invert authority, and empower skeptical thought.

Using artistic techniques like defamiliarization, we may awaken others from their slumber to see common things in an unfamiliar way, in order to enhance perception of the familiar.

Using the artistic techniques of visualization, we can delineate the unseen forces that shape our lives, in order to reveal the invisible.

Above all, we are obliged to take a “seat at the table” to help set – and not simply be victim to – technological agendas.

We will go crazy if we dwell, without relief, on injustice and impending disaster. As artists have always done, they also concoct poetry and magic, transport us to different realms of experience and imagination, remind us about what is really worth living for, and, perhaps, just a little, relieve our suffering.

References

  1. Microsoft Denies Windows 7 Has NSA Backdoor
  2. Douwe Egberts, “Bye Bye Red Eye
  3. Spy Drone Can See What You are Wearing From 17,500 Feet
  4. When Art, Apple and the Secret Service Collide: ‘People Staring at Computers’

Undergrad Art+Tech Options at CMU: An Update

9 April 2014 / pedagogy, reference

There are many different options for combined undergraduate study in art+technology at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). This blog post contains a quick list, accurate, to the best of my knowledge, as of spring 2014. I advise many of the students working in these ways, and I have known and advised students working in all of the ways listed below. (For reference: A “concentration” is four courses; a “minor” is six courses. A standard bachelor’s degree at CMU is about 360 units.)

• The CMU School of Art has internal concentrations in several areas; you can create your own, or select among (A) Painting, Drawing and Printmaking, (B) Sculpture, Installation and Site-Work, (C) Contextual Practice, or (D) the Electronic and Time-Based arts concentration [ETB]. Most Art students with an interest in art+technology are pursuing the ETB concentration in the School of Art. The ETB concentration includes coursework options (all within the School of Art) in topics like interactive art, video and performance, game design, animation, and kinetic sculpture. Incidentally, the School of Art also has required arts-engineering courses for all of its BFA students (such as “EMS2″, or Introduction to the Electronic Media Studio II) which teach programming for the arts, using the ProcessingArduino, and Max/MSP toolkits. EMS2 is required for all Art sophomores, regardless of their internal concentration, but we generally recommend that BCSA and pre-BCSA students take EMS2 in their freshman year.

• CMU’s new IDEATE program offers a half-dozen different interdisciplinary concentrations and minors that cut across the university in lots of ways: Animation and Special EffectsEntrepreneurship for Creative IndustriesGame DesignIntelligent EnvironmentsLearning MediaMedia DesignPhysical Computing, and Sound Design. As concentrations, these are not mutually exclusive with the School of Art’s ETB concentration; you can do both. To reiterate, these programs are also available as minors.

• You can also pursue a Computer Science minorRobotics minorHuman-Computer Interaction minor, or Language Technologies minor. It is also possible to double-minor, meaning, two minors (or even more); for example, you could have a minor in CS and also a minor in IDEATE/GameDesign.

• The Bachelor of Computer Science and Art, or BCSA, is an integrated double-degree. About 80% of the BCSA students are “internal transfers”, meaning that they transferred into BCSA at the end of their Freshman or Sophomore year. (The other 20% were accepted into BCSA right out of high school.) To transfer into BCSA from the School of Art, you must demonstrate proficiency in Computer Science: by doing well in the first couple of introductory CS courses (namely, 15-112 and 15-122) in your Freshman year. To transfer into BCSA from the School of Computer Science, you should have a portfolio that demonstrates your sensibility in combining art and technology. The BCSA is designed to be completed in 4 years, and requires about 380 units. (I helped co-create the BCSA degree in 2008, and I’m the School of Art’s advisor for its BCSA students.) Students interested in pursuing or applying for the BCSA should contact Dr. Stephanie Murray, Director of the BXA Intercollege Degree Programs office.

• As a BFA student in the School of Art, you could pursue a second major. For example, you could get a second major in Computer Sciencea second major in HCIa second major in Robotics, or many other departments. Please note that the double-major requires about 520 units, and you only get one Degree (in other words, you would earn a “BFA with a second major in Computer Science”).

• It is also possible to pursue a double degree. This means you would earn (for example) a BFA in the School of Art, and a BS in Computer Science. It requires about 560 units and generally takes 4½ or 5 years to complete. (Naturally you can still specify that your Art concentration is ETB, and you might pick up an IDEATE or other concentration/minor along the way).

• It is also possible to pursue a University Student-Defined major (SDF) at CMU. This is a great degree for square-pegs-in-round-holes, and other students who want to achieve something that is currently unachievable with any of the above structures. Students interested in the SDF should contact Dr. Amy Burkert, Vice Provost of Education.

• There are also some little-known “4+1″ accelerated master’s programs (AMP) which would allow you to complete a Master’s degree in a single year. Ordinarily, Master’s degrees require two years, but these AMP degrees work by having some of your undergraduate coursework count towards the graduate degree. For example, it is possible to do a 4+1 with BCSA and the ETC Masters of Entertainment Technology, or a 4+1 with BCSA and the Masters of Tangible Interaction Design (soon to be renamed the Masters of Emerging Media). This list is not exclusive and other combinations exist as well.


Malofiej Presentation: Graffiti+Infovis

6 April 2014 / infovis, lecture, pedagogy, reference

I delivered this presentation at the Malofiej #22 Infographics World Summit, Pamplona, Spain, 27 March 2014. The subject of my talk was the possibility of combining the visual language of information graphics, with the communication strategies of graffiti and urban markup. Thanks to the Malofiej organizers for their hospitality and the honor of addressing this audience, and to Alberto Cairo for a rousing discussion, afterwards, about its possibly troubling implications for propaganda.

Golan Levin presentation from Malofiej 22 (2014)