Advertisement

Slow Motion Electric Chiaroscuro: An Experiment in Glitch-Anthropo-Scenic Landscape Art

  • Patti Pente
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Educational Futures book series (PSEF)

Abstract

Ecological effects indicated in the age of the Anthropocene continue to disrupt and change lives of human and non-human. Yet, Euro-American perspectives are slow to acknowledge a posthuman outlook that might shift political will so that deep ontological shifts result in change regarding how life with the planet unfolds. In this chapter, through disjunctive synthesis (Deleuze and Guattari 1983). I investigate concepts of fail and fix from glitch art and the Anthropocene. Within the entanglement of digital-analogue worlds, I create a prototype for glitch-Anthropo-scenic landscape art inspired by these ideas. As an interruption in the social norms and boundaries whereby the human uses/saves the land, my art experiment problematizes notions of landscape art, Anthropocene and glitch art, opening towards a posthuman perspective as a form of public pedagogy.

References

  1. Andermann, J., & Giorgi, G. (2017). We Are Never Alone: A Conversation on Bio Art with Eduardo Kac. Journal of Latin American Cultural Studies, 26(2), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, K. (2015). Ethics, Ecology, and the Future: Art and Design Face the Anthropocene. Leonardo, 48(4), 338–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett, J. (2010). A Vitalist Stopover on the Way to a New Materialism. In D. Coole & S. Frost (Eds.), New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency and Politics (pp. 47–69). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berry, D., & Dieter, M. (2015). Thinking Postdigital Aesthetics: Art, Computation and Design. In D. Berry & M. Dieter (Eds.), Postdigital Aesthetics: Art, Computation and Design (pp. 1–11). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Betancourt, M. (2016). Glitch Art in Theory and Practice: Critical Failures and Post-digital Aesthetics. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Bignall, S., Hemming, S., & Rigney, D. (2016). Three Ecosophies for the Anthropocene: Environmental Governance, Continental Posthumanism and Indigenous Expressivism. Deleuze Studies, 10(4), 455–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Braidotti, R. (2013). The Posthuman. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Braidotti, R. (2017). Four Theses on Posthuman Feminism. In R. Grusin (Ed.), Anthropocene Feminism (pp. 21–48). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bryant, L. (2011). Love. Retrieved from https://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/love/.
  11. Cascone, K. (2000). The Aesthetics of Failure: “Post-digital” Tendencies in Contemporary Computer Music. Computer Music Journal, 24(4), 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chakrabarty, D. (2009). The Climate of History: Four Theses. Critical Inquiry, 35(2), 197–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark, N. (2014). Geo-Politics and the Disaster of the Anthropocene. The Sociological Review, 62, 19–37.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cloninger, C. (2010, October). GltchLnguistx: The Machine in the Ghoat/Static Trapped in Mouths. Retrieved from http://lab404.com/glitch/.
  15. Cohen, T., & Colebrook, C. (2017). Vortices: On “Critical Climate Change” as a Project. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 116(1), 129–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Colebrook, C. (2016a). What is the Anthropo-Political? In T. Cohen, C. Colebrook & J. Hillis Miller (Eds.), Twilight of the Anthropocene Idols (pp. 81–125). London: Open Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  17. Colebrook, C. (2016b). ‘A Grandiose Time of Coexistence’: Stratigraphy of the Anthropocene. Deleuze Studies, 10(4), 440–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Colebrook, C. (2016c). Time That Is Intolerant. In S. Groes (Ed.), Memory in the Twenty-First Century: New Critical Perspectives from the Arts, Humanities, and Sciences (pp. 147–158). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.  https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137520586.
  19. Colebrook, C. (2017). We Have Always Been Post-Anthropocene: The Anthropocene Counter-Factual. In R. Grusin (Ed.), Anthropocene Feminism (pp. 1–20). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  20. Connolly, W. (2017). Facing the Planetary: Entangled Humanism and the Politics of Swarming. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Cramer, F. (2015). What is “Postdigital”? In D. Berry & M. Dieter (Eds.), Postdigital Aesthetics: Art, Computation and Design (pp. 12–26). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Crutzen, P. (2002). Geology of Mankind. Nature, 415, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Crutzen, P., & Stoermer, E. (2000). The Anthropocene. International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme Newsletter, 41, 17–18.Google Scholar
  24. Davis, H., & Turpin, E. (Eds.). (2015). Art in the Anthropocene: Encounters Among Aesthetics, Politics, Environments and Epistemologies. London, UK: Open Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  25. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1983). Anti-oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (R. Hurley, M. Seem, & H. R. Lane, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Original Work Published 1972).Google Scholar
  26. Dillon, M. (2007). Governing Terror: The State of Emergency of Biopolitical Emergence. International Political Sociology, 1, 7–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ellis, E., Maslin, M., Bolvin, N., & Bauer, A. (2016). Involve Social Scientists in Defining the Anthropocene. Nature News, 540, 7632. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/news/involve-social-scientists-in-defining-the-anthropocene-1.21090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ellsworth, E., & Kruse, J. (2012). Making the Geologic Now: Responses to Material Conditions of Contemporary Life. Brooklyn, NY: Punctum Books. Retrieved from http://www.geologicnow.com/.
  29. Gaulon, B. (2017). Philosophy: Critical Making. Retrieved from http://hacklab.recyclism.com/.
  30. Gough, N. (2015). Undoing Anthropocentrism in Educational Inquiry: A Phildickian Space Odyssey? In N. Snaza & J. Weaver (Eds.), Posthumanism and Educational Research (pp. 151–166). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Haraway, D. (1985). A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology and Social Feminist in the 1980s. Socialist Review, 15(2), 65–107.Google Scholar
  32. Haraway, D. (2016). Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hayles, N. K. (1999). How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Herbrechter, S. (2013). Posthumanism: A Critical Analysis. London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  35. Holland, E. W. (2002). Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-oedipus: Introduction to Schizoanalysis. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. jagodzinski, j. (2015). Environment or Sustainability? Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society, 20, 84–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. jagodzinski, j. (2017). A Critical Introduction to What Is Art Education? In j. jagodzinski (Ed.), What Is Art Education for? After Deleuze and Guattari (pp. 1–61), New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  38. Liptak, K., & Acosta, J. (2017, June 2). Trump on Paris Accord: ‘We’re Getting Out’. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/01/politics/trump-paris-climate-decision/index.html.
  39. Luke, T. (2015). Introduction: Political Critiques of the Anthropocene. Telos, 172, 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Manovitch, L. (2016). Cultural Analytics Lab. Retrieved from http://manovich.net/ and http://lab.culturalanalytics.info/.
  41. McCormack, T. (2010, October 13). Code Eroded: At GLI.TC/H. Rhizome. Retrieved from http://rhizome.org/editorial/2010/oct/13/code-eroded-at-glitch/.
  42. Menkman, R. (2011). The Glitch Moment(um). Retrieved from http://networkcultures.org/_uploads/NN%234_RosaMenkman.pdf.
  43. Moore, T. (2016). Introduction: Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, History and the Crisis of Capitalism. In J. Moore (Ed.), Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, History and the Crisis of Capitalism (pp. 1–11). Chicago, IL: PM Press.Google Scholar
  44. Nakib, M. A. (2013). Disjunctive Synthesis and Arab Feminism. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(2), 459–482.  https://doi.org/10.1086/667220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nayar, P. (2014). Posthumanism. Malden, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  46. Nunes, M. (2011). Error: Glitch, Noise, and Jam in New Media Cultures. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  47. Rossaak, E. (2016). Who Generates the Image Error? From Hitchcock to Glitch. In B. Cohen & A. Streitberger (Eds.), The Photofilmic (pp. 217–232). Leuven and Belgium: Leuven University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Roy, M. (2014). Understanding the Glitch Art Movement. The Periphery. Retrieved from http://www.theperipherymag.com/on-the-arts-glitch-it-good/.
  49. Sweeney, R. (2015). Disfunction and Decentralization in New Media Art and Education. Chicago: Intellect.Google Scholar
  50. Tyszczuk, R. (2016). Anthropocene Unconformities: On the Aporias of Geological Space and Time. Space and Culture, 19(4), 435–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Weinstein, J., & Colebrook, C. (2017). Introduction: Critical Life Studies and the Problems of Inhuman Rites and Posthumous Life. Posthumous Life: Theorizing Beyond the Posthuman (pp. 1–14). New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wolfe, C. (2010). What Is Posthumanism? Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  53. World Bank. (2017). State of Electricity Access Report 2017 (Vol. 2). Full Report (English). Washington, DC: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/364571494517675149/full-report.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patti Pente
    • 1
  1. 1.University of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations