Resolution Dispute 0001 : Habit “Habit isn’t the same as instinct; habit is a learned action that becomes automatic. Crucially, habit is always something you learn from others, or in response to the environment. […] I understand habit as the scar of others within the self.”
- Chun, Wendy. Characters in a Drama called Big Data, in: Sonic Acts. Noise of Being Reader, 2017. p 114.





[ 0000 ]









Resolution Dispute 0000 : Habit
“Habit isn’t the same as instinct; habit is a learned action that becomes automatic. Crucially, habit is always something you learn from others, or in response to the environment. […] I understand habit as the scar of others within the self.”
- Chun, Wendy. Characters in a Drama called Big Data, in: Sonic Acts. Noise of Being Reader, 2017. p 114.
 















Following the ideal logic of transparent immediacy, technology is designed in such a way that the user will forget about the presence of the medium. Generally, technology aims to offer an uninterrupted flow of functionality and information. This concept of flow is not just a trait of the machine, but also a feature of society as a whole, writes DeLanda.1 DeLanda distinguishes between chaotic disconnected flows and stable flows of matter, that move in continuous variations, conveying singularities. DeLanda also references Deleuze and Guattari, who describe flow in terms of the beliefs and desires that both stimulate and maintain society.2 Deleuze and Guattari write that a flow is something that comes into existence over long periods of time. Within these periods, conventions, customs and individual habits are established, while deviations tend to become rare occurrences and are often (mis)understood as accidents (or in computation: glitches). Although the meaningfulness of every day life might in fact be disclosed within these rare occurances, their impact or relevance is often ruled out, because of social tendencies to emphasize the norm.

To move beyond resolution also means to move beyond the habitual. One way to do this is by creating noise, for instance in the form of glitch: a short lived fault or break from an expected flow of operation within a (digital) system. The glitch is a puzzling, difficult to define and enchanting noise artifact; it reveals itself as accident, chaos or laceration and gives a glimpse into normally obfuscated machine language. Rather than creating the illusion of a transparent, well-working interface to information, the glitch can impose both technological and perceptual challenges to habitual and ideological conventions. It shows the machine revealing itself. Suddenly, the computer appears unconventionally deep, in contrast to the more banal, predictable, surface-level behaviors of ‘normal’ machines and systems.

To really understand the complexity of the user’s perceptual experience it is important to focus on these rare occurances - to create an awareness of the users habits by use of, for instance, the accident.

︎︎︎︎︎︎

1. Manuel DeLanda, War in the Age of Intelligent Machines, New York: Zone Books, 1991. p. 20.
2. Gilles Deleuze and Pierre-Félix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, Trans. B. Massumi, Londen: The Athlone Press, 1988. p. 219.

The slides underneath are from the New Media class ‘Beyond Resolution’ which I thaught as substitute professor at the KHK (Kassel) in the Sommer Semester of 2018. During this week we unpacked the term ‘Habitual Use’ via a research into various layers of standardization. The slides are clickable; they either link to the work reference or zoom.





[︎]

Jodi on the Rack
[Jodi op de pijnbank]

Master thesis in Dutch (2006), supervised by Joost Bolten.

Introduction
In October 2005 I visited the World Wide Wrong, a solo show from the Dutch/Belgium artist collective Jodi (Jo for Joan Heemskerk and di for Dirk Paesmans) in Montevideo, the Institute for Media Arts in Amsterdam.

Untitled Game (Jodi, 1996) was one of the works on display. I immediately recognised the game Quake 1 (id software, 1996), of which Untitled Game is a collection of mods. At first, the confrontation with these mods was confusing, but after reading the texts that accompanied the exhibition, I understood the work better; my associations with the game Quake had mislead my first interpretations - I had let my previous experiences lead my reading of the work and Jodi had played with this habitual pattern of expectation.
This was my first experience with digital art that played with the norms and expectations of digital material. Untitled Game was an eye-opener. I realised there were new, changing and evolving differences not only between traditional ‘high art’ and contemporary, interactive ‘high art’, but also between art and entertainment. What intrigued me most, however, was that the work of Jodi, an art collective that does not follow any traditions, is still part of a canon of ‘high art’ and has won quite a few important prices!
The debate around art and the videogame industry has grown in intensity since the exhibition The Next Level in the Stedelijk Museum Centraal Station (SMCS). The exhibition got a lot of publicity and has been visited by both the game community as well as the normal museum crowd and received some critical feedback from both sides. Merel Roze wrote a critical piece titled  ‘Games = Art’. From this piece it seemed like the question if a popular mass medium belongs to the space of the contemporary museum is again relevant.
These developments made me think more deeply about the medium of Untitled Game - the computergame; how does this technology actually work, and how does the medium in which the work is disseminated and institutionalised (the internet, the museum and the art discourse) influence the (understanding of the) work. These are the questions I wish to analyse in this thesis. I am using the word analyse here in quite a literal way - I will take Untitled Game apart for a more close-up understanding, using the metaphor of a medieval ‘rack’; a technique used in torture - to force a subject to answer during questioning.
During this questioning of Jodi and Untitled Game, I will limit myself to five perspectives; in chapter one I will describe the art collective Jodi and the work. The following chapter I will dedicate to the difference and tension between high art and popular culture, to position Untitled Game within the perspective of critical theory. In the third chapter I will describe Untitled Game from an aesthetical point of view. Here I am not just using the classic, rather passive meaning of aesthetics, referring to passive contemplation, but also using the term in a more active form. In doing so, I wish to come back to a more philosophical meaning of the term esthetics. In the fourth chapter, I will describe Untitled Game from a technological and art historical point of view. Finally, in chapter five - I will describe the work as an ephemeral work of art.

︎ Jodi op de pijnbank (Dutch)
︎ bijlagen Jodi op de pijnbank (Dutch)





  [ manifesto ]
Filtering failure home brew by EuroTrash Brewery
glitch:
Technological definition of glitch:
A short lived fault or break from an expected flow of operation within a digital system.
Glitch Art: The metaphorical, conceptual or Aesthetic use of technological glitches and other resolutions within the realm of art.
Glitch Studies Manifesto (short version)
1. The dominant, continuing search for a noiseless channel has been – and will always be – no more than a regrettable, ill-fated dogma.
Acknowledge that although the constant search for complete transparency brings newer, ‘better’ media, every one of these improved techniques will always possess their own inherent fingerprints of imperfection.

2. Dispute the operating templates of creative practice; fight genres, interfaces and expectations!
Refuse to stay locked into one medium or between contradictions like real vs. virtual, obsolete vs. up-to-date, open vs. proprietary or digital vs. analog. Surf the vortex of technology, the in-between, the art of artifacts!
.

3. Get away from the established action scripts and join the avant-garde of the unknown. Become a nomad of noise artifacts!
The static, linear notion of information-transmission can be interrupted on three occasions: during encoding-decoding (compression), feedback or when a glitch (an unexpected break within the flow of technology) occurs. Noise artists must exploit these noise artifacts and explore the new opportunities they provide.

4. Employ bends and breaks as metaphors for différance. Use the glitch as an exoskeleton for progress.
Find catharsis in disintegration, ruptures and cracks; manipulate, bend and break any medium towards the point where it becomes something new; create glitch art.

5. Realize that the gospel of glitch art also reveals new standards implemented by corruption. Not all glitch art is progressive or something new.
The popularization and cultivation of the avant-garde of mishaps has become predestined and unavoidable. Be aware of easily reproducible glitch effects automated by softwares and plug-ins. What is now a glitch will become a fashion.

6. Force the audience to voyage through the Acousmatic Videoscape.
Create conceptually synaesthetic artworks, that exploit both visual and aural glitch (or other noise) artifacts at the same time. Employ these noise artifacts as a nebula that shroudsthe technology and its inner workings and that will compel an audience to listen and watch more exhaustively.

7. Rejoice in the critical trans-media aesthetics of glitch artifacts.
Utilize glitches to bring any medium in a critical state of hypertrophy, to (subsequently) criticize its inherent politics.

8. Employ Glitchspeak (as opposed to Newspeak) and study what is outside of knowledge. Glitch theory is what you can just get away with!
Flow cannot be understood without interruption, nor can function without (the possibility of) glitching. This is why glitch studies is necessary.

Longer versions:

︎old || ︎ new

︎Polish translation by Bogumiła Piotrowska, Piotr Puldzian Płucienniczak, Aleksandra Pieńkosz 

︎ Portuguese translation by Italo Dantas
[ book ]
Glitch Moment/um
Published by the Institute of Network Cultures, December, 2011.

The Glitch Moment/um is the title of a small booklet I published in 2011. In the publication, I describe the moment of encountering a glitch as twofold:

First there is the moment the glitch happens, which is often experienced as an uncanny break of an expected technological flow or threatening loss of control. In this moment, the user or spectator doesn’t know what to expect next. This loss of control soon becomes a catalyst with a certain power as the glitch passes a tipping point. After its tipping point, the glitch is either understood as a failure, or as a development that forces new knowledge onto the user about their presumptions of the technology, or the technologies actual functioning. In case of the latter, the glitch can force the user to reconsider their habitual use of the technology.

After this experience of rupture, the glitch thus moves beyond its sublime momentum and vanishes into a realm of new conditions; it becomes a new mode - either technologically or aesthetically -, while its previous uncanny encounter is now an ephemeral, personal experience of a machine.

︎ From the INC Website

“Glitch culture organizes itself around the investigation and aestheticization of breaks in the conventional flow of information, or meaning within (digital) communication systems.

In this book, Rosa Menkman brings in early information theorists not usually encountered in glitch’s theoretical foundations to refine a signal and informational vocabulary appropriate to glitch’s technological moment/ums and orientations.”


[ ︎ ]

GLI.TC/H Festival 2010 | 20111 | 2112
faq on the 2112 gli.tc/h website, written by Nick Briz, Rosa Menkman and Jon Satrom


a version of the archived wiki

What is GLI.TC/H?
GLI.TC/H (pronounced G - L - I - dot - T - C - slash - H) has had four iterations and is presently being developed and maintained by Nick Briz, Rosa Menkman and Jon Satrom with help of many others. Founded in 2010, GLI.TC/H has been self-described as a conference, festival and gathering hybrid. It has always been a free and open event, taking place in Chicago (2010, 20111, 2112), Amsterdam (20111) and Birmingham (20111), and aims to gather glitch artists, theorists, coders and enthusiasts for a short time, to share their work and ideas. In the past (2010 and 20111) GLI.TC/H held a call for works, from which the organizers have curated gallery exhibitions, video screenings, realtime audio/video performances, lectures, workshops, panels and online exhibitions. GLI.TC/H has featured the works of over 100 artists from over a dozen countries. In 2010 GLI.TC/H launched a research wiki, which functions as a glitch art resource. It includes theoretical texts,tutorials, a list of glitch artists, past and future glitch related events (not exclusive to GLI.TC/H events) and lists online glitch communities. It is open to contributions and has been in development since 2010. In 2011 GLI.TC/H released a collection of essays and text art called the GLI.TC/H READER[ROR] published by Unsorted Books (ISBN: 978-4-9905200-1-4).

This year (2112), rather than having a call for works, GLI.TC/H has held a call for threads. These threads (lead by thread facilitators) are open groups invested in exploring a particular aspect or theme of glitch art from either a theoretical or practice based perspective. At present, these threads exist as open conversations on the GLI.TC/H working groups(forums) and will eventually take place as series of 3 hour sessions (similar to classes or think tanks) at the physical GLI.TC/H events in Chicago from Dec 6 - 9, 2012. The work produced in these threads (referred to as thread output) will be featured in the next GLI.TC/H READER[ROR] and/or online and/or in the evening exhibitions and real time performances being held in Chicago from Dec 6 - 9. Participation in these threads is free and open to anyone (deeply or mildly) interested in glitch art, as are the evening exhibitions of thread output.


Who is GLI.TC/H? This is a complicated question, but we'll do our best to answer it. Maybe we'll start with the 'we' answering this question. The voice speaking on behalf of GLI.TC/H is a core group of organizers which at present include Nick Briz, Rosa Menkman and Jon Satrom. In 2010 we co-founded GLI.TC/H, along with Evan Meaney. Collectively we refer to ourselves as the gli.tc/h/bots.

It takes considerable effort to put on an event like GLI.TC/H, and the gli.tc/h/bots haven't done it alone. The first iteration of GLI.TC/H was held in Chicago in 2010 and received support from a handful of institutions and individuals. The department of Film, Video, New Media and Animation at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago provided substantial support that year, thanks in large part to jonCates, the present chair of the department. A handful of local venues hosted free events including Roxaboxen Exhibitions, Transistor, the Nightingale Theater and Club Foot.

For GLI.TC/H 2011 (referred to as 20111) we expanded the event significantly and with that came more work and more help. The events held in Chicago, IL and Amsterdam, NL, were primarily organized and curated (from an open call) by Nick Briz, Rosa Menkman and Jon Satromwith significant organizational help from William Robertson. Kim Asendorf curated the online gallery. Theodore Darst and Evan Meaneyco-curated the screening component. Antonio Roberts, with support from Arts Council England, Birmingham City University. fizzPOP, helped at the closing day of GLI.TC/H at VIVID gallery in Birmingham, UK. Additionally, Jessica Westbrook assisted in the production of the GLI.TC/H READER[ROR] and jonCates and Jake Elliott live broadcasted the Chicago events on Numbers.fm. The venues which hosted GLI.TC/H 20111 were, MBLabs, Rodan, Enemy and the Nightingale Theater in Chicago, and STEIM and PlanetArt in Amsterdam. GLI.TC/H 20111 was financially made possible through donations on Kickstarter As well as artists who donated their work to the Kickstarter; Melissa Barron, Nick Briz, jonCates, Jeff Donaldson, Evan Meaney, Rosa Menkman, Don Miller, Pox Party (Jon Satrom and Ben Syverson) and Vaudeo Signal(Ben Baker-Smith and Evan Kühl). A list of the backers can be found here.

GLI.TC/H 2012 (referred to as 2112) is again being organized by Nick Briz, Rosa Menkman and Jon Satrom with the individual threads being organized by Beth Capper,jonCates, Curt Cloninger, Jake Elliott,Benjamin Gaulon, Shawné Holloway, Daniel Temkin, Adam D Trowbridgeand Jessica Westbrook with additional threads by Ryan T Dunn,Kyoung Kim, Edwina Portocarrero and Philip Stearns and panels by Kevin Carey, Ted Davis, Steven Hammer, Paul Hertz,Shawné Holloway, Chris Lindgren, A Bill Miller, Alex Myers, Patrick Quinn, Antonio Roberts, Daniel Rourke and Alfredo Salazar-Caro. The events will be hosted at MBLabs, High Concept Labs, The Gallery Formerly Known as Happy Dog and Tritriangle. All the work being exhibited and performed this year will be co-produced by the online WorkingGroup participants and anyone who attends the thread sessions during the event. GLI.TC/H 2112 is financially made possible by a grant from the Propeller Fund and the support from this years Kickstarter donars.

Lastly, GLI.TC/H would be an empty room if not for the artists, theorists and enthusiasts which have participated in the past. An incomplete list of artists can be found here.