2.2.5.1. Connecting approach: Art-context
The connecting approach is inspired by the artistic tradition of re-purposing and re-contextualising objects as seen in the Dada and Fluxus movements.[144] Both movements in art generated a new (audio) visual language and new notions of aesthetics through mixing and combining or blending materials and concepts. Fluxus’ participatory performances, happenings and installations are often seen as forerunners to today’s interactive art. The pioneer of video and electronic art , and former Fluxus artist, Nam June Paik states about his explorative practice:
‘Reaching out into the boundary regions between various fields, and complex problems of interfacing these different media and elements, such as music and visual art, hardware and software, electronics and humanities in the classical sense..’ (N. Paik)[145]
Paik represents the artist as processpatcher, who works on extending her/his practice through a constant skimming and exploration of the nearby fields, borrowing and exchanging knowledge and expertise, and gluing the found pieces together according to often surprising logic or intuition.
‘Paik connected the theory of cybernetics, in which the interdisciplinary approach was a major principle, with his own experiments that crossed over to different disciplines. In his writings he regularly refers to Norbert Wiener’s and Marshall McLuhan’s theories in relation to his own ideas of the communication aspects of art.’ (M.Bijvoet)
Bijvoet points us to Paik’s connecting or processpatching practice, as an artist who draws from theory and practice from a range of art disciplines, engineering, social science and cybernetics. In the process of connecting different areas or disciplines, most artists do not limit their selection to computer science; social or cultural processes relevant to the concept are often linked into the collaboration network. In contrast to the earlier discussed problem solvers, artists often act as ‘problem creators’ by fulfilling a 'knitting' or connecting function, bridging different fields, from which knowledge and research results are 'borrowed' to be placed in a new artistic context. This attitude often leads to unexpected and surprising combinations. The artistic process of patching, knitting and connecting, is aimed at the creation of (new) meaning(s) of technological research and development and the impact of technology on our perception. This refers to one of the characteristics of the role, or maybe even method, of artists who work in interdisciplinary contemporary art and technology practice. There are some hints or suggestions found here and there in literature, most closely in the theory of Weibel, who calls art a method. We should note that Weibel uses the definition of a ‘method’ as proposed by the French physiologist Claude Bernard (1813-1878) who refers to ‘method’ as the experiment at large which includes the laboratory, the environment, material, personnel, the incidents and so on, which is different from Descartes who refers to ‘method’ as an analytical model. Connecting and patching ought to be seen in the context of mixing a plurality of methods. Weibel sees a comparable interest in the methodology of Feyerabend and art methodology, and Weibel refers to the social construct of science shown by Feyerabend in comparison with social constructs in art. One should be aware of the fact that art practice does not limit itself to working exclusively with (today’s) technology, art and technology practice also draws from non-technical disciplines and traditions. In the artist’s kitchen, ‘fusion kitchen’ is a favourite. Artistic patching and connecting generates new combinations or blends of research, art and social fields that inform and expose each other.
‘The aim is to produce a new kind of information that is not introspective but combinative, outward-looking and seeking new connections, (….) in this way, artistic research can also have a meaning that is wider than its own narrowly conceived discipline’
(M. Hannula, J. Suoranta, T. Vaden) [146]
The authors elaborate on the importance of choosing the relevant and most suitable research method, though there is no mention of the processpatching or connecting approach as a re-mix of methods in one single art project. In their publication, they cover the arts at large. In their vision, the artist’s liberty to choose from a range of methods is defined as a way to create new connections with other fields, and the authors are not outspoken about the function of connecting or processpatching as defined earlier in this chapter. This directs us to an important nuance in the definition of this method. Processpatching or connecting goes beyond ‘being informed’ or ‘being inspired’ by other fields. In the context of interactive art, it also refers to aspects of materiality, whether this is physical matter or ephemeral.
