At the cutting edge of technology, art and design – Robots and Avatars

March-May 2012

Robots and Avatars is an example of exhibition focused on presenting cutting edge innovative works at the intersection of art, design and technology. The exhibition was a part of a larger research proj- ect, originally initiated by London-based design collective <body-data-space> in partnership with NESTA, which grew into a bigger collaboration between various European partners, supported by funding from the EU Culture Programme.27 _{The project was set up to explore:}

‘how young people will work and play with the new representation forms of themselves and others in virtual and physical life in the next 10-15 years [...] Robots and Avatars – by looking at the future of work and play - examines the multi identity evolutions of today’s younger generations within the context of a world in which the virtual and the physical spaces are increasingly blended.’28

24 FACT, 2014. ‘Semiconductor. Worlds in the Making’. Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/ semiconductor-worlds-in-the-making.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

25 FACT, 2014. ‘Liverpool Biennial 2012. The Unexpected Guest’. Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/ projects/liverpool-biennial-2012-the-unexpected-guest.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

26 FACT, 2014. ‘Knowledge Lives Everywhere’. Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/knowl- edge-lives-everywhere.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

27 Robots and Avatars, 2014. ‘Robots and Avatars – Our Colleagues and Playmates of the Future.’ Online. Available at: http://www.robotsandavatars.net/. Accessed: July 20, 2014.

Robots and Avatars presented a variety of works, which were selected following an internationally circulated open call.29 _{Artworks included virtual reality projects, wearable and robotic technologies} and online-based work using social networks. One of the works especially commissioned for the exhibition was Michael Takeo Magruder’s piece Vision of Our Communal Dreams. The piece, shown in Media Lounge, Gallery 2 and the FACT foyer, was an interactive environment that blended virtual, physical and networked environments.30 _{The piece consisted of two spaces – physical and virtual,} which were interconnected, allowing for real-time interaction, such as creating one’s own avatar and navigating the virtual world from different portals (gallery space, the web). The project was pro- duced in collaboration with young people from Liverpool, who learned how to create the 3D virtual environment and build a series of avatars.31

29 200 applications from 27 countries were received. The jury consisting of international panel of experts (including FACT’s CEO Mike Stubs) selected 3 new commissions and 14 exhibits to be produced and presented in the exhibition. See Robots and Avatars, 2014. ‘Exhibition’. Online. Avilable at: http://www. robotsandavatars.net/exhibition/. Accessed: July 20, 2014.

30 FACT, 2014. ‘Robots and Avatars’. Online. Available at://www.fact.co.uk/projects/robots-and-avatars/ michael-takeo-magruder-visions-of-our-communal-dreams.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

31 Collaboration with 9 students from Weatherhead Media Arts College. For details See FACT, 2014. ‘Visions of Our Communal Dreams.’ Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/visions-of-our-commu- nal-dreams/. Accessed: July 20, 2014.

Fig.16 Michael Takeo Magruder, Visions of Our Communal Dreams, 2012. Installation view, Media Lounge and FACT foyer. Robots and Avatars exhibition, FACT, 2012. Image courtesy of FACT.

In Gallery 1, two installations were presented. The first one was an analogue installation ADA by Karina Smigla Bobinski, consisting of a large inflated floating globe, to which attached were pieces of coal, that left marks on the walls and the ceiling when the globe was pushed around the gallery by the visitors. ADA was a ‘performance-machine’, in which the audience, interacting with the globe, became co-creators of the work.32 _{The second part of Gallery 1 was occupied by Lawrence Malstaf’s} installation Compass. This piece was described as a ‘living installation’ and ‘an individual performance experience [...] situated somewhere between art and theatre.’33 _{The piece consisted of a wearable} machine, a type of a large metal belt, which could be worn by visitors, and a series of magnetic plates, hidden under a carpet floor, which created a magnetic force field. The belt reacted to the magnetic field and was able to change the direction and control the movement of the one wearing it. The visitor could either succumb to the force of the belt, or try to resist it, although this was very difficult to do.

In the Gallery 2 selection of different projects were presented including MeYouandUs by Alastair Eil- beck and James Bailey, an interactive installation which displayed on a large plasma screen digitally manipulated video images from the gallery,34 _{and a digital rendition of Pepper Ghost trick,}35 _creat-

32 Smigla-Bobinski, 2004. ‘ADA’. Online. Available at: http://www.smigla-bobinski.com/works/Ada.html. Ac- cessed: January 20, 2014.

33 See FACT, 2014. ‘Lawrence Malstaf – Compass.’ Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/ robots-and-avatars/lawrence-malstaf-compass.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

34 FACT, 2014. ‘Alistair Eilbeck and James Bailey – MeYouAndUS.’ Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/ projects/robots-and-avatars/alastair-eilbeck-and-james-bailey-meyouandus.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

35 Pepper’s ghost is an illusion technique used in theatre, which uses plate glass and lighting to make objects seem to appear or disappear or morph into another. See The Filmmakers Workshop, 2013. ‘Practi- cal Effects Classics. Peppers Ghost Effect. How To Do Peppers Ghost.’ Online. Available at: http://www. thefilmmakersworkshop.com/practical-effects-classics-peppers-ghost-effect-how-to-do-peppers-ghost/. Accessed: July 20, 2013.

Fig. 17 Karina Smigla Bobinski, ADA, 2010. Installation view, Gallery 1. Robots and Avatars. FACT, 2012. Image courtesy of FACT.

Fig. 18 Lawrence Malstaf, Compass 2005. Co-produced and presented by FACT and body>data>space in Robots and Avatars, 2012. Installation view, Gallery 1, FACT. Pho- tographer: Brian Slater. Image courtesy of FACT.

Fig. 19 Chris Sugrue, Base 8, 2011. Co-produced and presented by FACT and body>data>space in Robots and Avatars, 2012. Installation view, Gallery 2, FACT. Photographer: Brian Slater. Image courtesy of FACT.

ing virtual representations of body akin to holographic illusions (Base 8, Chris Sugrue).36 _{There were} a series of monitor-based projects including Rep.licants.org (by Matthieu Cherubini), a web service which offers to simulate and enhance one’s web’s activity on social networks,37 _{and an online game}

Naked on Pluto (by Aymeric Mansoux, Dave Griffiths, Marloes de Volk), in which subscribers to the game played against virtual agents harvesting personal data from gamer’s online environments.38 In the foyer space on the ground floor a person sized talking robot was installed. The robot spoke out loud text messages, which were sent by the audience to a dedicated number.39 _{The exhibition was} accompanied by a series of events and discussions, as well as a performance Public Avatar, which en- abled users logged in online to give instructions and to control, in real-time, a ‘human test subject’.40

Robots and Avatars attracted significant attention and press coverage.41 _{Alongside many press features} and reviews, BBC Click TV – a programme dedicated to new technologies – presented a full episode (30 minutes) covering Robots and Avatars, filmed at FACT. Most of the reviews focused on explaining the different works and on the novelty and experimental aspects and the discussion on human-robotic relationship. The idea for the exhibition certainly encapsulated FACT’s ambition to present work at the cutting edge of technology, design, art and society. However, the exhibition also fully demonstrated the difficulties of accommodating experimental work in the traditional exhibition framework.

The show was plagued with technical problems; the main piece in Gallery 1 – Compass – was not op- erational for majority of the show’s duration, with the exception of two first weeks. For the rest of the time, a documentary of a performance using the Compass was screened in the gallery. ADA, the inflat- able drawing globe also needed maintenance as it was regularly deflated and had to be replaced part way through the run of the exhibition. Pieces which were expected to deliver a significant interactive aspect of the show, such as the Vision of Our Communal Dreams, required a more sustained engage- ment (creating account on an online virtual reality server, building one’s avatar etc.)42 _{which therefore} made it more difficult to interact with. The online-based works, which were displayed on a series of monitors in Gallery 2, also required certain amount of time to work out the basis of the project, and without the guidance from the Gallery Assistants, were difficult for the audience to engage with.43 36 See FACT, 2014. ‘Chris Sugrue – Base 8.’ Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/robots-and-

avatars/chris-sugrue-base-8.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

37 FACT, 2014. ‘Matthieu Cherubini – Rep.licants.org.’ Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/ robots-and-avatars/matthieu-cherubini-replicantsorg.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

38 See FACT, 2014. ‘Aymeric Mansoux, Dave Griffiths, Marloes de Valk – Naked on Pluto.’ Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/robots-and-avatars/aymeric-mansoux,-dave-griffiths-and-marloes-de- valk-naked-on-pluto.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

39 FACT, 2014. ‘Martin Bricelj Baraga – RoboVox.’ Online. Available at: http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/robots- and-avatars/martin-bricelj-baraga-robovox.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

40 See FACT, 2014. ‘Martin Bricelj Baraga and Slavko Glamocianin – Public Avatar.’ Online. Available at: http:// www.fact.co.uk/projects/robots-and-avatars/martin-bricelj-baraga-and-slavko-glamo%C4%8Danin- public-avatar.aspx. Accessed: January 20, 2014.

41 For selection of press coverage and reviews See Robots and Avatars, 2014. ‘Exhibition. Press.’ Online. Available at: http://www.robotsandavatars.net/exhibition/robotsandavatars_fact/press/. Accessed: Janu- ary 20, 2014.

42 The instruction for participation in Visions of Our Communal Dream is a multi page document. See Magruder, T. 2012. ‘ Visions of Our Communal Dream. Virtual Participation Set up Guide.’ [PDF]. Online. Available at: http://www.robotsandavatars.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/VOCD_virtual-participa- tion-guide_v1.0_web-copy1.pdf. Accessed: June 30, 2013.

43 FACT, 2012. ‘Robots and Avatars. Evaluation meeting notes.’ Available from FACT hard drive. [no pagina- tion].

Reading FACT’s internal evaluation notes regarding Robots and Avatars reveals other factors, that contributed to some of the difficulties with the final outcome of the exhibition. It becomes clear that the exhibition was a smaller version of what was originally anticipated due to the body<data>space last minute funding issues, which resulted in significant cut to the exhibition’s anticipated budget. This resulted in two major new commissions not being able to be completed in time.44 _{The notes} also reveal some of the problems and contingencies of working in collaboration with various part- ners, in which the curatorial decisions as well as different aspects of work development and pro- duction were shared between a larger group of people, which made it more difficult to coordinate the work flow.45