Johnny Magdaleno, ‘An Urban-Scale Light Show Splices The Sky Over Tasmania’, Creators Project, 13 June 2014

BLOG

An Urban-Scale Light Show Splices The Sky Over Tasmania

By Johnny Magdaleno — Jun 13 2014

Rafael  Lozano-­Hemmer’s  light  shows  are  more  than  just  reflections  of  his  artistic  vision.  While  the  Mexico  City-­born  artist  does  articulate

all  the  programming,  3D  graphing,  and  staging  himself,  he’s  often  less  concerned  with  his  role  in  the  actual  performance  than  he  is  with

that  of  the  audience.  Considering  that  his  performances  literally  couldn’t  happen  without  audience  presence  and  participation,  it  makes

sense.

Like  many  of  his  other  installation  and  conceptual  pieces,  Lozano-­Hemmer’s  light  shows  thrive  off  of  crowdsourcing.  Take,  for  example,

2007’s  Pulse  Front.  Staged  in  Toronto,  Canada’s  Harbourfront,  the  interactive  performance  piece  consisted  of  20  robotic  searchlights

and  10  metal  sculptures.  When  a  participant  grabbed  onto  one  of  the  sculptures,  a  few  of  the  search  lights  would  pulsed  at  the  same

speed  as  the  participant’s  heart  rate.  The  result  was  beyond  flashy—  it  was  a  sky-­wide  broadcast  of  real-­time  biometric  data.

In  continuation  of  that  tradition,  Lozano-­Hemmer  is  in  the  midst  of  installing  another  urban-­scale  light  performance  along  the  waterfront  of

Hobart,  Australia.  It’s  called  Articulated  Intersect,  and  it’s  part  of  the  Dark  Mofo  festival,  a  10-­day  long  celebration,  run  by  the

the  Museum  of  New  and  Old  Art,  of  Tasmania’s  winter  season.  We  Skyped  with  Lozano-­Hemmer  while  Intersections  was  being  installed,

to  see  what  we  could  expect  when  the  project  debuts  this  Friday,  and  how  he  plans  on  incorporating  his  audience  this  time  around.

The  Creators  Project:  Could  you  give  us  some  background  on  the  Articulated  Intersect  project?

Rafael  Lozano-­Hemmer:  Originally  this  project  was  conceived  for  the  US-­Mexico  border.  When  I  first  thought  of  it  I  wanted,  like  so  many

other  artists,  to  work  along  the  Tijuana-­San  Diego  border.  I’m  very  inspired  by  the  work  ofGuillermo  Gómez-­Peña  and  Emily  Hicks,  like

the  original  broken  line  people  who  facilitated  performances  across  the  border,  which  dealt  with  this  binational  divide.  I  wanted  to  make  a

project  where  searchlights  would  be  used  not  in  this  celebratory,  victory-­parade,  carnival-­esque  mall-­opening  way,  but  rather  to  try  and

connect  the  two  countries  at  the  same  time,  and  have  a  reference  to  the  predatorial  lighting  that  is  quite  often  used  in  the  tracking  of

Mexican  migrants  by  la  migra  [immigration  police],  helicopters,  and  the  Minutemen.

The  original  concept  is  that  you’d  have  three  controllers  in  Mexico  and  three  in  the  US,  and  as  you’re  pointing  each,  you’re  literally

penetrating  the  air  space  of  the  other  country  with  a  powerful  search  light,  which  can  be  seen  from  a  ten  mile  radius.  In  so  doing  you

would  be  setting  up  these  light  sabers  or  bridges  of  light  between  the  two  countries,  to  be  interpreted  as  a  violent  transgression  of  air

space  but  also  a  connective  gesture  across  the  borders.  That’s  its  origin.  And  I’m  still  hoping  to  be  able  to  do  that  at  some  point.  It’s  a

logistical  -­  no,  more  a  financial  problem  than  a  logistical  problem  at  this  point.

Logistically,  do  you  think  it  would  be  possible?  Or  something  both  governments  would  allow?

I  genuinely  don’t  believe  the  authorities  would  have  a  problem  with  it.  At  least  not  between  Tijuana  and  San  Diego.  It’d  be  most  natural  to

do  it  there,  because  it’s  where  there’s  the  most  fluid  connection  between  both  countries.  It  also  hosts  the  biggest  tradition  of  border  art,

so  it’s  not  like  I’m  inventing  anything.  It’d  be  on  the  backs  of  hundreds  of  other  incredible  arts.

Except  you’d  be  bringing  a  new  media  angle  that  would  build  upon  that  history  in  a  21st  century  way.

Right.  In  a  way  that’s  consistent  with  what  is  happening.  I  often  say  I  work  with  new  media  not  because  it’s  new  or  original,  but  because

it’s  inevitable  -­  the  language  of  our  time.  I  always  try  to  present  new  media  as  something  that  is  normal,  as  opposed  to  something  that  is

new.

It  first  showed  in  Montreal,  correct?

Yes.  It  first  showed  at  the  Triennale  Québecois,  which  was  a  triennial  for  Quebec  artists  in  Montreal,  Canada.

What’s  different  about  the  Hobart  edition?

There  are  several  differences,  but  the  most  important  one  is  the  way  the  lights  are  being  used.  They’re  more  like  aggregates  of  light.

Basically,  we  have  6  controllers  and  each  of  the  controllers  controls  one  light.  In  Montreal,  we  were  creating  a  dome-­like  structure,  based

on  Buckminster  Fuller’s  Tetrahedron.  So  as  you  moved  your  lever,  what  you  were  controlling  was  the  apex  of  intersection  of  three  lights,

which  were  creating  this  enormous  tetrahedron  in  the  sky.  For  Hobart,  we’re  basically  putting  three  search  lights  extremely  close  to  the

controller,  and  putting  the  person  right  in  the  middle  of  a  big  compound  beam  made  itself  out  of  three  beams.  So  it’s  a  much  easier  beam

to  follow  because  you’re  setting  up  this  one-­to-­one  relationship.  Your  haptic  lever,  the  physical  interface,  is  moving  this  enormous

compound  beam.

We’re  doing  this  because  of  visibility.  It’s  a  lot  easier  to  see  the  beam  when  it’s  compounded.  Tasmania  does  not  have  any  pollution.

When  we  work  in  Mexico  City,  for  example,  the  pollution  provides  a  “natural  fog  machine,”  which  is  great  because  you  see  the  beams

well,  but  Tasmania  is  so  clean!  You  really  need  the  extra  punch  of  agglomerating  the  lights  into  a  single  beam.

The  other  new  thing  is  that  it’s  on  the  waterfront,  in  an  area  called  Sullivan’s  Cove.  The  reflections  on  the  water  double  up  the  effects

very  nicely.

The  final  difference  is  that  we’ve  added  sound.  Now  there’s  feedback  when  there’s  an  intersection  between  two  or  more  participants.  The

computer  makes  a  ticking  sound  to  let  you  know  when  that’s  happened.

The  context  is  not  like  in  Montreal,  where  the  associated  event  was  focused  around  visual  arts.  Here,  the  Dark  Mofo  festival  is  based

around  performing  arts.

When  the  lights  intersect,  is  the  sound  that  gets  generated  amplified,  or  local  to  the  user?

It’s  local.  For  light  to  have  materiality,  you  need  to  employ  all  the  tricks  you  can.  The  motion  is  certainly  one.  The  haptic  feedback  is  one,

too.  When  you’re  moving  the  lever  and  the  lights  intersect,  you  literally  feel  it  because  of  a  series  of  brakes  and  clutches  which  slow

down  the  lever  and  give  it  autonomy.  Then  the  sound  comes  in  for  extra  effect.

I  was  curious  to  know  about  that  responsiveness.  How  do  the  lights  know  when  the  beams  interact?  I  read  about  the  optical

encoders,  and  I’m  assuming  that  it’s  based  on  the  physical  position  of  the  lever,  which  is  programmed  into  a  system  that

relates  light  position  with  lever  position.

That’s  exactly  right.  The  controller  is  stainless  steel  which  has  a  pan-­and-­tilt  head.  The  pan-­and-­tilt  allows  you  to  point  the  lever  in  any

direction.  The  encoders  tell  the  computers  at  what  angle  each  lever  is  oriented.  And  from  that  we  have  the  3  dimensional  position  of  the

target  in  space  -­  that  is,  where  the  light  is  pointed.

In  terms  of  the  technical  aspects  of  the  project,  the  most  complicated  thing  is  the  3  dimensional  calibration.  It  happens  in  3  dimensions,

but  also  3  orientations.  For  each  search  light  and  each  controller,  we  need  to  know  not  only  its  GPS  position  in  the  city  -­  we  also  need  to

know  the  precise  orientation.  They  call  it  tilt,  yaw  and  roll.  Because  even  a  slight  variation  of  that  means  a  huge  difference  to  where  the

search  light  is  pointed.

That  calibration  is  basically  what  we  have  been  configuring  over  the  past  4  nights.  We’ve  just  been  sort  of  taking  note  and  measuring

what  different  pan  and  tilt  values  are  giving  us  for  the  search  lights,  and  then  correcting  that  in  a  3D  world  view  program.  Then  the

controllers  themselves  have  the  computers  to  make  this  happen,  and  they  have  these  4  clutches  which,  for  example,  not  only  give  you

the  haptic  feedback  when  there’s  contact  but  prevent  the  lever  from  pointing  the  lights  to  a  nearby  hospital,  or  hotel,  or  bird  sanctuary.

One  final,  broader  question.  To  me,  this  project  follows  the  path  set  by  your  earlier  projects  like  Open  Air,  Pulse

Front  and  Vectorial  Elevation,  which  are  kind  of  based  on  an  urban,  massive,  crowdsourced  “telecommunity.”  What  do  you

hope  to  achieve  with  each  new  iteration  of  your  urban  light  projects?

It  depends,  but  often  times  what  I’m  trying  to  do  is  personalize  public  space.  Searchlights,  as  you  know,  are  used  in  a  militaristic  way.

They  were  originally  used  for  anti-­aircraft  surveillance.  But  after  the  Second  World  War,  they  were  used  for  celebration  and  in  victory

parades,  so  we  now  associate  them  with  that.  Sadly,  these  days  that  celebration  is  now  affiliated  with  some  kind  of  corporate  event,

where  you’re  encouraged  to  buy  something.  For  me,  what’s  radical  is  to  misuse  these  technologies,  which  were  military  but  now  are

corporate,  to  create  spectacles  that  aren’t  passive,  that  go  away  from  the  fireworks  culture  of  catharsis,  and  instead  create  platforms  that

are  seeking  complicity.

The  thing  about  all  of  the  projects  you  mentioned  is  that  if  no  one  participates,  they  become  static  and  do  nothing.  An  activation  from  the

public  is  required  to  animate  the  entire  piece.  So  one  of  the  things  I  hope  to  do  with  projects  like  this  is  to  have  that  sense  of  relationship,

of  agency,  of  -­  why  not?  -­  power.  Of  being  able  to  take  individual  expressions  and  amplify  them  to  an  urban  scale.

Lozano-­Hemmer  will  be  busy  installing  new  projects  up  through  the  end  of  this  year.  Find  out  what,  where  and  when  onhis  website.

All  photos  courtesy  Museum  of  Old  and  New  Art  and  Rafael  Lozano-­Hemmer.