The Future of Indeterminacy: Datification, Memory, Bio-politics

未来不再被视为是开放的。一方面，它被视为不稳定，另一方面，它被视为技术上的过度决定。经济的不确定性、风险社会的兴起、恐惧文化和新自由主义的死亡政治——“制造和让死亡”的政治（Mbembe 2003）——被视为严重的威胁。当风险社会把所有的危险都归咎于人类的决定时，恐惧文化培养了灾难化的倾向。新自由主义的死亡政治以一种不可逆转的方式将技术与自然和社会储备的开发结合起来，创造出一种封闭和厄运的感觉。这个跨学科项目不是哀叹“被取消的未来”的不确定性（Berardi 2014），也不是哀叹大数据预测引发的“自由意志的终结”（Han 2017），而是逆转了这个问题。它问：不确定性的未来是什么？最初来源于Gödel的不确定性和stenger和Prirogine的非线性动力学，其中秩序从混沌系统中自发出现，不确定性是一种自我延续的变化动态。它没有开始或结束，没有空间或时间的恒常性。它颠覆了现有的结构和僵化的权力制度，这就是为什么它在20世纪60年代被视为一种解放力量，并再次被20世纪90年代的艺术家和理论家如凯奇，激流，Xenakis，德里达，Guattari， Hayles和Varela所接受，他们都试图在思想和行动中实施不确定的程序，在各自的领域。在数字时代，在加速发展的信息资本主义中，情况就大不相同了。首先，永久改变是规则。第二，艺术、文化和政治不再是分开的；它们融合在位于信息领域的文化领域中。信息空间由互联网、文化生产、满足、算法预先决定、象征和情感制度组成，它改变了思想和行动的语言和形式。它也改变了现实的结构。重新调动Poggioli的先锋派概念，将其视为在其他艺术形式中固有的可复制性，更重要的是，在主流文化中（1972），该项目将通过四个不同的研究活动，对艺术不确定性与当前文化实践的关系产生新的理解：1。20世纪60年代和90年代不确定实践（Fluxus，情境主义国际，etoy和Knowbotic Research）的案例研究，这些实践破坏了语义，视觉，听觉和动觉的秩序和规范性，以了解他们的方法对当今艺术和文化实践的全面影响。将这些分析与2010年代破坏跟踪和数据监控的不确定性进行比较，即：在尼森鲍姆、卡德纳斯、盖茨、门克曼、诺比、绍德尔、比格斯和藤田等艺术家和活动家的作品中发现的故障、混淆、数据化和耗散网络，它们通过扰乱文化记忆来重新配置（虚拟的和现实的）存在空间。在这里，案例研究将与实践研讨会相结合。3. 3 .通过一系列艺术科学会谈、一次国际会议和《莱昂纳多》特刊（麻省理工学院出版社），形成关于（快速变化的）数字无意识与未来媒体生态之间关系的假设，这些关系与媒体深刻的躯体、社会和文化工作有关。从“大问题”的角度重新评估艺术不确定性对因果关系、部分与整体关系的解构，这些问题从超现实主义者克雷文20世纪20年代的“冲动生活”实践到戴维斯2018年的偶然操作基因编码作品，即：序列（线性、圆形或图案）是构建知识的唯一途径吗？事件与经验档案——个人和文化身份——的持续联系是必要的吗？或者，我们是否可以独立于任何整体性和恒常性来参与异质性？这些问题将在专著中加以探讨。

The future is no longer seen as open. It is seen as precarious on the one hand and technologically over-determined on the other. Economic uncertainty, the rise of the risk society, the culture of fear and neoliberal necropolitics - the politics of 'making and letting die' (Mbembe 2003) - are seen as a serious threat. While the risk society attributes all hazards to human decisions, the culture of fear cultivates the tendency to catastrophise. Neoliberal necropolitics welds technology to the exploitation of natural and social reserves in an irreversible way creating a sense of closure and doom. Instead of lamenting the uncertainty of a 'cancelled future' (Berardi 2014) or the 'end of free will' induced by big-data's predictions (Han 2017), this interdisciplinary project reverses the question. It asks: what is the future of indeterminacy? Initially derived from Gödel's undecidability and Stengers and Prirogine's non-linear dynamics in which order emerges spontaneously from chaotic systems, indeterminacy is a self-perpetuating dynamic of change. It has no beginning or end, no spatial or temporal constancy. It upsets the existing structures and ossified power regimes, which is why it was embraced as a liberating force by the 1960s, and, again, by the 1990s artists and theorists such as Cage, Fluxus, Xenakis, Derrida, Guattari, Hayles and Varela, all of whom sought to implement indeterminate procedures, in thought and action, in their respective fields. In the digital age, in accelerated, informational capitalism, the situation is very different. First, permanent change is the rule. Second, art, culture, and politics are no longer separate; they are fused in the cultural sphere located in the infosphere. Consisting of the internet, cultural production, datification, algorithmic predetermination, symbolic as well as affective regimes, the infosphere has modified the language and forms of thought and action. It has also modified the structure of reality. Re-mobilising Poggioli's concept of the avant-garde as inherently reproducible in other art forms and, importantly, in mainstream culture (1972), this project will develop a new understanding of the relationship of artistic indeterminacy to current cultural practices via four distinct research activities:1. Case studies of the 1960s and 1990s indeterminate practices (Fluxus, Situationists International, etoy and Knowbotic Research) that disrupt semantic, visual, aural and kinaesthetic ordering and normativity in order to understand the full impact of their methodologies on present-day artistic and cultural practices.2. Comparing these analyses to the 2010s indeterminacy that sabotages tracking and dataveillance, namely: glitching, obfuscation, databending and dissipative networks found in the work of such artists-activists as Nissenbaum, Cardenas, Cates, Menkman, Norby, Szauder, Biggs and Fujihata, which reconfigure (virtual and actual) existential spaces by dis-ordering cultural memory. Here case studies will be combined with hands-on workshops. 3. Forming hypotheses about the relationship of the (rapidly changing) digital unconscious to future media ecologies as related to media's profound somatic, social and cultural working via a series of art-science talks, an international conference, and a special issue of Leonardo (MIT Press).4. Re-evaluating artistic indeterminacy's deconstruction of the cause-effect, parts-and-wholes relationship in light of its 'big questions', questions that have persisted from Surrealist Craven's 1920s practice of 'impulsive living' to Davis's 2018 work with chance-operated genetic coding, namely: Is sequence (linear, circular or patterned) the only way of constructing knowledge? Is the constant linking of events to the experience archive - personal and cultural identity - a necessity? Or, can we engage heterogeneity independently of any whole-ness and constancy? These questions will be explored in a monograph.