The Futurity Long Conversation, a 9-hour relay of one-to-one conversations, brings 21 leading artists, designers, theorists, journalists and media interventionists together to discuss, contextualise and explore a multiplicity of utopias, projects and technologies crucial for the ways in which we conceive the future today. It remains open which turns these dialogues will ultimately take -- just as the future itself always eludes our grasp. The processual character of the event creates a framework which allows to experience future without predicting it. With the dialogue thus unfolding as an aesthetic, analytical and collaborative process it establishes an open space in which the audience can wander about freely between the disciplines of art, science and ecomony. The event questions the predominant way in which 'future' finds its cultural roots at a point in history where the convergence of media technologies, communication mobility and means of simultaneity eclipse the 20th century rhetoric of the future.
The event will begin with a greeting by Alexander Rose, Director of the Long Now Foundation, and a keynote by Dr Richard Barbrook.
The Futurity Long Conversation was developed in collaboration with the UK arts organisation Artangel and the Longplayer Trust, and was inspired by their work and that of The Long Now Foundation, international organisations crafting ways with which to perceive time and durational process in radically different and perhaps media technologically appropriate ways. In Long Now's approach, we are in a period which redefines the 'now' within a timespan of 10 000 years, altering our notions of future and the acceleration of progress and development. For the duration of transmediale.10 the HKW will act as a temporary sound beacon for Longplayer, Jem Finer's algorithmic musical composition, written to play in 1000 year cycles within which it never repeats.
For the duration of transmediale.10 the HKW will act as a temporary sound beacon for Longplayer, an algorithmic piece of music designed to play 1000 years without ever repeating itself composed by artist Jem Finer.
The Long Conversion [9] is a hybrid between installation and performance which will be developed especially for transmediale.10. Through a series of visual and sonic transformations, the Award nominees Sosolimited will disassemble and recombine the experimental symposium the Futurity Long Conversation in real time revealing linguistic patterns, expose thematic content and structures.
This event will be in English language only.
All participants are listed in chronological order. The key words and statements describe the working field of the 'conversationists' and serve as a guide for the audience through the "long conversation".
13:00 Imaginary Futures Keynote: by Richard Barbrook (uk) [10]
Order of Appearance:
14:00 - 14:22 Drew Hemment [3] & David Link [3]
14:22 - 14:44 David Link [3] & This becomes a particularly relevant strategy when considering how to plan, build, design and compose for an uncertain future.')" onmouseout="UnTip()">Jem Finer [3]
14:44 - 15:06 This becomes a particularly relevant strategy when considering how to plan, build, design and compose for an uncertain future.')" onmouseout="UnTip()">Jem Finer [3] & Alan N. Shapiro [3]
15:06 - 15:28 Alan N. Shapiro [3] & Ken Rinaldo [3]
15:28 - 15:50 Ken Rinaldo [3] & Jan Edler [3]
15:50 - 16:12 Jan Edler [3] & Maja Kuzmanovic [3]
16:12 - 16:34 Maja Kuzmanovic [3] & Joy Tang [3]
16:34 - 16:56 Joy Tang [3] & Today the attributes of Future aren’t anymore those of Speed nor Haste: our imagination starts seeking accessibility, reusability and interoperability in every cultural artifact. We are called to consider the solidity of natural and artificial ecosystems which shouldn’t anymore be built on hybris, but still on techné intended as a rythm that lets humanity relate to its Times.
“Go ahead, capitalize the T on technology, deify it if it will make you feel less responsible – but it puts you in with the neutered, brother, in with the eunuchs keeping the harem of our stolen Earth for the numb and joyless hardons of human sultans, human elite with no right at all to be where they are --” ( Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow )')" onmouseout="UnTip()">Jaromil [3]
16:56 - 17:18 Today the attributes of Future aren’t anymore those of Speed nor Haste: our imagination starts seeking accessibility, reusability and interoperability in every cultural artifact. We are called to consider the solidity of natural and artificial ecosystems which shouldn’t anymore be built on hybris, but still on techné intended as a rythm that lets humanity relate to its Times.
“Go ahead, capitalize the T on technology, deify it if it will make you feel less responsible – but it puts you in with the neutered, brother, in with the eunuchs keeping the harem of our stolen Earth for the numb and joyless hardons of human sultans, human elite with no right at all to be where they are --” ( Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow )')" onmouseout="UnTip()">Jaromil [3] & Gustaff Harriman Iskandar [3]
17:18 - 17:40 Gustaff Harriman Iskandar [3] & Gabriella Giannachi [3]
17:40 - 18:02 Gabriella Giannachi [3] & Steve Benford [3]
18:02 - 18:24 Steve Benford [3] & Warren Neidich [3]
18:24 - 18:46 Warren Neidich [3] & Denisa Kera [3]
18:46 - 19:08 Denisa Kera [3] & Jimmy Loizeau [3]
19:08 - 19:30 Jimmy Loizeau [3] & Regine Debatty [3]
19:30 - 19:52 Regine Debatty [3] & Nicola Triscott [3]
19:52 - 20:14 Nicola Triscott [3] & Futurity is a tease. It keeps us in a heightened sense of anticipation. It’s alluring, beguiling and enticing. It tempts us. It’s a promise. And yet... it never quite gets there. It never comes off. It remains unconsummated.
Is our love affair with the future over? Are we through with futurity?
Don’t hold your breath.')" onmouseout="UnTip()">Andy Cameron [3]
20:14 - 20:36 Futurity is a tease. It keeps us in a heightened sense of anticipation. It’s alluring, beguiling and enticing. It tempts us. It’s a promise. And yet... it never quite gets there. It never comes off. It remains unconsummated.
Is our love affair with the future over? Are we through with futurity?
Don’t hold your breath.')" onmouseout="UnTip()">Andy Cameron [3] & Julian Oliver [3]
20:36 - 20:58 Julian Oliver [3] & Victoria Estok [3]
20:58 - 21:20 Victoria Estok [3] & Technological imaginaries of the future are often trajectories of positivist technology fetishism or luddite scenarios of destruction. This sort of binary futurity speaks of not recognizing the complexity of our lives with or without technologies today and in the past. What futurity may require to become relfexive is an ability to draft differently how relations between entities (human, non-human living and non-living) are reconfigured as ethical and reciprocal, and what role technologies are assigned in it. In this scenario, binary futurism has no future. Part of this reflection requires questioning those technological metaphors and motifs that are acting as carriers of futurity. As an example of these metaphors in praxis, I would suggest that rather than being networked in fleeting mobility, becoming more entangled in human, material, and ecological complexities is necessary to not see future as a site of escapism but rather as a possible environment of living.')" onmouseout="UnTip()">Tapio Mäkelä [3]
21:20 - 21:42 Technological imaginaries of the future are often trajectories of positivist technology fetishism or luddite scenarios of destruction. This sort of binary futurity speaks of not recognizing the complexity of our lives with or without technologies today and in the past. What futurity may require to become relfexive is an ability to draft differently how relations between entities (human, non-human living and non-living) are reconfigured as ethical and reciprocal, and what role technologies are assigned in it. In this scenario, binary futurism has no future. Part of this reflection requires questioning those technological metaphors and motifs that are acting as carriers of futurity. As an example of these metaphors in praxis, I would suggest that rather than being networked in fleeting mobility, becoming more entangled in human, material, and ecological complexities is necessary to not see future as a site of escapism but rather as a possible environment of living.')" onmouseout="UnTip()">Tapio Mäkelä [3] & Drew Hemment [3]
[12]
[13]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[28]
[30]
[32]
[33]
[47]
