Alchorisma Thinklab 1
11 & 12 January 2018
Z33, Hasselt
THINKLAB 1
Program:
Notes from Thinklab 1: https://pad.constantvzw.org/p/alchorisma_thinklab1
Presentations Thinklab 1: https://pad.constantvzw.org/p/alchorisma_thinklab_presentations
THINKLAB 2
Notes from Thinklab 2 - day 1: https://pad.constantvzw.org/p/alchorisma_thinklab2
Notes from Thinklab 2 - day 2: https://pad.constantvzw.org/p/alchorisma_thinklab2_day2
Brainstorm Thinklab2 - day 2: https://pad.constantvzw.org/p/alchorisma_thinklab2_brainstorm
IN SYNC
Definition of in sync (Merriam-Webster)
1 : in a state in which two or more people or things move or happen together at the same time and speed
2 : in a state in which two or more people or things agree with or match one another and work together properly
Synchronicity Wikipedia: (German: Synchronizität) is a concept, first introduced by analytical psychologist Carl Jung, which holds that events are "meaningful coincidences" if they occur with no causal relationship yet seem to be meaningfully related.
Synchronization Wikipedia: is the coordination of events to operate a system in unison. The conductor of an orchestra keeps the orchestra synchronized or in time. Systems that operate with all parts in synchrony are said to be synchronous or in sync—and those that are not are asynchronous.
In computer science, synchronization refers to one of two distinct but related concepts: synchronization of processes, and synchronization of data. Process synchronization refers to the idea that multiple processes are to join up or handshake at a certain point, in order to reach an agreement or commit to a certain sequence of action. Data synchronization refers to the idea of keeping multiple copies of a dataset in coherence with one another, or to maintain data integrity.
In an alternating current electric power system, synchronization is the process of matching the speed and frequency of a generator or other source to a running network.
Non-simultaneity or nonsynchronism Wikipedia: (German: Ungleichzeitigkeit, sometimes also translated as non-synchronicity) is a concept in the writings of Ernst Bloch which denotes the time lag, or uneven temporal development, produced in the social sphere by the processes of capitalist modernization and/or the incomplete nature of those processes.[1] The term, especially in the phrase "the simultaneity of the non-simultaneous", has been used subsequently in predominantly Marxist theories of modernity, world-systems, postmodernity and globalization.
PROGRAM
Day 1:
- Train to Hasselt with coffee/tea/croissants & Brians paper as mental food
8:45 Bruxelles-Midi
8:55 Bruxelles-Nord
- Arrival in Hasselt 9:49
- Walk to Z33
- 10:30: introduction Z33, people around the table
- 11:00: Elle proposes practise
- 11:30: presentation Olivier
- 13:00: lunch
- 14:00: presentation Elle
- 15:45: video conference Brian: Q&A
- 17:00-17:30: discussion how to proceed for day 2
- 18:11: train to Brussels
- 19:05: arrival in Brussels-North
- 19:15: arrival in Brussels-South
Day2 will follow the same train schedule.
----
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTIONS
Brian House, Synchronizing Uncertainty: Google’s Spanner and Cartographic Time
In this paper, I investigate the way in which temporality is structured by contemporary, large-scale, network-distributed databases, exemplified by the largest of all, Google’s Spanner—so named because it circumscribes the entire planet. Technical details on Spanner were shared in 2012, and they refine the concept of massive data infrastructure in a way that is likely to exemplify industry practice to come. My particular interest in distributed databases stems from a broader project on rhythmic entrainment as a function of networks on everyday life. That work warrants a close look at how time is materially mediated by storage technology, the subset of that research which I will talk about today. In particular, the way in which Spanner must reckon with time synchronization over the extent of the globe itself situates it within a genealogy of Western timekeeping that extends from astronomical observations, through various electromagnetic media for coordinating clocks, to the networks of today. This history demonstrates how evolving notions of temporality are inexorably bound to the material practice of cartography.
Brian House is an artist whose work explores the interdependent rhythms of the body, technology, and the environment. His work has been shown by MoMA (NYC), MOCA (LA), Ars Electronica, Transmediale, ZKM, Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Center, Tel Aviv Center for Contemporary Art, and Rhizome, among others, and has been featured in publications including TIME, WIRED, The New York Times, Neural, Metropolis, and on Univision Sports. He is currently a doctoral candidate at Brown University.
Olivier Perriquet - The Jung / Pauli concept of Synchronicity
I propose an incursion into the concept of synchronicity, as it was introduced by pyschologist Carl Gustav Jung and physicist Wolfgang Pauli: the coincidence in time of two or more causally unrelated events which have the same meaning. Synchronicity might be seen as an attempt to approach, with rational means and within Western culture, the Eastern conception of time, which is focused on permanency and conjonctions rather than grounded on causality. This improbable encounter in the last century between quantum physics and depth psychology has opened up a highly speculative field where metaphors often play a key role in understanding concepts. Yet, what is at stake springs from everyday life and shall resonate with personal stories... Could we approach those questions from an artistic perspective?
What modus operandi can we invent? This presentation is intended to stimulate imagination and feed our discussions.
Olivier Perriquet is an artist and a research scientist. For the last ten years he has been exploring the materiality of images and their relation to body and thought, experimenting with live cinema and installation, using home-built machines, cameras and projectors. His work is situated in fields at the crossroads of arts and sciences,
bearing a particular interest at the crossing of disciplines and imaginary. Olivier Perriquet has a PhD in computational biology and is graduated from le Fresnoy - National studio of contemporary arts.
http://olivier.perriquet.net
http://cesium-133.net
Elle - Urban Monastery
https://studiolalimite.org/
As a contribution to the Alchorisma ThinkingLab, The Monastery will propose some experiential meditations out of their daily practice. The monastic life is a way of freeing time through ordering, of surrendering to time in order to ‘lose’ time or ‘loosen’ time from its constraints of effectivity, accumulation and future orientation. Through the use of Productive Paradox in the practice of the everyday, we open up gaps of potential reformulation, reconsidering the mind frames that construct our realities and the perception of our capacities to be in the world. Attached you find two of the precepts of The Monastery (Time and Paradox) that will serve as a red thread throughout the proposed exercises and meditations.
Time
No future can hold
The promise of the now
Shining through the cracks
A monastic life is an attempt to reclaim time. Growing up in today’s society, time has molded itself into a future shape. We study to become something or someone, we date to build families or otherwise meaningful lives, we have a vacation to be able to work harder later on, we work hard to be able to have a nice vacation. We are living in a constant push of accumulation towards a better future: more visibility, more love, more things, more time, more credibility, more acclaim, more creativity, more enjoyment. The future-oriented approach of time and the need for accumulation are one and the same thing. By portraying a life-to-come, life gets colonised by projections. Of a better one. Which makes it quite difficult to appreciate the one we actually have. Right now.
This upward soaring curve of accumulation stands in stark contrast with the downward curve of our life span, which inexorably leads us to a gradual physical and mental decapacitation. The painful awareness of the growing distance created between both, is a source of gnawing frustration.
The monastic life tries to save time by decolonising it from future projections. There is no accumulation necessary in the monastic life. Nothing to achieve in particular, although a lot can be done. Each day looks pretty much the same, although every moment is experienced as radically different. It is a rather ‘monochrome’ life, in which the nuances only become visible on closer inspection. And this is the time we are given everyday: to practice life in every moment. To be there for the other, and for the things around us: the plants growing in the garden, our body practices, our reading, our working. To practice really being there and listening to the other. To make the meditation become life itself. In all its appearances.
Paradox
Awake in the gap
Between one and the other
Duality splinters
I come a-life
To live in paradox is an attitude that allows for spaces of intensity to open up. A paradox becomes productive when it is not resolved. When the tension between the apparent opposition is allowed to resonate into the practice. It is not a question of solving the problem, of creating a particularly attractive shade of grey. Rather, the suspension of dissolving the tension, or of choosing either/or, allows for a much more alert practice.
Like the artist that refuses to ‘choose’ between transparency and obscurity in his work, the monk is not making it easy on himself by ignoring what is at hand. In the artist’s case too much transparency make the work perfectly ‘understandable’ but ultimately bland. Whereas an overall obscurity robs the artwork of its mystical potential to speak to whomever it encounters. It is in the tension territory between these two extremes that the work can breathe freely, shapeshift in the gaze of the beholder, and become a place of contemplation, intense experience and shared intuition.
In the Monastery Productive Paradoxes are what shape the daily practice. An obvious one is the false paradox between Discipline and Freedom. In the Monastery discipline is not what takes away your freedom, but exactly the thing that opens up a space and time to experience it. By embracing the paradox as a whole, without favoring either side, it creates an enormous space of vibration and liveliness.
Moreover the Productive Paradox creates an attitude of alertness, of awareness not to fall into the trap of easy solutions. There is no redemption in absolute discipline, as there is no liberation in absolute freedom. Only the weaving of patterns in the aftermath of duality is making something visible that was not there before. Not by reducing everything to the One, but by creating force fields for practice in-between the one the two the three the multiple.
Elle is a tantric practioner and artistic researcher. She developed her work in the last 5 years under the umbrella of Bureau d’Espoir, a practice on the import, export and redistribution of hope. For this practice she studied political theory, contemporary philosophy and spiritual body practices. Her work is a transdisciplinary practice, linking contemporary philosophy to spiritual body practice, in the development of an ethics of coming together and rethinking our relation to the world we live in.
In Studio La Limite she shares her tantric practices: Tantra Kriya Yoga, the Tantra weeklies and Intensive sessions, massage sesions for singles and couples. She also organizes the research group for body practitioners the WitchLab, and different reading groups.