My recent performance work – PENUMBRA – involves the use of traditional theatrical lighting to project a special ‘zone’ onto the stage – the lighted area is described as a “NO ZONE.” Outside of the “NO ZONE” something is permitted. And inside the “NO ZONE” that same something is prohibited.
The work attempts to mix-up roles which are usually kept separate – that of ‘on-stage’ actor/performer and ‘behind-the-scenes’ director/technician.
Since I am both performer and lighting-operator I can direct the powerful beam wherever I want (even into the faces of the audience) and, within the construct of the performance, the “NO ZONE” is imposed wherever the light falls.
A member of the Liverpool audience suggested that the space described is in fact a “NO COMFORT ZONE” and this seems very fitting!
(images – stills from video documentation by Sam Meech)
Designed as part of my response to Newcastle City Council’s ‘Interpretive Signage’ brief, which aimed at taking heritage information into the digital realm, the ‘Information Free Zone’ raises the questions “How much information do we need?” & “Where exactly can we go to get away from it?”
An ‘Information Free Zone’ would restrict “the use of the electromagnetic spectrum for wireless telegraphy (to include WIFI, SMS, Bluetooth etc)” and I proposed that the zone be applied to an already peaceful space next to the City’s Cathedral – Amen Corner – and went ahead and notified the public of this ominous change:
If the ‘Information Free Zone’ were to be applied in the UK public sphere, an important question would need to be addressed:
Does the zone impose an ‘information embargo’ through the use of electromagnetic signal jamming technology?
Or is the zone subscribed to by citizens (in a similar way to the quiet coach on a train.)
(A technologically imposed ‘Infromation Free Zone’ would likely be in contravention of the 2006 Wireless Telegraphy Act.)
Early responses from the public were mixed – here are some examples:
Text extract from “PENUMBRA” – performance/demonstration of concept at Liverpool’s Bluecoat Art Centre on Friday 18th June 2010. More information relating to the event: ‘REVOLUTIONS IN FORM’
In considering gesture, interaction, sound and public space intervention the organ grinder (and his monkey) are springing to mind…
The wikipedia entry in this case is really excellent and says more than I could say – some highlights:
They apparently were not interested in keeping their instrument in tune or cranking at a rate suited to the music which was “programmed” in their barrel organ.
Many cities in the United Kingdom had ordinances prohibiting organ grinders. The authorities often encouraged policemen to treat the grinders as beggars or public nuisances.
the disappearance of organ grinders from European streets was in large part due to the early application of national and international Copyright laws.
Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento is an artist who practices art law. He is interested in the relationship between contemporary art and law, with a focus on copyright, free speech, deaccessioning, and nonprofit organizations.
Manufacturers of riot and personal defence shields since 1977, when Arnolds made for the Metropolitan Police the first shields ever to be used in the UK.
Coincidence Engine One consists of a precisely fabricated expanded polystyrene foam construction whose form evokes an amphitheatre. Within this structure, twelve hundred clocks of identical design are arrayed in concentric arcs.
As an interactive artist Rozin creates installations and sculptures that have the unique ability to change and respond to the presence and point of view of the viewer.
Recent Comments