{"id":875,"date":"2019-04-14T18:27:50","date_gmt":"2019-04-14T22:27:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/?page_id=875"},"modified":"2019-04-14T18:27:50","modified_gmt":"2019-04-14T22:27:50","slug":"heinen","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/volume-4-2015-2016\/heinen\/","title":{"rendered":"Archiving The Brotherhood: Proposing a Technical Genealogy for Time-Based Works"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Joey Heinen
The Electronic Media Review, Volume Four: 2015-2016<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

ABSTRACT<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The\nfollowing case study is a proposal for the creation of a \u201ctechnical genealogy\u201d\nfor time-based artworks, specifically focusing on works that use a multitude of\nhardware and software in a highly-customized environment. The Brotherhood<\/em>, a six-part installation series by Woody Vasulka\n(b. 1937), is an example of an artwork where a thorough understanding of the\nemployed technologies mediating the work and the intended user experience are\njust as much\u2014if not more\u2014 an essential component to the artwork as the interactive\nexperience alone. Many models currently exist for defining the relationship\nbetween materials and behaviors in interactive and technological artworks, informing\nmore pragmatic approaches towards ongoing care and stewardship for the artwork,\nwhich are more often than not guided by an artist interview. In this particular\ncase study, the artists are imagining the destination for their collection as a\nresearch library so that their body of work and the works\u2019 employed\ntechnologies can be studied. For this reason, the process of describing and\ndocumenting the relationship between behaviors and materials takes on a\ndifferent role than it might in a museum setting, particularly in how to\nprovide access to this work and through what means. Through documentation (both\npre-existing and generated through this exercise) and examining the\nrelationships between hardware and software, I will argue for a new means of\narchiving a complex artwork with a particular focus on the work\u2019s innovative\nmethods, so as to leverage scholarly intrigue. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

THE\nVASULKAS: ARTISTIC PRACTICE IN CONTEXT<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

For\ntime-based media artworks, public access is usually thought of in terms of\ninstallation of the piece. Increasingly more theory and practice have emerged,\noften focusing on the stabilization of a time-based media work or determining\nthe parameters of the piece that can be modified without altering artistic\nintent. In some cases, modifying the piece in order to respond to technological\nchanges may motivate the artist to think of the work as a new version or new\nartwork, particularly if the work itself comments directly on technology. The\nintent of the artist is of utmost significance, and an understanding of these parameters\nemerge out of the artist interview. However, in some cases, the artistic intent\nof a work extends beyond reinstallation of the piece, and may serve as a\nhistorical record, offering itself as evidence of technological innovation that\nholds a significant place in history. The polemics of scholarly and\nexperiential access can be seen quite distinctly when embarking on conservation\nplans for the work of artists Steina (b. 1940) and Woody Vasulka (b. 1937). The\nVasulkas are two pioneers of video art whose work spans from the 1960s to the\npresent and whose practice has included early experiments with music and\nperformance, image processing, computer graphics, lighting, electrical\nengineering, and integrated software and hardware in interactive installations.\nThe Vasulkas are extremely prolific artists with an impressively diverse\nartistic product. However, they also consider their process to be just as\nsignificant as the finished works, and are committed more broadly to scholarly\nand theoretical discussions around art-making. In addition to their more\nscholarly approaches towards art and technology\u2014at the Center for Media Study,\nState University of New York at Buffalo (1974-1980) and Eigenwelt der Apparate\nWelt at Ars Electronica, 1992, and Techne & Eros, 1998-1999 (Bonin 2003a)\u2014they\nbegan to archive their own life and work early in their artistic practice,\nretaining outtakes\/raw materials, studies, sketches, and research material in\naddition to their finished projects. During the summer of 2013, I worked with\nthe Vasulkas to prepare an inventory of their collection of video, papers,\nphotographs, and art documentation, and made recommendations for prioritizing\nobjects in their collection based on various risks, including media\nobsolescence. My work was intended to facilitate a donation of the Vasulkas\u2019\narchive to a research institution. At the outset of this project, the Vasulkas\nwere in conversations with the University of Colorado Boulder (UC), which would\neventually own and provide long-term access to their entire artistic and\npersonal collection. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

During\nthe work in 2013, it was clear that the Vasulkas\u2019 artworks, particularly the\nvideo masters, were of the utmost importance, although there was another aspect\nto the collection that was of primary interest to the Vasulkas. In our earliest\nconversations Woody was quite insistent that in the overall processing of their\ncollection at the UC Archives, it would be essential to bear in mind that there\nis a \u201ccurriculum\u201d around their work. By curriculum he meant that the means used\nto create their works are just as important, if not more important, than the\nfinal works themselves. Another vital aspect of the Vasulkas\u2019 artistic process\nis their relationship with their technological tools and the potential for\nabstraction, interactivity, and extemporaneous manipulation. It is worth\nmentioning that their respective practices are rooted in music and engineering,\nwith video eventually emerging as a medium that suited these impulses very\nwell. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

One theme that can be seen throughout their artistic career is exploration of the signal and an invisible language contained therein. In many instances, the nucleus of these explorations was found in audio signals. The couple met in Prague while Steina was a student at the State Music Conservatory for violin performance and Woody was at the Academy of Performing Arts, Faculty of Film and Television, studying filmmaking. These melded interests of the musical impulse and the moving image informed their work throughout the several decades of art-making to come (fig. 2). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.
Fig. \u00a02: Steina Vasulka, Descends <\/em>(1972) http:\/\/shapesforsound.typepad.com\/inspiration\/2010\/05\/steina-and-woody-vasulka-studies-19701971.html<\/a> c. The Vasulkas <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The use of the Putney (a.k.a EMS VCS3) was one of their first experiments in using an existing audio system and wiring it to a television system, abstracting the video image from a live camera feed by using the amplitude and frequency of the audio signal to interrupt and distort the feed (Bronin 2003b).\u00a0 One of Steina\u2019s signature works is Violin Power<\/em> (1978) in which she rigged a microphone in coordination with sound processing tools (she later used an electric violin) and through interference of the audio waves, manipulated the horizontal scanning of a live video feed, resulting in an abstracted moving image (fig. 3). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.
Fig. \u00a03: Steina Vasulka, Violin Power<\/em> (1978) http:\/\/www.abstractmachine.net\/thesis\/machines.php?id=220<\/a> c. The Vasulkas <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Their\nrelationship with the liberated potential of audio and video signals through\nsynthesizers and oscilloscopes expressed their intense interest in the anatomy\nof the signal and its relationship with perceptions of reality. Woody famously\nexpressed these theories on the electronic signal in his Time-Energy Objects<\/em> series in which three primary waveforms\u2014sine,\nsquare, and triangle\u2014are fed into a scan processor and result in a multitude of\nfixed shapes on the monitor. The Vasulkas saw how a seemingly invisible and\nineffable signal could actually manifest into tangible forms and objects if\nonly given dimensional representation through the appropriate tools. Though\nthese concepts were expressed quite iconically during their pure analog video\nart phase of the early 1970s, the same credo was, and is, seen in their work as\nit has continued into the computer age.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

THE\nBROTHERHOOD <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In the 1980s, Woody Vasulka began sifting through castaway objects at the Military Research Centre in Los Alamos, New Mexico. While these objects would have been of little use to most people, Woody\u2019s propensity for electrical tools and his talent for engineering hybrid objects made one person\u2019s trash another person\u2019s treasure. Military research has motivated innovation in technology for decades, ultimately trickling down to the masses once these projects transition into the commercial market. Video tape recorders and cameras, personal computers, and infrared motion detection can all be traced back to military research (Schoenherr 2005). While the sordid past of these machines and their inherent purposes of surveillance and defense is at the heart of Woody\u2019s work The Brotherhood<\/em> (1990-1998) (fig. 1), the Vasulkas also imagined a new potential for these machines that they hoped would remind visitors of how machines are often designed to convey and expand upon human behaviors and capabilities. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.
Fig. 1. Installation Diagram for The Brotherhood <\/em>http:\/\/vasulka.org\/Woody\/Brotherhood\/Brotherhood.html<\/a> 1998. Last accessed 12\/2015 c. The Vasulkas <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Brotherhood<\/em> was born out of a singular work-in-progress, which then grew into a work with six movements or \u201cTables.\u201d The Tables were displayed in various ensembles and in some instances as a complete group. Though each of the six movements had its own unique hardware\/software, physical configurations, and varying degrees and modes of user-interactivity, each Table followed a relatively similar structure. These machines with seemingly human behaviors acted in dialog with human presence and actions; they were intended to be experienced by the visitors as if they were entering the realm of the machine and were encountering them in their natural habitat. As the title of the piece also suggests, Woody wished to explore themes of masculinity that are intrinsically tied with militarism. This theme of masculinity further extends to notions of power through use of surveillance and the evoking of a sense of dominance of the machine over humans. These themes are critiqued and necessarily deconstructed in the work\u2019s use of hacking and in the unpredictability of the machines, intending the viewer to rethink whether machines are merely instruments of power or can in fact demonstrate their own sense of autonomy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For brevity\u2019s sake, two of the six tables from The Brotherhood<\/em> will be described. The first chronological movement of The Brotherhood<\/em> (and the initial impetus for the project as a whole) was The Theater of Hybrid Automata<\/em>, a work that was not purely interactive, but that demonstrates the Vasulkas’ interest in the melding of humans and machines. The Vasulkas created Automata<\/em> (as it was later simply called) initially for the 1990 exhibit Events in the Elsewhere: Performance and Exhibition<\/em>, organized by Joan LaBarbara at the Center for Contemporary Arts in Santa Fe (fig. 4). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.
Fig. 4: Installation shot of Automata<\/em>, 1998, ICC Tokyo, http:\/\/vasulka.org\/Woody\/Brotherhood\/Automata\/PBG_Automata08.html<\/a> c. The Vasulkas <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The centerpiece of Automata<\/em> was the RPT (Rotate-Pan-Tilt) camera, mounted on a gyroscopic slip-ring assembly head that was originally used in locating missile targets in aerial attacks. A computer-generated voice called out different spatial commands based on pre-programmed targets; these commands then prompted the RPT to locate the targets within the cubed demarcations of the space. The camera projected a live feed of the target over-lain with a 3D rendering of the space, creating a liminal space where both the human and computer realm could coexist. The visitor did not affect the space besides being implicated in the live camera feed; the interactive and variable nature of the piece was found in the random sequence of directional commands and use of chance and scripted algorithms. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The sixth and final Table, The Maiden<\/em>, was often considered the most iconic work in the series; it was simple in structure, but extremely complex in its mechanical and computational processes. The piece was comprised of a microphone into which the visitor spoke, a screen that displayed sequences of video activated by the visitor\u2019s voice, and the Maiden, a solenoid-valve sculpture whose skeleton was controlled by the stimulation of specific appendages. The sculpture was based off of a chiropractic table that could be mechanically lowered, tilted, and extended for enhanced procedures. The sculpture expanded, contracted, and moved its various appendages based on pre-programmed pitches and velocities from the visitor\u2019s voice, which were fed through a voice recognition program. When installed at the ICC (InterCommunication Center) in Tokyo, Steina performed along with the Maiden using a Musical Instrument Digital Interface (MIDI) Violin to control the movements of the sculpture (fig. 5).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.
Fig. \u00a05: Installation shot of The Maiden<\/em>, 1998, ICC Tokyo, http:\/\/vasulkainterviews.org\/page\/6<\/a> c. The Vasulkas <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Each\nTable of The Brotherhood<\/em>, though\nhighly complex and unique in its own right, can be defined based on a primary\nstructure of stimulus and response. They were also all controlled through the\nuse of a common host terminal that configured each Table through a singular\nsystem. However, it is not as simple to define all of the interactive\npossibilities for each given Table in the work, or to unanimously describe the\nnuances that can occur therein. The types of responses and the different\ndegrees of responsiveness contained in each work\u2014although in some cases the\nresponses can be directed and in others seemingly random\u2014are not always as they\nappear. In some pieces there may not be a clear one-to-one relationship between\nthe stimulus and the response. For example, in some cases the visitor did not\nnecessarily understand how mechanical movements or changes in atmosphere\n(lighting\/audio) corresponded to specific user interventions. Other nuances\nincluded differences in response time to actions by the visitor and the degree\nto which the machine was \u201cin dialogue\u201d with the visitor, as opposed to simply\nexhibiting a one-way response to a visitor\u2019s command. Woody has never\narticulated specific response times for each movement, but rather has insisted\nthat the installations were made to feel organic. He preferred that it appear\nthat the art works reacted rather than responded; that they appeared to be\ntheir own autonomous entities, even though they were specifically programmed.\nIn some instances, a digital log jam\u2014in which certain commands may have been\nlost or overwritten\u2014was desirable to Woody because in that case the machine\nseemed to be behaving of its own volition. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nbehavioral aspects of the piece proved to be some of the most significant and\nchallenging properties for preservation as we delved further into the development\nand functionality of The Brotherhood<\/em>.\nTo make matters somewhat simpler for the conservator, the installations were\nvideo documented and the system design exists in various forms such that\nbehaviors can be more closely studied. However, knowledge of the behaviors will\nneed to emerge from a deeper understanding of the precise integrative design of\nThe Brotherhood,<\/em> which becomes\nimmediately apparent when examining the system concept for the entire work. The Brotherhood<\/em> is unique in that rather\nthan having a precisely controlled configuration system that resulted in a\nwell-defined stimulus and response, randomness was incorporated as an inherent\nproperty, allowing for the organic feeling which Woody insisted upon. Thusly,\ndetermining the best vehicle to deliver these mechanical responses required an\nassessment of what available technologies, could, in concert, approach the\ndesired outcomes as closely as possible. This required strong attention to a\nbasic, yet manipulatable, programming language and a means of communicating\nwith external hardware. These aspects of the design of The Brotherhood<\/em> are the most fundamental elements for the\narchivist\/conservator\u2019s understanding of the work\u2019s contribution to a visionary\ngenealogy of innovative technology in interactive artworks. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

MAKING\nTHE BROTHERHOOD<\/em>: CONCEPTS AND\nCOMPUTATION<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

With\nthe notion of the time-based media artwork as historical record as our guide,\nwe will explore the origins of The Brotherhood<\/em>,\nwhich will inform the means through which the piece is cataloged and how the\nremaining piece of documentation and source code will be contextualized to form\nthis descriptive framework. In relating this work to broader discussion of the\nhistory of technological innovation, it is important to note some of the more\nnoteworthy processes\u2014created for The\nBrotherhood<\/em>\u2014that can be placed within a technological genealogy. A\ngenealogy traces lineages and histories within a logical group or family, and\nthe innovative features of The Brotherhood<\/em>\nare traced by three distinctive lifelines within the work, which describe its\nfunctionality. This is to say that these elements of the work are also what\nsustain its existence and are thus some of the most essential (and difficult)\naspects of the piece to adequately archive and preserve in order to ensure\nlong-term access. The three elements are: the use of MIDI as a main abstraction\nlanguage, the use of programming languages and interfaces to control a diverse\namount of external hardware, and a custom-designed computer environment that can\nhandle the volume of information being processed. In identifying these three\nlifelines, we not only see a potential diagram for grouping the related\nmaterials (hardware, software, documentation) but can see how some conventional\napproaches in archiving and conservation begin to fall apart for a work this\ncomplex. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As\nwas mentioned earlier with regard to the Vasulkas\u2019 artistic practice, the\nrelationship of visual forms to signals and the abstracted languages of sound\nand image were almost always a presence in their work. While the human-machine\ndynamic at the core of The Brotherhood<\/em>\nwas a relatively new theme in their work in the 1990s, employing user-generated\nimpulses to expose and manipulate the architecture of signals was already\ncentral to their art. With the advent of digital music synthesizing in the\n1980s, most prominently with the introduction of the Musical Instrument Digital\nInterface protocol (MIDI), the Vasulkas began to think about how they could manipulate\na digital stream in ways they had never before imagined. MIDI is a\ncommunication protocol that enables specially designed instruments and external\nconverters to process an analog audio stream as a bit stream; the bytes are\npackaged based on their purpose (i.e., start\/stop, pitch, volume,\nvelocity\/punctuation, tremolo\/vibrato). It occurred to Steina and Woody that if\nhardware existed to convert an analog stream into standardized digital binary\nmachine code, and if this bitstream could be easily hacked\u2014such that its\nintended commands could serve as discrete triggers rather than notes for a\nmusical composition\u2014then there would be an infinite number of ways that a\nstream could be translated and enacted upon via other outputs and programs. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

MIDI is an 8-bit protocol, meaning that each byte is comprised of a cluster of eight bits of binary information (1\u2019s and 0\u2019s). A MIDI byte can take one of two forms: as a basic MIDI header message allowing the computer to recognize the signal as MIDI, or a means of packaging the information from an analog input into some sort of digital output. These two types are called Status or Data, respectively. Status indicates the type of message being sent; examples being whether the note is on or off (in other words, indicating the start and end of a single command) (Manning 1993, 277). Data includes the content of the message, defining in most cases pitch (numerical assignment of the note within a scale) and velocity (the volume\/amplitude) of the note, although Data can also include information related to voice, tremolo, accent, sound dampening, and so on. Additional information, usually contained in the header of the initial MIDI message, determines the designated MIDI channel that is delivering the message (Planet of Tune 2013) (fig. 6). The channel information allows the computer to isolate a bit stream and direct it to a designated output destination, a particularly useful function in the presence of multiple simultaneous input and output signals. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.

Fig. 6: Architecture of the MIDI bitstream, Planet of Tune, http:\/\/www.planetoftunes.com\/sequence\/se_media\/message.gif<\/a> last accessed 12\/2015 <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

While\nthe MIDI bit stream was essential for using the functions of pitch and velocity\nto contain a large, yet finite, continuum of possible values and mapping these\nspecific inputs to mechanical\/audio-visual outputs, it was also the essential\nmeans for communicating out to specific hardware points in order to interpret\nthose bit streams as electrical impulses. Equipment such as MIDI samplers\/controllers\nand serial convertor boxes would trigger specific presets (such as lighting\nconditions) or translate MIDI binary into serial data, respectively. Herein\nlies one of the most significant aspects of the archival record for a\ntime-based work particularly considered within a broader technological\ngenealogy. While the piece could potentially be reinterpreted using more modern\ntechnologies and programming languages\/software, the original configuration\ndepends on a specific means for creating a computational language and creates\ndependencies between hardware and software that are irreplaceable. However, the\nplot further thickens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based on their understanding of MIDI and experiments in digital music, the Vasulkas were convinced that much of this degree of programmability was possible with the MIDI protocol; however, there was still an essential set of knowledge that they needed in order to exploit its power. Early on in the process of drafting a system design for The Brotherhood<\/em>, it became clear to the Vasulkas that they needed outside expertise for the process of hacking and reprogramming MIDI into the other hardware-specific languages that were unique to each machine. They hired Russ Gritzo, the son of a former collaborator Ludwig Gritzo, who was then an electrical engineer at Los Alamos Labs. Russ had familiarity with the electrical concepts present in the Vasulkas\u2019 past work and his burgeoning knowledge of scripting languages (particularly C) made him a particularly strong asset for the Vasulkas as they created an actionable system design for The Brotherhood<\/em> (figs. 7-8). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"Fig.
Fig. 7 & 8: System concept block diagrams for Rails <\/em>and The Maiden<\/em>, Russ Gritzo, 1998, c. The Vasulkas <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

After hearing about the Vasulkas\u2019 interest in organic human-machine interactivity and in the alternative use of MIDI, Gritzo knew that a system that utilized Interrupt Service Routine (ISR) would be essential to the configuration and functionality of the work, due to the many languages, stimuli, and moving parts. ISR was developed along with the introduction of the Intel 8086 Microprocessor in 1986 and it essentially aided a computer in two ways: in clearing its queue of user-generated impulses and in the actions of translating those impulses (inputs) into outputs (ECEn 425 2014). Defined another way, it was a means of facilitating communication between user commands and external devices, and allowed for efficient ways of restarting, continuing, or terminating that line of communication. The host computer is truly the brain of the artistic organism. The host computer needs to continuously receive data from sensor points, placing that data into a continuous queue of commands generated by the user and the corresponding input data, and to direct these messages out to many different outputs existing in many different Tables or parts of Tables. User-generated data is constant and fluid within each table, and in order to appear responsive, the system needs to maintain consistent communication with all of the external devices and to refresh input data regularly (BonaFide OS Development 2003). For example, without ISR it would have been difficult to program specific MIDI notes and events to an intended output, such as signaling to the RPT camera to move towards its target or to return to the home position in the absence of a command; without RPT the result is a disoriented system with lost, jumbled, or ignored commands.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\nthe late 1980s and into the early 90s, ISR could only be found in DOS (Disk Operating\nSystem), and could only be compiled through specific models of microprocessors,\nsuch as the 8086. The Intel 8086 was the first microprocessor chip designed\nwith ISR capabilities that was implemented on a microcomputer (Edwards 2008) and was the\nfirst computer on which methods for The\nBrotherhood<\/em> were tested. The 8086 was also one of the most widely adopted\nchips in PCs throughout the 80s and early 90s. Later OS models began to\nincorporate ISR and it was adopted more broadly. The incorporation of ISR into\nadditional operating systems sparked a shift in The Brotherhood<\/em> in 1992 from a DOS-based design to one that was\nLinux-based. This shift to Linux was also determined by an increased ability to\nbuild programs for communicating with peripheral devices in a real-time\nfashion, something that DOS increasingly lacked as Linux reached wider adoption\namongst programmers (Gritzo\n2013).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An\nessential example of how the programming language was compiled into machines\nlanguage in The Brotherhood<\/em> can be\nfound in the use of ISR. As mentioned ISR was a means of communicating from\nuser-generated input data out to hardware and facilitates constant flows of\ndata to simultaneous destinations, ensuring that commands are not lost or distorted\nalong the way.  Given that DOS was the\nfirst operating system to use ISR, it was also one of the first operating\nsystems to allow for direct communication from the computer terminal to the\nperipheral hardware. In computer science, the Basic Input Output System (BIOS),\nintroduced along with the IBM PC in the early 1980s, was the first standard\nusing firmware. Firmware is defined as a set of software programs that are\nexclusively designed for facilitating communication with external hardware via\ndesignated computer ports (Fisher 2014). BIOS is firmware that is directly\nprogrammed into the machine language of the microchips installed in the IBM PC\nfamily (in the case of The Brotherhood<\/em>,\nthe Intel 8086 microprocessor). The BIOS inherent to a computer can be accessed\nthrough source code. Essentially the BIOS acts as a compiler in its use of\npre-programmed software packages, native to the 8086, in order to manipulate\nthe machine language that sends commands out to the peripheral ports. With the\n8086 and DOS a programmer could write commands and source code that could alter\nthe structure of how a given peripheral device communicated with the computer,\na process that is otherwise only enabled by binary machine language. With BIOS\na programmer can build upon what an external device would natively understand,\nexpanding on the kinds of messages it could receive and the ways in which it\nwill respond to those messages. For example, many Tables in The Brotherhood<\/em> incorporate laserdisc\nsequencers that call up specific excerpts of video in response to a\nuser-generated impulse. BIOS allowed Gritzo to program a script that\ncommunicated directly to the laserdisc player, sending out information about\nwhich video sequence to call up in the laserdisc switcher\u2019s machine language,\nwhich was stimulated through the serial connection port on the player and was\nexpressed as serial data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\norder to more efficiently automate the process of designating commands to the\nBIOS and to achieve desired corresponding effects in external hardware, a\nprogrammer builds software programs called device drivers (\u201cActors\u201d in the\nparlance of The Brotherhood<\/em>). Device\ndrivers are written to directly interface and \u201ccall out\u201d to the BIOS routines\nof external hardware, initializing calls out to the hardware and returning a\nconfirmation message when the connection is understood. Device drivers\nessentially configure a computer system and deliver specific messages to its\ndesignated peripherals or outputs. In order for configuration to occur, a\nsystem must be able to reference a standard set of instructions for compiling\nsource code to machine language. As mentioned, the programming language C was initially\nchosen as the programming language for The\nBrotherhood<\/em>, and this was in large part because of its flexible syntax\nstructure and the ease with which it could communicate with BIOS and external\ndevices. This was later replaced by a low-level programming language created by\nRuss Gritzo and Bruce Hamilton which largely depended on ASCII to contain MIDI\ndata (expressed in hexadecimals) and delivered to specific ports via device\ndrivers. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nsoftware package for The Brotherhood<\/em>\nis made up of more than 1000 unique files. At the time in which The Brotherhood<\/em> was created, the use of\nBIOS and assembly languages (e.g. C) was a more user-friendly way of accessing\nand modifying a computer\u2019s hardware-interface and machine code although this\npractice was unique to the IBM PC and an era where that system was in wider\nuse. Understanding the transition and development of technologies described\nabove is an extremely vital component of our overall understanding of The Brotherhood<\/em>. Additionally,\nunderstanding the system concept of the work helps in describing the sentiments\nbehind its development, the desire to cast an entire system in a language that\ncould contain interactive range (MIDI) and using this language could call out\nto other devices in ways that otherwise could not have been possible without\nthese alterations to the relationship between the OS and the microprocessor.\nThis \u201chacking\u201d of the native system marks the work as not just an example of using\nan innovative means of obfuscating existing functionality but rather as a\nhistorical record of experimentations in computer science during a period of\nswift and epochal growth, aided for the first time by BIOS in the IBM PC.\nInitially an IBM PC with the 8086 microprocessor was used as the host terminal\nfor The Brotherhood<\/em>, namely for early\ninstallations of The Theatre of Hybrid Automata, the Table that, as noted\nabove, was completed as a solo artwork. Later as the work developed to include\nseveral Tables, there was a need to efficiently configure all of the pieces\ntogether under one system in order to streamline the initializing process when\nthe work was installed in a gallery. A more portable and customizable machine\nwith faster processing time than an IBM PC was required; hence the move to a\nToshiba 1200XE laptop with an external I\/O (input\/output) brainboard and\nintegrated circuits which also used the Intel 8086 chip (Gritzo 1992). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\naddition to ISR and BIOS, integrated circuits (ICs) were an essential component\nwithin the custom computational environment of The Brotherhood<\/em>.  ICs allowed\nfor a boosting of data transmission speeds and multiplexing of signals,\nfacilitating the one-to-many responses that are seen in many of the Tables in\nthe work. ICs allowed for discrete control of signals that were being sent out\nlargely to servo and stepper motor controllers, ensuring that these device\ndrivers would be separately directed and timed so as not to crash the host\nterminal. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Given\nthat the Vasulkas and Gritzo insisted upon pushing the confines of a singular\ncomputer system in order to achieve their goals for The Brotherhood<\/em> demonstrates how they looked beyond the currently\npossible and designed their own machine for achieving these feats. It further\nshows how the commercial market had yet to develop and release computer systems\nthat could adequately accommodate the work and the orchestra of machinery that The Brotherhood<\/em> required. The Vasulkas\nand Gritzo designed their own system and thusly were responsible for innovating\na totally unique environment. Of course, this further means that the work now\nlives in an environment that is perhaps irreplaceable. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\naddition to ICs, The Brotherhood<\/em> also\nrequired the use of the Opto Brainboard, a device for enabling follower\/leader\ncontrols in unison with the host terminal. A leadermaster\/follower device\nallows for unidirectional control across two computational systems. Opto was\nspecifically used in controlling mechanical sculptures such as in The Maiden to\nactivate solenoid (pressurized air) valve chambers that were directly wired to\nthe brainboard. The host terminal would send commands specific to the Opto\u2019s\nprogramming language in loads, generally packets of commands that were intended\nto be directed to several ports on the electrical sculpture at once. On this\nsubject, it is important to note that, above and beyond the complexity of the\ncomputer in this work, the external hardware is extensive (more than 70 pieces\nof unique external hardware). For example, elements such as the solenoid valves\nin The Maiden, laserdisc switchers in Friendly Fire, or the extremely unique\nRPT camera head in Automata mean that several proprietary languages were being\nused simultaneously, all of which needed to be sent out to hardware that could\nunderstand the machine language and repackage it into serial or analog\ninformation.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We\nhave now explored three aspects of the technical configuration for The Brotherhood<\/em>, which can be seen as\nevidence for how innovative approaches towards use of emerging technologies\nwere greatly at play in its creation. We also see the difficulty in relating\nbehaviors to the work\u2019s significant properties, most significantly seen in how\nthe source code often relied on bugs in the code to create the feeling of\nmachine autonomy. These significant properties are clearly seen through the\nhighly customized structure of the work aided by the existing technologies at\nthat time. First, understanding the use of MIDI and unpacking the signal down\nto logical, manipulatable clusters helps us to define the interactive formula\nof the piece as expressed through a singular language. Documenting the work\nwithout a rigorous understanding of MIDI, only paying attention to the literal\ncausality between stimulus and response, would over-simplify the dialog between\nuser stimulus and system response. It is also unlikely that another language\nwould unite all the diverse pieces of hardware given that MIDI acted as the\nlingua franca for all the related hardware. Second, the use of data input\nroutines that were present in operating systems at that time represented a cutting-edge\napproach to modifications to the interfaces of external hardware based on what\nwas currently possible to achieve with programming. Finally, the use of external\nintegrated circuits and brainboards to create a custom computer for centralized\ncontrol within each Table fixes the piece in a particular era in a period where\nthe speed and simultaneity of data transmission had reached a certain\nthreshold. The corresponding source code which interacted with this custom\ncomputer is thus reliant on that technological environment. Serious challenges\nwill be found if the source code was to be migrated to a more modern processor.\nAll these customized features that were added to an off-the-shelf system are\nnot likely to be maintained once the code is moved to a new system that\nfunctions in an entirely different way. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

THE COLLECTION: DOCUMENTATION AND REMEMBRANCES<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The\nsoftware for The Brotherhood<\/em> was last\narchived on one of the Vasulkas\u2019 PCs in 1998, contained in the form of a zip\nfile which was copied to an optical disc in the early 2000s. This was the only\nknown copy to have survived. Although a select number of system-level manuals\nwere digitized in 2006 and stored on CD-Rs as recently as 2008 along with the\nexecutable files\u2014those needed for enacting the piece\u2014the collection has\nremained in a dormant state ever since 1998. At that time the piece may have\nseemed relatively self-contained and its functionality and configuration was\nstill fresh in the memory of the Vasulkas and Gritzo. However, its stagnation\nhas resulted in many essential pieces that comprise a full expression of the\nwork falling through the cracks. My study of The Brotherhood<\/em> and reassembling its technical genealogy was at\nfirst unintentional. At the time, I was trying to locate papers which directly\npertained to the Vasulkas\u2019 image processing tools as part of a triage to\nprovide context to the videos that were soon to be digitized. I came across a\nmultitude of technical papers that were unlabeled and stored in seemingly\narbitrary locations. As I sifted through boxes of these composited, largely\nunrelated artifacts I began to pull out any technical documentation which\nseemed that they could serve the purpose of the \u201ccurriculum\u201d that Woody and I\nhad so often discussed. As I interviewed the Vasulkas about these documents,\nasking them to recall their purpose, random bits started to fit together but\nnot yet cogently: RPT, MIDI, Gritzo, etc. In many cases we were not able to\nidentify the documents or to understand their purpose. Nonetheless, as I\ncollected the documents I began to see patterns emerging\u2014also more explicitly\nlabeled documents were found\u2014and I created separate troves for different\nperiods of the Vasulka\u2019s work. Eventually, I was able to create separate sets\nof documents for each unique Table within The\nBrotherhood<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Early\non we agreed that Russ Gritzo\u2019s and Bruce Hamilton\u2019s accounts of the\ndevelopment of The Brotherhood<\/em> were\ngoing to be essential to understanding the artwork by better organizing the documents,\nso we interviewed them in August 2013. Their accounts and the paper trail that they\ncreated during the development of The\nBrotherhood<\/em> has been vital for two reasons. The oral history was essential\nto better understand not only what was significant to the Vasulkas and the\nimpetus to create the work but also their assessment of these aims which\nmanifested in his programming. Second, what emerged was that the Vasulkas and\nRuss Gritzo were forging a path and a computational design that was completely\ntheir own. Thus, if the work is to continue to function in the experiential\nrealm, this unique computer environment must be continually stabilized in order\nfor the source code to migrate effectively. Additionally, detailed\ndocumentation and an intuitive key for these documents and the relationship to\none another must aid in the process of excavating what behaviors emerged from\nthe code. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

One\nparticularly interesting aspect of Gritzo\u2019s account was his need to develop a\nworkflow that was adaptive to Woody\u2019s somewhat extemporaneous decisions around\nwhat he wanted the system to do. Gritzo needed to respond to specific aesthetic\nand behavioral requirements through creative programming. Arriving upon what it\nmeant to create an organic response required a great deal of trial and error on\nGritzo\u2019s part; he scripted programs that gradually approached the results that\nWoody desired. His pursuit of seeking the desired outcome through an iterative\nprocess meant that the code was responding to the affectual requirements\nthrough a process of discovery within the confines of a given language (e.g.\nMIDI).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nquestion now emerges of how to best arrange all this knowledge around the\nartwork and its development. Proper arrangement and description will enable new\nforms of scholarship, and the way works of art such as The Brotherhood<\/em> are documented in an archival setting will help to\nreveal the relationships between technologies and behaviors. The Brotherhood<\/em> is more than an artwork;\nit is an example of innovation set in a particular time period. Within an\narchival setting an understanding of the innovative qualities of the work are\nbetter understood if there is a documentation model that facilitates this\nstudy. In this case, scholars can help to further draw these distinctions\nbetween behaviors and materials and, in relating this to broader concepts and\nother historical examples in computer science and engineering, can better\nexplicate what emerged out of this affectual programming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So\nhow are we to imagine what this archival record would look like for a work of\nthis nature? Who might our designated community be and in what we could they be\nfolded into the process of creating further meaning out of this mass of\ninformation? For scholars in computer science, robotics, or interactive\nprogramming, a more rigorous descriptive framework for describing the\nrelationship of the parts would create a breadcrumb trail, improving the\ndiscoverability of the collection based on topics, themes, or keywords that\nmight pertain to their work, focusing on technological processes and not just\nthe specific environment of the artwork. At the same time, the relationship\nthat the individual technology has to the whole still needs to be evident to\nthe researcher and should be reflected in how the collection is organized. The\nresearcher would also benefit from an understanding of how the work\u2019s\nfunctionality set itself apart from what was technologically feasible at the\ntime, focusing especially on the unique and innovative elements of the work –\nwhich are more likely to be the subjects for scholarly inquiry. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Besides\nbenefiting our scholarly understanding of the The Brotherhood<\/em>, building a curriculum or genealogy can also\nbenefit a broader field of inquiry. The\nBrotherhood<\/em> is a perfect example of an art work which uses a modified\nversion of a programming language that, though widely adopted in its time, has\nchanged greatly over time through subsequent versions. The highly customized\nconfiguration of the code further means that methods exploited through the\nprogramming language leave unexplained traces of what functionality (or\npotentially lack thereof) was allowed through its syntax. Identifying those\nexamples, such as unique characters, commands, or sequences, could help to\naggregate knowledge around the quirks of a programming language which often go\nundocumented. These pieces of evidence can contribute to a deeper understanding\nof not just the programming language but how it interfaces with the unique\nsystem of hardware and how it facilitated interactivity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

PROPOSING A MODEL<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Before\nchoosing a course of action for documenting a complex artwork, one must first\nunderstand how a work functions by creating an exhaustive inventory of the\nhardware and software. Essentially, before deciding what behaviors emerge from\nthe hardware and software, one must first and foremost completely understand\ntheir interdependencies. While I have argued that an understanding of a work as\ncomplex as The Brotherhood<\/em> needs to\ngo much further than simple inventories in order to fully grasp the\ninteroperability within this customized, hybrid environment, we will still need\nto create a basic structure for commencing with the classification and\nrelational quality of the hardware or software items. In order to do this, one\nmust go further than a simple listing of all the component parts (hardware,\nsoftware, necessary peripherals), but also build other data fields which\nfurther illustrate how the various component parts communicate within a generic\nsystem (basic computing platforms, operating systems, etc.), as well as within\nthe specific environment of the artwork (microprocessors, external timing\ndevices\/controllers, integrated circuits, etc.). The chain of communication of\nall these moving parts, in what direction the various messages are to be sent,\nand in what manner they are to be packaged, are perhaps the most essential\ncharacteristics that this inventory should express; in other words, how many\ndiverse data formats and signals were cast through the singular MIDI protocol\nin The Brotherhood<\/em>. The form of this\ninventory or abstract should be concise enough to clearly address the specific\ninteroperability of the specific artwork but flexible enough so as to be\nrelevant in an archival environment that could include other artworks in a\ncollection, works which all have their own unique structures and dependencies.\nIdeally in creating this abstract possible conservation actions may reveal\nthemselves, such as whether an obsolete MIDI serial convertor box could be\nreplaced by more modern technology that also understands and packages data\nbased on the MIDI protocol. However, for the purposes of The Brotherhood<\/em> I am proposing that what is most important is\nframing this work within a significant historical context so as to better\nunderstand its innovative processes. Thus, a collection for the designated\naudience of media archaeologists should include an abstract that is descriptive\nof how the piece functioned but also that allows the researcher to connect to\nits significance of the development of computer science and interactive\ntechnology at large.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As\nmentioned earlier, the initial process of creating the technical genealogy for The Brotherhood<\/em> was somewhat haphazard.\nWhilst digging through miscellaneous papers that might have assisted in\nfacilitating the video triage (i.e. inventories of master tapes, technical\npapers for the image processing tools), many other documents emerged with\nunknown purposes or origins. Over the course of many interviews with the\nVasulkas and eventually Russ Gritzo and Bruce Hamilton, we were able to\nseparate certain papers based on their association with a given artwork. In the\ncase of The Brotherhood<\/em>, simply\ngrouping papers in this way was not enough to truly help us understand how each\ncomponent part worked within the overall configuration. After assigning unique\nidentifiers to each user manual, schematic, or block diagram and scanning these\ndocuments, I began to pore over all the material, attempting to find patterns\nin the various commands being invoked, what data formats were being outputted,\nor what ports or hardware specifications were mentioned. Over time I was able\nto map out the relationships of the hardware based on these internal clues, and\nwas able to capture both narrative and contextual information about each work\nin terms of its intended function as well as how it was adapted into the\nholistic system concept of The\nBrotherhood<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before going any further in regards to the archaeology of the work, I must stress how essential the unique identifier is in terms of adding validity to the inventory as well as in creating my methodology and structure for archival arrangement and description. All of my conclusions from describing and contextualizing the mechanical guts of the work can be traced back to a document or a series of documents. Every item in the inventory points to a document for further research, and ideally the inventory serves as a guide for a media archaeologist in finding relevant interrelated documents. An item in the inventory, be it a script, database file, or piece of hardware, contains a listing of related items, information on its intended function in the piece, its role in the Input\/Output scheme, as well as tags pertaining to the functionality, risks, or necessary commands to engage with the technology. Given that documents in the Vasulka collection are always used as evidence for drawing these conclusions, the unique identifiers can be used such that researchers can find source material to further research whatever piece of hardware, software, or programming method most pertains to their work. In locating a particular document and further researching the technical characteristics, a researcher will be able to cite The Brotherhood<\/em> in their own work but will also be able to build upon our understanding of the nuances within the technology which in turn enabled the autonomous organism that is The Brotherhood<\/em>. For example, perhaps a scholar is researching use of stepper motor controllers in the early 90s and discovered the Vasulka collection based on the explicit mention of this technology within the inventory. They would be able to research the specific devices and computational environment of The Brotherhood<\/em> and add further annotations as to how the controller works which may either build upon the existing abstract or perhaps even correct or modify the information. The relationship to the document is the most essential component to all of this because, after all, we are trying to provide access to a designated community within Media Archaeology in keeping with Woody\u2019s desire for a \u201ctechnical curriculum\u201d around their work (fig. 9).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.
Fig. 9: Example of source code from a user manual on RPT (UID IN040), Russ Gritzo, 1998, c. The Vasulkas <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

After\nidentifying the relationships between documents and pieces of hardware, it was\ntime to explore the software more deeply. I first scoured all the documents and\npicked out any sections which noted specific data clusters or command prompts,\nproviding evidentiary support as we examined the source code. After aggregating\nenough information indicating, for example, that the command \u201caa ml\u201d is used to\ncontrol elements of the RPT in Automata (as seen in the excerpt above), I could\nsafely say that any scripts using the \u201caa ml\u201d command is operating the mechanical\npositioning of the RPT head. In consolidating such examples of clusters of code\ninto a singular document or \u201ckey,\u201d I was able refer to the originating\ndocuments by their unique identifiers and place this identifier in the \u201crelated\ndocument\u201d field in the software inventory. A majority of the files in the\npackage are shell scripts and database files which are interrelated. The\ndatabase files store the essential bits of data for repackaging bitstreams and\nthe shell scripts enact this process, detecting when data is coming from a\ndesignated stimulus channel and determining what device driver will deliver\nthat information to the hardware for generating a response. Within these two\nfile types that make up most of the software package, there was more than\nenough information to answer some of our burning questions: What are the\ninputs\/outputs? At what point do they occur? How is the hardware configured?\nHow can the source code be linked to specific hardware by virtue of the\nhardware\u2019s technical specifications? What is the native\/ideal environment (OS,\ndedicated RAM, transmission speeds, etc.)? Finally, we could also begin to concretize\nwhat makes this technology unique or significant and represent this in the documentation\nin a way that is searchable through keywords.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

STRUCTURING\nTHE INVENTORY<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In creating the\nabstraction of all necessary hardware and software, I also outlined the\ndirection of the signals and points at which the messages become repackaged,\ntranslated, or scripted out to designated hardware through BIOS control. After\ncompleting the inventory and analyzing the component parts through their\nrelated documentation, I arrived upon a controlled vocabulary for describing what\nis happening to the data streams or signals at certain points so that stimuli\nare processed and sent out to their designated outcomes. This was a useful\nexercise in not just identifying some elemental function of the scripts but\nalso to create a clearer visual for how the sensor data travels across the\nsystem in each Table. My hope is that this inventory will not only be a guide\nto accessing the materials for scholarly research in Media Archaeology and to\nunderstanding the interrelated nature of the elements within The Brotherhood,<\/em> but will also be\nopen-ended enough to solicit further participation and data gathering from the\ndesignated community. To this end, data related to specific commands in the\nscripts are gathered despite a lack of authoritative knowledge on their\nsignificance. The inventory is both a map for understanding the elements and a\nskeleton upon which researchers can aggregate their research so as to further\ncrystallize our collective understanding of this complex work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under the Hardware table of the inventory\/abstraction, there are a number of fields that are relatively straightforward in their approach (fig. 10). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.
Fig. 10: Example of Hardware Inventory for The Brotherhood<\/em> <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Abstract contains information about the narrative of the piece of equipment, namely its intended purpose and its use within the context of The Brotherhood<\/em>, and Related Document contains the unique identifier for the document that points the researcher to additional information. Dependencies contains any information about the technical specifications related to necessary microprocessors, external power, built-in software, etc. However, this column serves a different purpose as Related Hardware\/Software which is intended to contain data that connects to other pieces within the inventory that are specific to The Brotherhood<\/em> system concept (rather than potentially unforeseen external dependencies). The Component Visible column contains data that is perhaps most useful to a conservator is a museum, making it clear whether a certain component is part is visible in installation; that is, the component is part of the aesthetic experience of the installed work and also provides further justification for the item\u2019s necessary inclusion in future iterations of the work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This\nact of diagramming the various inputs and outputs marks the first departure of\nthis methodology from the above-discussed ways of documenting variable media\nworks, since data is separated out to describe both input and outputs (whereas\nmost models include this data in one column). I find it essential within a\nsingular piece of hardware to diagram the data that is coming in versus the\ndata that is being sent out so as to better demonstrate what is being done to\nthe signals and at what point, and how every unique piece communicates with\nanother. Thus, the four separate columns are Input Signal\/Data, Output\nSignal\/Data, Input Port, and Output Port. Within these columns I note not just\nthe type of data or signal but from where it has been sent, further diagramming\nthis \u201cbaton-passing\u201d that occurs ubiquitously throughout the artwork. For\nexample, under \u201cPneutronics Card,\u201d the piece of hardware that is designed for\ncontrolling the air valves for the sculpture in The Maiden, Input Signals are\nmarked as \u201cOn\/Off binary data from Opto Board.\u201d Under Related Hardware\/Software\nwe also see Opto Board. Thus, we understand not just what role the Pneutronics\nCard serves, but where it lies in the great chain of command for the system\nconfiguration. A final necessary data column is Connections\/Cables, which\npredominately shows how the hardware ports connect to external devices via a\nport and cable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Input\/Output Signal (Analog)<\/em>
IR (Infrared Range)
Volts, Direct Current (DC)
RPM
Pulse-Width Modulation
NTSC Video
RF
Pressurized Gas
Audio
NPN\/PNP transistors
VCC (Integrated Circuit Power Supply)
Light-Emitting Diodes (LED)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Input\/Output Signal (Digital)<\/em>
MIDI
Serial Data (Hex) \/ Bauds \/ FIFO (data buffer algorithm)
Latch Signal Pulse\/Flip-Flop
Machine Binary
ASCII
PCM\/WAV<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Input\/Output Ports<\/em>
Infrared Detectors
LS10R\/LS10E (Phototransistors)
MIDI
Switches, SW1-5
LED pins, TP1-TP4
Terminal Pin Jack
Servo to Stepper: SM\/PM, ST\/PT
5-pin adapter
VGA\/EGA
DB-25\/50
9-pin RS-232C
XLR (3 and 5 pin)
20\/26 pin converter
60 pin daughter board
34 Conductor Ribbon
1\/4\u201d Audio Jack
BNC
RCA
COM1-COM3 (Pigtails)
PFC
14-pin connector
CTC DIN connector
JB5\/JB9 to CT (CPU extension)
Dual SCR
SCSI
Integrated Circuits
DM15M (gyroscope)
RX\/TX pin
37-pin connector (DB37)
J2\/J3 memory port
Serial S0-S12
40-pin interconnector
OAC Opto ports<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Software, we also have a number of straightforward data columns, which I like to refer to as \u201cmonolithic\u201d (figs. 11-12). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"Fig.
Fig. 11 & Fig. 12: Example of Software Inventory for The Brotherhood<\/em> <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

By this, I mean that this data pertains to the software package at large rather than discrete parts therein, mostly out of respect for the fact that other artworks and data packages will enter the collection which merit their own unique system-level forms of description. First, we have the I\/O Protocol which describes the singular language under which all hardware and software are cast, in this case MIDI. The Programming Language indicates the scripting language which communicates with the OS which is further compiled into machine language, in this case a custom language (with roots based in C). Similarly, this system relies heavily on the use of source code to access the machine\u2019s native means of controlling external hardware, so information is collected about the Firmware, in this case PC BIOS. Finally, we will contain data about the Operating System, GNU\/Linux. As was found in Hardware, we will also collect data related to the narrative or Abstract, as well as the Related Documentation for further research and analysis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here\nis where data collecting starts to get really interesting in terms of how to\ndocument The Brotherhood<\/em> so as to\npertain to wider conversations and points of research within the Digital\nHumanities and Media Archaeology. For the purposes of The Brotherhood<\/em>, the most noteworthy features include forms of data\nrepackaging and control of external hardware to create an interactive\nenvironment. After poring over the source code and related documentation, I was\nable to create an exhaustive list which speaks to every type of data that is\nbeing interpreted as stimulus data or repackaged so as to be useful to external\nhardware as a response. We can describe The\nBrotherhood<\/em> in broad strokes based on these twelve functions: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. PID (Process Identifier) <\/li>
  2. Solenoid Valve <\/li>
  3. Text <\/li>
  4. Hex: MIDI Velocity\/Pitch <\/li>
  5. Variable (setting acceptable interactive range) <\/li>
  6. Stepper Motor <\/li>
  7. PIC-Servo Motor <\/li>
  8. MIDI Light Control<\/li>
  9. Laserdisc Sequence<\/li>
  10. MIDI note (audible)<\/li>
  11. Live Camera Feed<\/li>
  12. MIDI Channel<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    By\noutlining these twelve functions, we will provide the researcher with a\nskeleton for the project at large such that specific hardware and software\nelements can more intuitively be placed in context with one another in terms of\nfunction. This will also help us in charting a a system of \u201cclasses,\u201d\nparticularly in the case of the software for which there are close to 3,000\nfiles. In grouping this vast directory into data types, the researcher will be\nable to navigate the elements based on function, which ideally will suit their\nspecific research needs, even if they had never heard of the Vasulkas, but\nrather are studying the historical use of the relevant technologies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Of course, all of these bitstream reformatting processes are in service of specific outcomes via external hardware, all processes that are enabled by the BIOS and through device drivers that have been written for communicating with the specific hardware. This led me to also create an exhaustive list of Device Drivers that were created for the piece (also referred to as Actors), informing not just a means of classifying clusters of source code based on the purpose, but also revealing very direct dependencies amongst the shell scripts and database files which simply would not run in absence of the device drivers. One absolutely essential document that I found in my triage was OM037, which provided evidence as seen in figs. 13-14.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"Fig.<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
    \"Fig.
    Fig. 13 and 14: Examples of Device Driver baud channels (UID OM037), Russ Gritzo, c. The Vasulkas <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    One other document indicated that 9600 is the native baud rate for the MIDI protocol, bauds being defined as a transmission speed for clusters of data or discrete logical packets rather than individual bits. In other words, the baud rate is much like bps or bits per second but rather indicates the number of packets which contain logical data (e.g. a \u201cnote on\u201d message in MIDI) that can be sent at a given rate on a given channel, specifically across a modem (Brainbell 2014). After reviewing all the different baud rates that were in use throughout the software in The Brotherhood<\/em> and referring to documents that made mention of specific device drivers that were developed, I came upon a definite list: Opto, PIC-Servo, MIDI, Serial, Logic, and OMS (Stepper). Interestingly enough, each device driver was also designated at its own unique baud rate, developed as a means of allowing for the drivers to run at slightly different rates (albeit indistinguishable by human perception) on different channels so as to avoid data jamming. In comparing the designated baud rates for the device drivers (evidenced in the shell scripts exclusively by the designated baud rate e.g. 9800 for MIDI) you could also see a direct relationship with the hardware-specific command being invoked. Again, let\u2019s use the example from \u201cautomata_midi3.sh\u201d:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    #10.5.1.12 9901 :aa vl350,350,350;
    #10.5.1.12 9902 : 60 sp
    if %mvel -eq 6
    \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 {
         10.5.1.12 9901 :aa ml12000,0,0; gd id
         10.5.1.12 9902 : 15070 se\u00a0 13986 mr\\r\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 
         10.5.1.12 9901 :mn 90 7f 07<\/pre>\n\n\n\n
    Here\nwe see use of a channel with baud rate 9901 (OMS Stepper) which designates a\nvelocity for the stepper motor of the RPT head. We also see a channel with baud\nrate 9902 (Serial) which corresponds to a Laserdisc sequence. Laserdisc players\nare connected to the host terminal by means of a serial port, so this confirms\nthe correspondence of this baud channel with a serial-based device. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
    For\nthe purposes of the inventory, Device Drivers are given their own data column\ngiven how central they are to the Input\/Output configuration and interactivity\nof the artwork. Any specific mention of device drivers within the software by\nvirtue of the baud channels is tagged at the file-object level. The Device\nDrivers not only indicate how the file functions within the software, but it\nalso broadly expresses what types of technology are being enacted through the\nsoftware. For example, a researcher of servo motors could be directly connected\nwith the shell scripts that were designed for communicating with these\nelectrical components and would also be able to read more about how it\nfunctions in the overall piece by virtue of the Related Document field. Not\nonly that, but it also makes note of the internal dependencies of the overall\nfile directory, noting which programs rely on one another which will be\nextremely vital to retain as the work receives continuous digital preservation\nactions within a library\u2019s digital repository. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
    So\nfar, I have diagrammed an inventory for hardware and software elements in an\nartistic work which aid in the process of historicizing the work from a\ntechnological standpoint for use within a research library context. This may\nalso aid in understanding the behaviors as we delve more deeply into the unique\nconfiguration of the hardware and software which could further be used in\neducational environments. Discoveries from these educational pursuits could\nfurther aid conservators in both stabilizing the work and perhaps faithfully\nreinterpreting the work in a reinstallation. However, I do not claim to have\nexhaustively documented the work nor do I believe that we have all the answers\nin order to achieve our hazy dream of one day re-witnessing this monumental\nwork. Indeed, much of this process involves pointing to further documents which\nthemselves require much more digesting in order to fully crystallize our\nunderstanding of The Brotherhood<\/em>.\nScholars are the missing piece and this structure will hopefully tantalize them\nsuch that they will continue to lend their services. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
    PUTTING\nIT ALL TOGETHER<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
    Throughout\ntheir immense careers as artists and pioneers, the Vasulkas have created a body\nof work that is an invaluable record of artistic and technological innovation.\nThey pushed the realm of the possible and delved deeply within their tools to\nimagine new possibilities for communicating with and visualizing the language\nof the machine. The Brotherhood<\/em> was a\nscintillating example of how a multitude of hardware could be cast together\nusing a singular language, bending their intended purposes to reach a common\ngoal. It is somewhat ironic, then, that highly innovative works which merit a\npermanent place in the history of art and technology are somewhat resistant to\nthe archival record by virtue of their complexity and precise interdependencies\nwhich lie outside of existing knowledge and available historical reference\npoints. We are immensely fortunate that the Vasulkas are so generous with their\nintellectual property and willing to allow experimental methods for processing\nand organizing their material so as to better suit the impulses of researchers.\nWe are also fortunate to have Russ Gritzo\u2019s and Bruce Hamilton\u2019s tireless work\nin developing the piece and documenting the process, allowing for the\npossibility of organizing a collection for media archaeologists in the first\nplace. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
    In\nexamining different methods of access, we see how conservators and archivists\nin both museums and libraries devote rigorous attention to the relationship of\nbehaviors and materials in time-based media works, understanding that\nhistorical context provides an invaluable perspective on the intent of the\ncreator and the social conditions of the time upon which the work comments.\nThough a library is an unusual home for interactive installation art work, the\nVasulkas\u2019 desire for an enduring record of their technological innovations\noffers an opportunity to imagine how existing methods for describing and\nstabilizing a work in a museum setting can be applied to methods for providing\naccess to scholarly records. By focusing on the innovative nature of the work\nand how it relates to other developments in computer science and technology at\nthat time, a technological genealogy becomes important in mapping the work\u2019s visionary\nmethods: translation of a diverse number of machine languages into one protocol\n(MIDI), its adept means of controlling an orchestra of external hardware, and\nthe ways in which it pushed beyond the conventional limits of computational\npower and control. By relating this system concept to a web of documents and\noutside resources, we can help facilitate study of the materials and leave room\nfor scholarly input within the record itself, further extrapolating on its\ncomplexities and building upon our collective knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    In\nthe future I hope that The Brotherhood<\/em>\nwill pique the interests of scholars in media archaeology. I also hope that my\ngenealogy will help researchers and students to navigate the design of the\npiece such that the source code is not only analyzed but also manipulated\nthrough use of legacy equipment and external devices, both for the purposes of\nexperimentation in order to understand the relationship of hardware and\nsoftware as well as potential reinstallation in a gallery. Indeed, the\npotential for the use of the Vasulka collection in continuing education rather\nthan it existing as stoic artifacts is the reason the Vasulkas choose a\nUniversity Library as the home for their collection in the first place. Placing\nthis work in an archival context and creating a map that outlines its\nfunctionality makes it much more likely that the heart of the Brotherhood<\/em>\u2014its revolutionary nature and the artists\u2019 interests\nin complex electrical\/computation languages\u2014remains visible, allowing users to\npay rigorous attention to machine behaviors. In proposing new interrelated data\nfields and mapping documents to specific pieces of hardware and software, I\nhave created a skeleton upon which further research and knowledge will\ncrystallize. I hope that I have fully demonstrated how highly complex artworks\nof a technologically-interactive nature merit more thorough attention in the\narchival processing stage to provide historical context. In connecting these\nobjects to users and audiences of media archaeologists and scholars we may also\nenvision ways to use the objects in both experiential and educational\nenvironments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    REFERENCES<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
    Bonin, V. 2003a.\n\u201cSteina and Woody Vasulka fonds.\u201d La fondation Daniel Langlois pour l\u2019art, la\nscience et la technologie. www.fondation-langlois.org\/html\/e\/page.php?NumPage=422<\/a> (accessed: 05\/01\/14).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Bonin, V. 2003b.\nVCS3 (The Putney). La fondation Daniel Langlois pour l\u2019art, la science et la <\/p>\n\n\n\n
    technologie. www.fondation-langlois.org\/html\/e\/page.php?NumPage=446<\/a> (accessed: 05\/01\/14).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Schoenherr, S. 2005.\nThe History of Magnetic Recording. University of San Diego. www.aes.org\/aeshc\/docs\/recording.technology.history\/magnetic4.html<\/a> (accessed: 05\/01\/14).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Manning, P. 1993. Electronic and Computer Music. <\/em>Clarendon\nPress: Oxford, New York.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Planet of Tune.\n2013. Index of Sequences. http:\/\/www.planetoftunes.com\/sequence\/se_media\/message.gif<\/a> (accessed: 12\/13\/13; no longer accessible).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    ECEn 425 Online\nResources. Updated August 29, 2018. The 8086 Interrupt Mechanism. http:\/\/ece425web.groups.et.byu.net\/stable\/labs\/InterruptMechanism.html<\/a> (accessed: 05\/01\/14).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    BonaFide OS\nDevelopment \u201cInterrupts, Exceptions, and IDTs: Part 1 – Interrupts, ISRs,\u201d\n2003. http:\/\/www.osdever.net\/tutorials\/interrupts.1.php<\/a> (accessed: 12\/13\/13).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Edwards, B. 2008. Birth\nof a Standard: The Intel 8086 Microprocessor. http:\/\/www.pcworld.com\/article\/146957\/article.html<\/a>\n<\/em>(accessed 12\/13\/13).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Gritzo, R. 2013. Personal\ncommunication.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Fisher T.  2014. Firmware. PC Support. http:\/\/pcsupport.about.com\/od\/termsf\/g\/firmware.htm<\/a> (accessed: 05\/01\/14).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Gritzo, R. 1992.\nExhFour. http:\/\/www.vasulka.org\/archive\/ExhFOUR\/Brno\/brno.pdf<\/a> (accessed 12\/13\/13).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Brainbell. 2014. Modem\nSpeeds. http:\/\/www.brainbell.com\/tutors\/A+\/Hardware\/Modem_Speeds.htm<\/a> (accessed: 05\/01\/14)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Joey Heinen
    Digital Preservation Manager 
    Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA)F<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
    Joey HeinenThe Electronic Media Review, Volume Four: 2015-2016 ABSTRACT The following case study is a proposal for the creation of a \u201ctechnical genealogy\u201d for time-based artworks, specifically focusing on works that use a multitude of hardware and software in a highly-customized environment. The Brotherhood, a six-part installation series by Woody Vasulka (b. 1937), is an … Continue reading “Archiving The Brotherhood: Proposing a Technical Genealogy for Time-Based Works”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":37,"featured_media":0,"parent":616,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-875","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/875","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/37"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=875"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/875\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/616"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/emg-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=875"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}