2.7.1 Fuller invokes two people repeatedly in Nine Chains to the Moon, Leonardo da Vinci and Henry Ford. He refers to da Vinci as the artist-scientist who "wedded science, art and mechanics, the first stable matrimonial triangle." Ford continued this triangle by "recognising that his capital was primarily "intellect," compounded with a credit of his intellect and capability by vast numbers of workers and consumers." (1938, pg. 181) Einstein's theory of relativity reached the "Murphys" through Ford's mobilised production line, which utilised time as the critical element. Fuller actively defends Ford from critics who called him not only "ruthless" but "heretic" with all the implications that word carried at the time. He was highly impressed by Ford's ability to popularise scientific ideas and put them to use thus bringing the "product" of those ideas to the masses and thus changing the collective consciousness. In favour of promoting this ability that Ford had, Fuller chose to ignore some of the darker ramifications of such an endeavour. In Americanism and Fordism, Gramsci, Fuller's contemporary, defined Fordism as introducing a whole new epoch in capitalist civilisation. It marked a passage not only to a planned economy, but to a planned person. Fordism did not stop at the factory gates but invaded the home and the most private and intimate spheres of the workerıs life. (Gramsci, 1931, pg. 304) Fordism not only meant assembly lines but also prohibition and "puritanism," the attempt to regulate the sexual and familial life along with the work life. (Kumar, 1995, pg.50)

2.7.2 In his admiration for Ford's assembly lines, Fuller also exhibits some of the contradictions artists working in digital technologies face. Most of us do not want to consider, more than in passing, the deeply rooted military connection [5], the class structure, and the cheap labour in Third-World countries that is very much connected to the computer industry. Indeed, this thesis is not concerned with these issues more than in passing.

2.7.3 He was the prophet of humankind's liberation through technology, calling for a world-wide disarmament, an end to waste, and criticising corporate greed for profit. Yet he frequently found himself siding with, and receiving patronage from, the very institutions that were the focus of the 1960's protest movements: the army, large-scale administrations, and multi-national corporations. But, by having visions that ultimately inspired and moved those around him in socially conscious ways, he managed not to be maligned by this kind of sponsorship. It was his strategic adherence to the utopian genre that gave him the ability to convey a message without implying allegiance to any one group‹an avant-garde or even a school of rigid doctrine. Likewise, artists working with computer technologies, particularly those on the networks, have to face severe contradictions between the message of their work and those that sponsor and make the work possible (e.g. corporations and governmental organisations).

2.7.4 Throughout his career, Fuller was a strong critic of the existing capitalistic structure. Yet he glorifies the automated production lines that are to become the very core of an industrialised capitalistic era. Similarly, artists working with computers may be critiquing the very corporate structures they uphold by participating in the use of the technology used to get their message across. I consider myself an example of this and have experienced this contradictory relationship between the artist and companies that produce the technology used in artwork. For instance, in my first major piece utilising computer technology, Another Day in Paradise (1993), I was commenting on how palm trees are preserved using silicon and broadly critiquing the practice of artificialisation and preservation of nature, the destruction of the environment, construction of homogenous dwellings, and how politics displace people and nature. I was afraid companies that agreed to sponsor my work would pull out after seeing the content. To my surprise I found out that the medium is indeed the message-they were not concerned with the content at all or even threatened by it. All they were interested in was my innovative way of using, or rather exhibiting, their technology, thus creating another way of advertising their product. When exhibited at SIGGRAPH [6], most viewers were interested in what was new and how it was utilised and rarely spent the time to actually pay attention to the content. Similarly, Bodies INCorporated was a commentary on the corporate structure of the networks and how this shapes our online identity construction. Once again, it was sponsored by the very corporations I was commenting on, with no concern shown regarding the critique. (Vesna, 1998)

2.7.5 I have found these same contradictions to exist within the industry itself that is largely composed of baby-boomers and those who were anti-establishment hippies in the past. Faced with making millions overnight (Cringley, 1996), they suddenly had to negotiate the contradiction of being thrown into the established corporate structure that represented the very opposite to the ideals they were brought up with. Although baffling, it may be that these very contradictions being worked out may be the key to bringing in the change to the existing infrastructure. [top]

Notes:

5. Consider the MIT Media Lab, the prime institution for digital art research. Most of its funding comes directly from the military and industry that is sponsored by the military. [back]

6. For a long time SIGGRAPH was one of the few venues that made it possible for artists to access equipment and show their art work. Since 1996 this has changed significantly with a rising interest in art utilising computers. [back]