This article is part three of a three-part series. You can read part one here.
In part two of this series, I discussed how glitch can provide us with a way to re-contextualize our perceptions. I claimed that the glitch can broaden our understanding of what is meaningful, and thus can either be used to bridge or to segregate the interpretations of meaning between digital and biological perspectives. In this final segment of the series, I would like to introduce Alfred North Whitehead’s theories to shed light on methods of developing a new interpretation of meaning; an interpretation of meaning based on Whitehead’s theory of importance.
Alfred Whitehead describes a process philosophy whereby the universe continually moves towards a state of novelty through a creative advance. For Whitehead, the essence of life (the universe) is to be found in what he termed the frustrations of established order—the disruption of something stagnate towards something novel. The surprising and unexpected newness generated by glitches confuses our conventional understanding of perception. Glitching gives us the opportunity to open dialogue, provide new perspectives, and challenge our standards of perception, while also giving us a framework in which to discuss the technological world.
The “frustration of established order” is essential for Whitehead, since it is through this process that the universe begins to know itself and its infinite possibilities. This is the process whereby mere existence (for Whitehead this is referred to as the matter-of-fact) is redefined in relation to what the universe deems important. For example, evolution involves frustration of established order since a creature’s existence (its environment, its physical characteristics, its limitations, all within the context of an Earth and universe with certain qualities) evolves by deeming one thing or another as more important within that context.
One possible outcome of Whitehead’s process philosophy is that the biological perspective that we have been positioned to enjoy is only a sliver of the multitudes of potential perspectives and “established orders”. As we move into the future, technology is quickly providing us with alternatives to our current contexts and biological matter-of-factness, giving us a fresh opportunity to frustrate the established order and to re-imagine what is important. Dissolving into a digital realm may not only be possible, but it may even be necessary for the ripening of the universe, and for the growth of consciousness into one realm. It will one day be necessary to develop internal assumptions about the growing digital landscape around us, to develop interpretations of meaning that bridge the biological and technological, and to re-define importance.
For something to be important Whitehead asserts that it must first be important in relation to something. And it is exactly in this realm where I believe we must be careful. As our biological interactions become replaced by technological ones it will be essential that we do not lose sight of the context in which our biological perspectives have developed. A possible risk that may come from ignoring our previous perspectives is that importance will slowly lose out, and our experiences will start to trivialize, ultimately returning us to nothingness (2).
We must not let our experiences become trivialized by technology. Glitch and Glitch Art give us a wonderful lens from which to approach technology, as something which is useful, but which must come accompanied by a myth of imperfection. Only from this perspective can we engage in technology on a level playing field, because in this scenario we create a relationship of importance between us and technology, where we actively chose to engage in technology as opposed to passively succumbing to the myth that it is perfect.
If we allow ourselves to be lulled by a technology with a myth of perfection—one where all the glitches are fixed and the user interface is seamless—there could be a risk that instead of a universe growing in importance through the creative process of novelty experience may sink back down into triviality, where our only interpretations of meaning will be those that are forced upon us by a ubiquitous mesh of technology. In this situation, importance may be dictated not by the real context of the universe and its constraints, but by the simulated contexts that are nested within, yet separated from, the matter-of-fact of the universe.
The glitch aesthetic has already diffused into our modern consciousness. Glitching has been commodified as retro filters or datamoshing apps which do not require the user to engage in discourse concerning the practice of glitching. This discourse does exist, and it is not limited to perception. Glitch artists have identified glitch as a way to discuss copyright complications, commodification, power structures, inequality, information transmission, and censorship.
The most powerful concrete opportunity that glitch offers us is a new discourse, however we must choose to engage in it. Without engaging in the discussion that glitching offers, it’s very likely that this aesthetic will be ignored. As Whitehead says, in the absence of perspective there is triviality (3). The risk of trivializing glitch to simply an aesthetic is that we may miss the opportunity to engage in a new perspective, to re-define what is of importance moving forward.
Although glitching touches on all these wonderful ideas, there’s actually nothing new about it. If anything glitch art is just Dadaism’s cooler, hipper nephew. Cubism, surrealism, post-structuralism, the cut-up method of Burroughs and Gysin, bricolage, de-construction, all these methods attempt to find a way to disentangle our perspective from its biological constraints (4). The act of taking a found art object and manipulating it into something new is old as dirt, but the method has changed. As I see it, the real advantage of glitching is that the method has finally moved from the analog to the digital realm.
As each day passes, it becomes more and more clear that our future will become increasingly meshed with digital reality. It is only from this realm that can we tackle the unique and novel difficulties that arise from a digital perspective. If we hold on to our biological views too long, there may be a day where we may not be able to navigate the future. But in letting go without considering what is of importance we risk trivializing our experience and sinking into a simulated nothing. The glitch offers an opportunity to reflect and re-analyze our views of the world, in holding and in letting go. In the end, a glitch may give us views into an infinite unknown that we are fast approaching, however dizzying it may be.
Sources:
(1) Alfred North Whitehead, Modes of Thought, (The Free Press 1968), Lecture One: Form of Process, p 87
(2) Alfred North Whitehead, Modes of Thought, (The Free Press 1968), Creative Impulse, Lecture one: Importance, p 9
(3) Alfred North Whitehead, Modes of Thought, (The Free Press 1968), Lecture five: Form of Process, p 84
(4) Nick Briz, Glitch Art Historie[s], (GLI.TC/H 20111READER[R0R], 2011), http://gli.tc/h/READERROR/GLITCH_READERROR_20111-v3BWs.pdf
Awesome post! Keep up the great work! :)