The areas central to my art and research interests are in communication and behavioral modeling.
The use of protocol to control interactive communications between living things and machines is a common theme for my work. I consider a cybernetic engagement to be a type of networked situation, which includes living and non-living elements as the means to organize and activate information. What I am interested in is how communications may affect the components of a network and how the network develops a programmable culture as a result. By programmable culture, I mean that the culture of networks is not static but relative to the engagement of actors within them.
I am interested in producing works dealing with communication and behavior because I question the source origin of intelligence within biological systems. I like to think of cellular organisms as networked processes. By approaching biology as a science of networked systems, I am investigating the contextual framework for how relationships between parts form the basis of intelligence for the whole. The contextual framework defines the extent to which intelligence is present for a particular actor as part of a larger system. My works attempt to create a lens through which the history of events as processes may become better understood. As an autistic, I feel this objectification of context, as relationships of individuals taking part in a network, best relates to my perception for how I come to understand the intention and motivations of other people’s behaviors. By applying relativity to networked interaction I intend to create insight into the nuance of language as a psychology of communication.
The relativity between instances, as historical references, puts behavior into context and makes it possible for me to understand them as actions and reactions. In order for relationships to be given meaning there needs to be a functional aspect of an object that can satisfy an intention within another object. Once this connection is made clear the functionality of action may change with the objects’ wants, needs, or desires. The relationship is a basic process that incorporates a level of connectivity between individuals with an environment from which behaviors, and their intelligence, may evolve. Behavioral modeling exists in many structures that incorporate a network as part of their functional architecture. How do behaviors emerge from social, political, or cultural paradigms and what is the source of their action? And why do particular relationships form and lead to certain behavioral typologies? A typology is the mapping of type sets. These are the central questions that my work approaches.
The discussion of intelligence as a property of objective action is intended to be a construct, which when interacted with, exhibits a level of ambient or synthesis intelligence as a result. What I want the participant to take from their experience of a piece is that their understanding is based on a level of cultural identity that they have applied to the work. In order for the participant to understand what is going on, they need to first develop a relationship with the work through interactions, previous experiences, or trial and error, and then draw conclusions with how the work is responding and future expectations. I am developing work that can provide a level of sentience in its responsiveness, and that can accumulate knowledge based on sensory experiences to react in a personal way. I think it is common for human experiences to be projected onto interactive works in order to animate them and make them personally accessible, I try to make use of this conception.
noah marchal
