P. 1
Circuit-bending and the DIY Culture

Circuit-bending and the DIY Culture

|Views: 574|Likes:
Published by Alexandre Marino
The present article aims to inscribe Circuit-Bending in Do it Yourself (DIY) Culture and analyze
the anti-consumerist, rebellious, and creativity aspects which make up the culture. The main goal
is to show the subversive status of DIY culture, using the specific case of circuit-bending, which,
seen through this prism, can subvert the hegemonic “distribution of the sensible,” achieving what
Jacques Attali, in the late 1970s, called the “age of composition,” in which creators are enticed to
produce their own aesthetics.
The present article aims to inscribe Circuit-Bending in Do it Yourself (DIY) Culture and analyze
the anti-consumerist, rebellious, and creativity aspects which make up the culture. The main goal
is to show the subversive status of DIY culture, using the specific case of circuit-bending, which,
seen through this prism, can subvert the hegemonic “distribution of the sensible,” achieving what
Jacques Attali, in the late 1970s, called the “age of composition,” in which creators are enticed to
produce their own aesthetics.

More info:

Published by: Alexandre Marino on Apr 13, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Circuit-Bending and DIY Culture

Alexandre Marino Fernandez and Fernando Iazzetta Universidade de São Paulo - Brasil

Abstract The present article aims to inscribe Circuit-Bending in Do it Yourself (DIY) Culture and analyze the anti-consumerist, rebellious, and creativity aspects which make up the culture. The main goal is to show the subversive status of DIY culture, using the specific case of circuit-bending, which, seen through this prism, can subvert the hegemonic “distribution of the sensible,” achieving what Jacques Attali, in the late 1970s, called the “age of composition,” in which creators are enticed to produce their own aesthetics.

Introduction Circuit-bending consists of opening up low voltage (battery powered) electronic devices (musical toys, radio apparatuses, electronic keyboards, synthesizers, cd and dvd players, etc.), change (bend) the way electricity flows through their circuits until achieving an ‘interesting’ sound. One typically practices circuit-bending by removing and/or adding electronic components, connecting different circuits, or even adding organic elements to the circuit (such as the circuit-bender’s hand, or even fruits and vegetables). Upon obtaining the desired result, the next step usually calls for soldering the component into the circuit or marking the specific places to be touched. At the end of the process, some choose to design a nice case for accommodating this newly created instrument - an infra-instrument, in the words of John Bowers and Phil Archer in the article Not Hyper, Not Meta, Not Cyber but Infra-Instruments (Bowers & Archer: 2005).

In 1992, Qubais Reed Ghazala named the technique in a series of articles he wrote for Experimental Music Instrument magazine. He describes how he discovered this method of creating instruments, when, in 1967, he accidentally let a screwdriver come into contact with the circuitry of a battery powered amplifier, producing a short circuit that sounded rather ‘interesting.’ As he puts it: If this can happen to an amp, not supposed to make a sound on its own, what might happen if one were to short out circuits that already make a sound, such as keyboards and radios and toys? (Ghazala: 2004, 97)

As part of the experimental music tradition, circuit-bending follows the paths of such innovators as Alvin Lucier, David Tudor, Gordon Mumma, John Cage, among others, who advanced the limits and frontiers of musical creation. As Ghazala puts it, over the last several years, “experimentalism has taken flight and can be heard within many popular genres.” Currently, for instance, several popular music groups, such as Radiohead, The Flaming Lips, Mike Patton, and Bjork, use bent instruments in their setups (sometimes instruments not bent by themselves). Ghazala argues that “circuit-benders are at the very forefront of this experience of new experimentalism, constantly pushing music forward with original discoveries.” (Ghazala: 2005, 23)

At first, one sees a rebellious characteristic in circuit-bending as part of an experimental attitude. Circuit-bending creates a rupture in the consumerist society, since experimentalism is based on the need for free time, time to “waste” on making mistakes (a trial-and-error attitude). The goal is the unexpected, neither perfection nor efficacy. Benders seek, within this

and therefore the artist must “accept outside contributions and even displeasing things. It approaches other artistic models. creation. As John Cage says: “the utility of the useless is good news for the artists. is an interdisciplinary practice. 135). Has to do with changing of minds and spirits. . Following this logic. breaking the barriers between them. sound art. discovery. perform. and performance. allowing for niches to open where the ordinary person can (re)approach the musical creation. but also a small amount of design. the principal aim is not to play the latest hi-tech tool. 130) Transforming the useless and the expendable into raw material for creation and production is the tonic note of circuit-bending. connecting those who create.” (Cage apud Campos: 1998. a learning experience. circuit-bending proposes an art that is not intended for specialist musicians. but rather to create something unique. the error. Circuit-bending. When practicing circuit-bending. Emphasis lies in its procedural character and its focus on the concept. working only with inputs and outputs in a simplistic way. and listen. and the glitch are the stimulants that feed music: “musical sonic material are the noises that electronic devices generate” (Iazzetta: 2009. a mixture of electric engineering and music. At the end of the 20th century. then. Experimentalism manifests as a discipline of the ego.unexpectedness. For art does not have a material objective. freed from personal preferences and open for new experiences” (Campos: 1998. 189). the flaw. Lo-fi aesthetics display another key aspect of circuit-bending.

modification or repair of objects without the aid of paid professionals. to explore and conceptualize DIY culture and its relationship to circuitbending. Ghazala clearly inscribes circuit-bending in DIY culture. (Ghazala: 2005. (Kuznetsov & Paulos: 2010. XIII) Circuit-Bending and DIY culture In the above quotation. Communities. the immediacy and singularity of the instruments created represent two intentional aspects of circuit-bending. in Rise of the Expert Amateur: DIY Projects. pose a concise and pertinent definition for DIY: any creation. unique instruments by means of explaining only the general discovery process of circuit-bending instead of using the more standard “this wire goes here” dialogue — a dialogue that usually results in exact duplications of a target instrument. but rather. which are often quite advanced. was to launch new. It is compelling. Eric Paulos and Stacey Kuznetsov. the DIY phenomenon is clearly nothing new. and Cultures. It dates back to the practices in which a craft and the unskilled amateur’s stage were opposed to professional practice and industrial . as seen in Ghazala’s book Circuit-Bending: Build Your Own Alien Instruments: My aim. to emphasize that most of DIY culture is not motivated by commercial purposes. then. 01) Thus. We use the term “amateur” not as a reflection on a hobbyists’ skills. more than a decade ago when I began to write about the DIY of circuit-bending.In short.

for any necessity. Historically speaking. modern societies changed this principle by the gradual valorization and establishment of mass-production which led to the consumerist society in which we currently find ourselves. Model building. decorate. high-fidelity audio. this new mode of production spread throughout western society. Mass production becomes established in the 18th century as part of the Industrial Revolution in Great Britain. The end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th.mass production. create. According to this way of thinking. massive social condition. create. (as well as the flourishing appeal of science and technology) led to a boom in inventors and hobbyist activities. and/or build throughout most of history. can be bought at a nearby mega-store. It is noteworthy to see how this movement manifests during the modern era. photography. Such activities were organized through magazines. all created a vast multitude of technical hobbyists who gathered around specific interests. as well as any product. and suppliers. Hobbyists’ activities played an important social role because they allowed laymen to tackle complex science and technology topics which were shaping the very idea of modernity. books. Together with the ideals of liberals such as Adam Smith. The fragmentation of the production chain and the alienation of the individual brought about by mass production sparked a new interest in manual and craft activities. and/or make repairs. A remarkable case in which audio technology attracted the attention of hobbyists was the radio that was sold in kits for home assembly in the 1920s and ‘30s. . They also entailed connecting hobbyists to a specific social network that helped define their identification with an increasingly homogenized. professionals and specialists can be hired to build. clubs. However. DIY was the production method used to develop.

by such associations as AACM (Association for the Advancement of Creative Musicians) and Candid Records. In the 1970s. increasing the amount of adherents in several fields: from growing herbs indoors. learn new skills. In one of the most clarifying charts presented. and criticizing the musical marketplace from a DIY perspective. with its focus on unrestrained improvisation and the production of records outside of the industrial chain. to working on all kinds of electronic projects. even if badly” (Hegarty: 2008. the DIY movement became stronger due to rave culture and the beginning of the netlabel movement. both focusing on independent production (of events and records). In the 1990s. however. and Adafruit). bypassing the record industry. and crocheting. and create things. one sees how a commercial interest is one of the least important incentives for the DIY community. knitting. the Punk movement also emerged as a rebellion against this hegemonic order. “the creativity that comes from a lack of preconceptions and willingness to try out anything. the DIY movement expanded. producing textiles. Kuznetsov and Paulos present some rather significant data from surveys taken by DIY websites (such as Instructables. punk artists such as Crass. Etsy. In the 21st century. as Paul Hegarty argues. Dorkbot. In the above mentioned article. most important being to express oneself. imposing a mass consumption mentality throughout most of the western world. Similar to Free Jazz. . also joined forces to release their records. An initial reaction to such standardizing appears in the Free Jazz movement of the 1960s. For these artists. bringing DIY to the scene.The Second World War and the globalized consumerist model. for example. ineptitude was seen as virtue. Ravelry. Craftster. weakened the hobbyist and amateurist movement for a period of time. 89). with the Internet becoming a vast network of information exchange.

and. He follows by showing that the DIY movement “changes social relations. which seeks to change ordinary mercantile . encroaching upon the basic rules of capitalist society. pursuing singular forms of expression.” which he compares to movements like Situationism. he shows that DIY culture implies three states: an ideological/political one. written for the Spanish magazine Icono. He argues that one of DIY’s main goals was to abolish specialization. independent from industry. creating a community feeling. 279) By way of this prism. and an aesthetic one. an industrial one. regardless of origin or background. one of its characteristics was to rupture the lines that separated worker and creator.” For Gallego Perez. rebelling against the hegemonic marketing order.” (Perez: 2009. analyzes DIY culture in similar terms. “along with the possibility that anyone could be a creator. 6) Juan Ignácio Gallego Perez. and promote a product. He argues that this form of production allows “any person to create.” and is rather based on action: “first act. in the article DO IT YOURSELF: Cultura y Tecnologia.Figure 1: Motivations for contributing to DIY projects (Kuznetsov & Paulos: 2010. then think. searching for new ways of production. as we see in experimental music. distribute. this way of thinking is based on a subversion of the age-old “look before you leap. outside of mass culture.

Along this line of thought. 6). he analyzes society through the musical forms of different ages. Hence. and it is a refuge for residual irrationality. Representation. In noise can be read the codes of life. for Freud. it is a means of power and a form of entertainment (Attali: 1999. for Nietzsche. Sacrifice represents societies focused on religion. when it becomes sound. In his book Noise: The political Economy of Music. for it is one of the sites where mutations first arise and where science is secreted. the expression of truth. Clamor. Repetition is the era we . Dissonance. (. and Composition. For Marx. With noise is born disorder and its opposite: the world. he divides history into four different ages: Sacrifice. Harmony.. noise is the source of purpose and power. Social Context French economist Jacques Attali presents an important view on the subject. the social order we have just discussed merits further inquiry. where mythological customs prevail.) More than colors and forms. a text to decipher. Repetition. of the dream – Music. With music is born power and its opposite: subversion. It is at the heart of the progressive rationalization of aesthetics. 280). It is all of that. Representation relates to the rational view of the world beginning in the Renaissance. Melody.. the relations among men. culminating with the Enlightenment.relationships” (Perez: 2009. music is the mirror of reality. when it is fashioned by man with specific tools. it is sounds and their arrangements that fashion societies. when it invades man’s time. He states: the cardinal importance of music in announcing a vision of the world is nothing new.

an important contradiction emerges as people are no longer creators. In this epoch. It is no longer an enactment through representation. our relation to power is also disrupted: In this type of organization of the production of society. what interests us about Attali is the way he describes the Repetition era. 90) Thus. which begins to appear. at the same time that Attali was writing his book. an era of a new kind of society. Impossible either to locate or seize. It marks the birth of industry and is a time when our daily lives are invaded by show business and celebrity mentalities. The stockpiling of goods becomes. It is spread among the different elements of the system. neither are there counterpowers that can be institutionalized in response. 88). (Attali: 1999. the major goal (and maybe the only one possible) in our society. Power is incorporated into the very process of the selection of repeatable molds. Use-time is obliterated by exchange-time.currently live in. that of mass production. commencing with the advent of recording devices. In this process. Composition. . but the consumption of replications” (Attali: 1999. as shown above. but only consumers: they must “devote their time to producing the means to buy recordings of other people’s time” (Attali: 1999. they end up losing the time required to enjoy what is consumed . For now. power can no longer be located simply in the control of capital or force. in which “usage was no longer the enjoyment of present labors. in Free Jazz and Punk. the embryonic form that subverts the Repetition era. having become the genetic code of society. And if there are no longer any localizable power holders. And finally.or almost anything else. 101). then.

This manner of considering our social context is complementary to that of French philosopher Bernard Stiegler. to move the economy. to eliminate . To captivate libidinal energy (what Jean-François Lyotard called libidinal economy) people are enticed.in order to create a chain of production and consumption. after the Second World War (which is the time of Duchamp strictly speaking).which leads to a normalization of culture. but also the knowledge of how to live (savoir-vivre) of citizens. thereby destroying singularity together with the will to live (the libido). leading. the diachronic (singular) is no longer achieved. As Stiegler puts it. to the globalization of the consumerist model. for whom we live in an era of general proletarianisation: With general proletarianisation. 11). to consume . who thus become as such mere consumers: a good consumer is both utterly passive and irresponsible (Stiegler: 2010. The side effect. In the consumerist model it is not only the know-how (savoir-faire) of workers that becomes obsolete. is that these marketing strategies end up prevailing. Stiegler argues that the consumerist model emerged in the beginning of the 20th century as a way of solving an efficiency crisis in the capitalist order (World War I and the 1929 Stock Market Crash are two symptoms of that crisis). within the opposition of diachronicity and synchronicity. The problem is that this consumerist model leads to another crisis. the crisis of libidinal energy1. by marketing strategies. a process in which creativity is substituted by profit and stardom. human knowledge is short-circuited as a result of its technological reproduction and implementation. and all that remains is the “subcategory of the synchronic: that which marketing calls segment. however.

diachronicity and the possibility of the assertion of a singularity. and semiotician Félix Guattari also talks about the importance of the individuation process in the construction of subjectivity. (Bourriaud: 2002. Artistic practice forms a special terrain for this individuation. their savoir-vivre. the revalorization of the amateur made possible by digital technology and strengthened by the Internet can create a new avant-garde and form new audiences. Nevertheless.) The end purpose of subjectivity is nothing other than an individuation still to be won. and soar off in pursuit of the laws of the socius. subjectivity as production plays the role of a fulcrum around which forms of knowledge and action can freely pitch in. users have to themselves become creators.” (Stiegler: 2007. as seen in Nicolas Bourriaud's book Relational Aesthetics: in the Guattari order of things. resulting in a process he calls disindividuation: a process that destroys the collective and destroys culture. For him. providing potential models for human existence in general.. 40) This context obstructs the process of individuation2. And this disindividuation is also a kind of proletarianisation. 17) It is important to note (and also as a way to further delve into this subject) that the French psychotherapist.. he argues that in order for this process of subverting the consumerist mindset to happen. (. 88) Bernard Stiegler sees the process of de-professionalization of the contemporary era as a possible means of escape from this situation. and their theoretical knowledge. (Stiegler: 2010. philosopher. given that the proletariat in fact refers to those who have lost their knowledge – their savoir-faire. cease to be simply .

and also can be a means to achieve fame and recognition. a remedy and a scapegoat. A paradox that emerges in a society where capital has infiltrated every single aspect of life. This question was raised by the audience during a talk by Richard Stallman (the creator of GNU. produce knowledge. he was asked how people would live their lives working with free software. DIY (and circuit-bending) can be a path to this process of de-proletarianisation. a way to learn new techniques and make new discoveries. 19). If you let profit-thinking invade free software production. on 5 April. and this is without doubt a key to the 21st century (Stiegler: 2010. it can also be another way to create commodities (the infra-instruments created by benders.passive consumers. But. calling for a “far-reaching process of de-proletarianisation.” . he sees the new digital technologies as pharmakon: at once a poison. 11). and try to find another way of earning money. that is. can be sold for a lot of money. and shake the grounds of the capitalist structure. since both allow amateurs to leave the status of passive consumer. enables an effective struggle against the poison which it also is. 2008. On the one hand. DIY culture (and circuit-bending as part of it) carries the same potential contradictions as digital technology..another type of fetishism).. This infiltration clearly makes it difficult to live life without falling into such a trap. Like the ancient Greek philosopher. at MACBA (Barcelona): while discussing free software. on the other hand. of course. to which he responded: “Living their lives. then the movement is dead. the recovery of knowledge of all kinds” (Stiegler: 2010. Only the digital itself. due to their uniqueness . He compares new digital technology to the invention of writing in Plato's era. like products crafted in the DIY fashion. Each person involved with it has to do it as a matter of belief and love. insofar as it can be a remedy. heart of Linux).

12) As seen before. functions of words. as seen in the words of Slavoj Žižek in the afterword of Rancière's book The Politics of Aesthetics: Politics proper thus always involves a kind of short-circuit between the universal and the particular: the paradox of a singular which appears as a stand-in for the universal. people have become mere consumers. 70). Rancière points out that the arts “never lend to domination or emancipation maneuvers more than what they are able to: positions and movements of bodies. artistic practices are means for intervening in the general manner of doing things and in relationships with form and visibility. then. our share of the sensible lies in what marketing analysts decide is good for us to consume. thus. in modern capitalist societies. politics in the arts resides more in the distribution of the sensible than in the content of the works themselves: The distribution of the sensible reveals who can have a share in what is common to the community based on what they do and on the time and space in which this activity is performed. slices of the visible and the invisible” (Rancière: 2005. or what we have enough money (or credit) to pay for.Distribution of the sensible According to French philosopher Jacques Rancière. (Rancière: 2009. Following this line of thought. destabilizing the “natural” functional order of relations in the social body (Rancière: 2009. 26). affirms itself as a principle of a new distribution of the . Production. Rancière argues that in order to change this hegemonic order. it is mandatory to short-circuit this distribution of the sensible.

68) It is easy to see how DIY culture. that is. is always mentioned by benders as one of its key factors. Emphasis is placed on the creation of a particular aesthetic. You don’t need to be an electronics guru or a shop genius. Since its functioning can be odd or even random it may not lead to any kind of virtuosity. It can already be seen in the avant-garde movements of the 1920s. and new designers often follow their curiosity into schooling not otherwise planned. to life.sensible. XIV) . 3-4) And also: Just as bending led me into “real” electronics. As mentioned.” (Rancière: 2005. As Qubais Reed Ghazala says: That’s the beauty of circuit-bending. (…) That’s pretty immediate! (Ghazala: 2005. anyone can do it. Viva el electron! (Ghazala: 2005. The “products” created by benders are less interesting than the process by which they are created. “giving it back to work. which elaborates its own meaning. while they sought to suppress art as a specialized activity. as it unites the formerly opposite concepts of making and visibility. bending stirs great interest in electronics. of a singular instrument and in the way one experiments with it. it is a new relationship between making and seeing. can fit into this way of thinking. as part of this musical practice. and specifically circuit-bending. To produce is to create and make visible (to distribute). many benders report to me the same. Learning. All you need is the ability to solder and to think outside the box.

where art and life are no longer separate. made into phantasmagoric objects in order to be interpreted as the expression of society’s contradictions.(. that it exists nowhere else.” (Ghazala: 2004.. second.. now in hand is an instrument that exists nowhere else in the universe and that presents sounds no one else has yet heard. specialized subjects. 34). .. and also fundamental for Rancière.a word benders use frequently when talking about their instruments . a mythological or phantasmagoric figure. for this is the key to the aesthetic regime of the arts. as we have already discussed.) The Marxist theory of fetishism is the most striking testimony to this fact: commodities must be torn out of their trivial appearances.. the fact that the instrument created by the bender is unique. where the ordinary becomes beautiful as a trace of the true if it is torn from its obviousness in order to become a hieroglyph. (. Scholarly history tried to separate out various features within the aesthetic-political configuration that gave it its object. 99) Two things should be noted in this last quotation: first the usage of the word Alien .This amateurism. is a pivotal key for Bernard Stiegler. It flattened this phantasmagoria of the true into the positivist sociological concept of mentality/expression and belief/ignorance (Rancière: 2009.reinforcing the mythological. again recalling the French economist Jacques Attali. That is exactly what circuit-benders do: transform an ordinary electronic device into an interesting musical instrument. This second aspect leads us to our conclusion.) After all. “a truly alien instrument. phantasmagoric figure of the transformation.

Playing for one’s own pleasure. he called it Composition: There is no communication possible between men any longer. Attali foresaw. in the 1970s (in embryonic form. A concept such as this seems natural in the context of music. Repetition. which alone can create the conditions for new communication. produced. including even the code of exchange in repetition. Inventing new codes. As Kevin Henry puts it in the article Craftivism: Reconnecting art and design education through the social act of making: . now that the codes have been destroyed.Composition and Craftivism As already mentioned. Attali divides history into four different periods based on the way music is thought. Noteworthy. is how DIY and circuit-bending fit into this fourth period. We have also said that we currently live in the age of Repetition and discussed its implications. self-transcendence. Doing solely for the sake of doing. that a new method of thinking about music would appear and replace Repetition. and Composition. pleasure in being instead of having. it relates to the emergence of the free act. and played/distributed: Sacrifice. That is what composing is. inventing the message at the same time as the language. We are all condemned to silence – unless we create our own relation with the world we try to tie other people into the meaning we thus create. Representation. as he puts it). however. (Attali: 1999. without trying artificially to recreate the old codes in order to reinsert communication into them. But it reaches far beyond that. 134) Resonating with this way of thinking is the conception of Craftivism.

leads to a craftivistic approach . 94-95) The new definition of craft which Henry refers to is given by Richard Sennet in The Craftsmen: “the desire to do a job well for its own sake” (apud Henry: 2010. 217-218). etc.according to Henry. but rather craftsman as a lifestyle choice. 95). The result is a world challenged by climate change. . – issues for the most part that won’t go away but instead comprise the world our students will manage. providing those objects of the hand and the mind so necessary to us all” (apud Adamson: 2010.” (Henry: 2010. One-size-fits-all strategies of education change. This new craftsman is no longer craftsman by necessity (since there is a massproduced solution for every necessity). diminishing energy and material resources. and global capital that moves at the speed of fiber optics. and selfsustainability. containerization made economically feasible by cheap foreign oil. peer-to-peer production.quite similar to Attali’s definition of the era of Composition .Capitalist production has been hyper-accelerated by the exploitation of cheap foreign labor.that of the open source software. The question of whether we are adequately preparing them for that challenge can be partially addressed with a new definition of craft. 95) Henry argues that this new approach is dependant on trial-and-error dynamics. This definition . global terrorism. overpopulation. as Eudorah Moore puts it: “fashioning his lifestyle to realize the creative impulse so vital to the whole person. in order “to focus on knowledge communities united by the goals of ‘problem-finding’ and problem solving. (Henry: 2010.

. lo-fi. creative electronics. test it. Our basic idea is. can fit exceptionally well into this logic of “doing for the sake of doing”.As we have seen before. by choosing a new lifestyle that has the potential to change the way we live. We work mostly with electronic waste. therefore. by reusing what is meant to be thrown away. circuit bending and more. this way. THIS IS YOUR FUTURE. and circuit-bending in particular. and. open it. 2. We just take any device. The lifespan of all devices is getting shorter and shorter. that all electronic sounds are just amplification of alternating current. into the world of experimental electronics. As the Finnish circuit-bending group Kokeellisen elektroniikan seura (Association of Experimental Electronics) clearly states in their description3: Lo-tech. creating something interesting and new. creating one’s own instruments instead of buying some new hi-tech tool. bend it and experiment with it as long as we get it to work in a way we consider interesting. so any device that can be used to produce or modify the current can be used as an electronic instrument. how long can this continue? Step out of the line. a means to short-circuit the hegemonic consumerist distribution of the sensible. Today’s digital technology-based lifestyle is not ecologically viable. can act as de-proletarianisation tactics. the low end of all sound production. Think about it. The stuff we dig from the trash bins sounds so much better than any pluginshit. THIS IS NOT RETRO. DIY culture. “outside the box”. Composition and Craftivism. not seeking commercial profit or stardom. We do that for two reasons: 1. and the amount of consumers wanting all new digital gizmos is rising exponentially. subverting the consumption chain.

. Sensed Sounds.We can also see this way of thinking explicitly in other circuit-bending-like events and/or groups. Dorkbot meetings are free and open to the public. students. and other interested parties from the New York area who are involved in the creative use of electricity. a global network of “people doing strange things with electricity. designers. engineers. Open Source. such as Dorkbot4. The same attitude as Dorkbot is present within HackLAB Rio. carrying much of the ineptitude attitude of Punk fanzines. In Rio de Janeiro. as shown in their pamphlet (Figure 2). scientists. open-source attitude of DIY that we have discussed up to this point. even in the design of their folder. Experimental Luthierism. Sound Systems. every Friday. created in 20005 : Dorkbot is a monthly meeting of artists (sound/image/movement/whatever). people gather to “research together. where we see a contrast of some high-tech images and some hand-drawn lines.” As seen on the website of their New York based group. In Dorkbot's philosophy we can see the interdisciplinary.” topics like “Ludic Electronics. Bricolage and the like”. Improvised Rhythms. experimentalist.

net/). PaneTone (http://panetone.br/).art.org/2011/).org/).instructables. like the Hack It! Challenge (http://www. such as Ônibus Hacker (Hacker Bus http://onibushacker. n-1 (http://n-1.Rio de Janeiro Shown above are three examples of what we have discussed in this article. We do not naively believe that DIY culture and. among others.org/details/cr05RottedOrange). We do believe.net.http://garoa. Instructables and its challenges. Many other examples of groups and/or events can be found.archive. more specifically.br/wiki/). circuit-bending are solutions or simple ways out of the complex context presented in this article.com/contest/hackit/). Cursor Records (http://www. . the Bent Festival (http://bentfestival. Garoa Hacker Clube (Drizzle Hacker Club .Figure 2: Hack Lab .

it is a destructive control. like I do. But this captivation is destructive. etc. 16) 3. Marketing people are very aware of those socioprofessionals of high profits who do not want more cars.org/dorkbotnyc/about. etc. meaning that what is submitted to control ends up being destroyed by what it controls. people who begin dreaming about a world without consumption. http://dorkbot. meaning that the society we live in has gotten into a dilemma..beam. http://www. http://dorkbot. Notes 1. and that won’t happen in a painless way. to become what one is by making the passage to the act of a potential that lies within every noetic soul.” (Stiegler: 2007.’ This. 26) And also: “What I describe here is a tendency: we are heading towards a scattering of consumption. because in order for people to consume objects. without consuming oneself. without suffering from consumption.) then. organized trips. as also said in mechanical geniality.shtml .however. it is mandatory that they first want them. their desires. from which it will be mandatory to get away. that we live in the era of the capitalist order that exploits libidinal energy (as it previously exploited fossil fuels. Bernard Stiegler talks about an important paradox of the hyper-industrial capitalist society: “industrial life tends to channel individuals’ libidinal potential.org/ 5. that is. or ‘ad-busters. natural resources. is absolutely not a good sign. 35) 2. And if we believe. hyper-industrial capitalism is on the verge of a serious crisis. that is.” (Stiegler: 2007. That’s the core of movements called anti-publicity. that the appearance of these movements and their growth in recent years shows the importance of discussing such subjects in an interdisciplinary manner. to experiment.” (Stiegler: 2010. heading towards the consumer who does not want to consume anymore.to/koelse 4. however. “To individuate oneself is to learn.

(2004) 'The Folk Music of Chance Electronics: Circuit-Bending the modern coconut’. Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing Inc. (ed.html (Accessed: 04/24/2011) Campos. [Online] Available at: http://www. (2008) Noise/Music: A History.pdf (Accessed: 04/16/2011) Moore. pp. nº13. P.14. pp: 214-218. (2005) Circuit-Bending: Build Your Own Alien Instruments.org/2005/proceedings. ‘DO IT YOURSELF: Cultura y Tecnologia’.staceyk. Ghazala. (1998) Música de Invenção. Iazzetta. R. Perspectiva. (2009). Kuznetsov. Ghazala.Bibliography Attali. Dijon: Les presses du réel. G.nime. 278-291. K. São Paulo: ed. (2010) ‘Craftivism: Reconnecting art and design education through the social act of making’. In: Revista Icono 14. (ed. & Delfos. (2009) Música e Mediação Tecnológica. Perez. & Paulos. (2010) ‘Craftsman lifestyle: The Gentle Revolution’. F. E. and Cultures. Bowers. J. Not Meta. São Paulo: ed. (1999) Noise: The political Economy of Music. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. In: Corcoran. A. [Online] Available at: http://www. N.) The Craft Reader. Communities. Not Cyber but Infra-Instruments. . Henry. (2002) Relational Aesthetics. P. Madrid. J. Bourriaud. K. Perpectiva. Amsterdam: ELIA. S. G. London: Continuum. Spain. J. New York. San Francisco. Q. Hegarty. I. v. & Archer. In: Adamson. In: Leonardo Music Journal.) ArtFutures Current issues in higher arts education. (2005) Not Hyper. R. E. Q. Oxford/Nova Iorque: Berg. C.org/hci/KuznetsovDIY. pp: 92-97. (2010) Rise of the Expert Amateur: DIY Projects.

J. (2009) The Politics of Aesthetics. pp: 10-19. 34: Exo Experimental. (2005) A partilha do sensível. São Paulo: Ed.Rancière. . Stiegler. (2010) ‘The Age of De-proletarianisation: Art and teaching art in post-consumerist culture’. C. (ed. In: Corcoran. K. New York: Ed. & Delfos. (2007) Reflexões (não) contemporâneas. Rancière. J. B. B. Chapecó: ed. Stiegler. Argos. Amsterdam: ELIA. Continuum.) ArtFutures Current issues in higher arts education.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->