The Future of Evolution

by Geert Lovink


With the opening of the Ars Electronica web site on march 1st, 1996, we
now have the opportunity to extend the traditional form of the 'conference'
with a lively discussion on the Net in the months before the actual
event. 
We would like to get away from the usual panels and presentations and see
the getting-together in Linz, early september, as a place to continue
and round-up ungoing discussions. 
Of course it is not that easy to simply blow up the entire concept of the
'conference' and its rituals, although it is already imaginable to host a
festival entirely in cyberspace. At least at this moment certain hierarchical
('one to many') modes can be modified through an open discussion in the phase
of preparation.
The introduction of the public discussion is not only determined by the
technical support the Ars Electronica Center now can offer. It is only recently
we observe that 'new media' is no longer a topic of speculation for a few 
scientists, theorists, artists and their small circles. As digital technology 
is entering society (with the rise of multi-media and the Net), the amount
of contradictions and controversies is becoming apparent. Still the hype in 
the 'old media' guarantees a feeling of consensus amongst media artists,
critics and 'our' experts. But the hard and cruel economical, social and
political reality is slowly invading the polished, innocent but still marginal
media-art community.

So far there is not much experience and expertise in the orchestrating of 
net-based public debates on technology. It didn't make much sense to confront 
the technophobic with the technophile. At this stage we are leaving the era 
of the introductions on the nature and implications of new technologies (and 
the role of artists in this process) and find ourselves in the middle of
controversies around topics like copyright, privacy, war on standards, 
cultural biases, public access, censorship and other 'old patterns' in 
'new media'.

We would like to invite you to participate in the discussion between
the other artists and critics we have already invited to send their first 
statement.
'The Future of Evolution' should not only attract meme-experts,
cyberartists and bio-ingeneers. Recently we have witnessed a shift in the 
definition of 'evolution' from biology to culture. Artists are actively 
appropriating the term 'evolution' and are working on their own models of 
'cultural viruses', robotics, artificial life, knowbots etc. But to what 
extent are these models actually promoting ideas like 'survival of the 
fittest information', cynical socio-biological elitism; racist images of the 
cyber body and neo-liberal market philosophies? Or is it 'just' technology? 

The concept of the 'meme' seems to be objective and neutral. After the fall 
of the Berlin Wall certain aspects of the communist tradition (for example)
could metaphorize into 'memes'in order to continue their travel through 
history. And why not? Or is this just a silly idea and will we face a 
so-called 'natural order' in order to reduce diversity, complexity, 
noise and resistance?
And is the meme-concept useful if we want to study the way collective
memory is formed? Will the Holocaust memory emigrate with us in
cyberspace?
Digital culture is a voyage into the realm of the artificial, borrowing
metaphors here and there, with little or no reflexion on the
implications of the cultural patterns in which interfaces, databases and
gadgets are shaped. Both private obsessions and political correctness
have stopped the media-art community to raise (and reject) all these
questions. Now, in the middle of the 'digital revolution', it is time to
look for unspoken permisses and organize a lively, open debate.