This just happened — while trying to figure out a colorful way to begin the story you’re reading, I toggled to Twitter and saw a link to a short film by two Brooklyn directors who used a drone to film actors having sex. Their project, somewhere between art and porn, hovers on the R-rated margins of a thriving cultural movement in which artists of all stripes are exploring what it means to live in a state of surveillance.
You can’t throw a rock these days without hitting a surveillance art project, and the remarkable thing is that so much of it is so good. Some of the Snowden era’s sharpest interrogations of collect-it-all tracking by corporations and the government are to be found in galleries and other art spaces. They are the opposite of the acronym-laden news stories we read: NSA, FISA, PGP, PRISM, ACLU, EFF, SIGINT, GCHQ, TOR, FOIA, HTTPS, are you still awake? They are playful, invasive and eerie, and best of all they are graphically visual. With a transgressive edge that journalism struggles to match, they creatively challenge what it means to be human in a time of data.
The latest example is an exhibit called Watching You, Watching Me, organized by the Open Society Foundations in New York City and featuring ten artists and photographers. Rather than tell us about program X or problem Y in the word-based vernacular we’re numbed by, they offer new ways of seeing and understanding surveillance. The stunner in this show is an object created by Hasan Elahi that from a distance looks like a lovely tapestry draped on a wall.
As Elahi has explained, in 2002 he was stopped at the Detroit airport because his name appeared on a terrorism watchlist, and he was subsequently interrogated by FBI agents. Born in Bangladesh and raised in the United States, Elahi, an art professor at the University of Maryland, chose an unusual response to clear his name and make a statement—he began a self-surveillance project in which he took pictures of nearly everything he did and sent them to the FBI. He also posted them to a website he created. He’s taken about 70,000 pictures of the buildings he’s visited, the beds he’s slept in, the food he’s eaten, the toilets he’s used, the roads he’s travelled on, and he’s also published receipts for the things he’s bought; he even tracks his location using GPS.
“By disclosing mundane details about my daily life, I am simultaneously telling everything and nothing about my life,” he writes in the exhibit brochure. “I am flooding the market with banal information, and questioning its inherent meaning and value for intelligence purposes.”
Artwork by Hasan Elahi
Surveillance art — or as one academic has called it, artveillance — fits into a creative continuum that stretches back to at least the 1930s, when the introduction of “miniature” cameras, such as the Leica, made it relatively easy for photographers to secretly take pictures. Walker Evans led the way with undercover pictures taken on the New York City subway with a Leica hidden behind his coat. State surveillance wasn’t the subtext of Evans’ work—he was the surveiller, after all—but as the art professor Stephanie Schwartz pointed out to me, the issue was being evoked in the creative realm at the time. One of the scenes in Modern Times shows Charlie Chaplin’s character, the tramp, going into a bathroom to get away from the factory floor, only to find a monitor from which the factory manager sees him and orders him back to work.
The latest wave of surveillance art has been evident for a number of years, especially since 9/11, which increased the powers and budgets of intelligence agencies in the United States and elsewhere. The wave seems to have grown larger in the wake of the leaks from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, and this is fortunate. Pervasive surveillance is oddly paralyzing—it is the digital equivalent of the aphorism about genocide, “The death of one man is a tragedy and the death of a million is a statistic.” The more we learn of its vast scope, the more we seem dulled to it. We need to see it anew.
Josh Begley, a data editor at The Intercept, tries to bring that kind of utility to the New York Police Department’s invasive surveillance of Muslims. After 9/11, the NYPD established a secret “Demographics Unit” that mapped Muslim neighborhoods, dispatching plainclothes officers to collect photographs and information about Muslim businesses and gathering places. The program was revealed in a 2011 news story by the Associated Press that also published the NYPD’s surveillance photos and notes.
Begley’s project in the Watching You exhibit reassembles the original documents, arranging the NYPD photos of hundreds of Muslim-owned establishments in a jaggedly circular collage, surrounded by notes from the undercover cops involved in the surveillance (“Medium sized store that sells stationary, lotto, newspapers and American party supplies…Location sells live poultry…A male Pakistani was working behind the counter”). The project engages you far more deeply than a stack of original documents or news stories about them ever could.
The exhibit offers much more—photojournalist Tomas van Houtryve displays his beautiful and disturbing pictures taken with a small drone that he flew over American settings to replicate the locations of drone strikes in Pakistan and Afghanistan—weddings, playgrounds, people praying or exercising. There is also the turn-the-tables work of Simon Menner, a German who combed through the Stasi archives for pictures the East German spy agency took of its own agents (mainly in training situations, but also at parties).
Code Names by Trevor Paglen
As a writer, it’s hard to say this but there’s more variety and excitement in surveillance art than in surveillance writing. For instance, artist Heather Dewey-Hagborg has collected DNA samples from cigarette butts, chewing gum and stray hair, and has used these to create portraits of whomever the DNA belongs to. It’s an aggressive act — appropriating someone’s genetic property to show the ease with which our identities can be constructed and exposed. Two artists, Brian House and Kyle McDonald, even created an eavesdropping device that looks like a light bulb or lamp, and after infiltrating them into public places like a restaurant, bank lobby and library, they tweeted snippets of overheard conversations; the project is called “Conversnitch.”
Fair game? I don’t know, but these projects engage us with the problems of surveillance in ways that news stories and congressional hearings do not. There’s a freshness to each one, and the list lengthens every day. As I was finishing this story, I received an email from a group of 14 artists who have released a CD called “NSA Listening Party” — songs against surveillance. The first track is called “Dossier.”
Here are some other surveillance projects and artists we’ve noticed:
Privacy Policy: The Anthology of Surveillance Poetics
Jenny Holzer (Doodle)
PRISM: The Beacon Frame (Julian Oliver and Danja Vasiliev)
Lauren McCarthy (Social Turkers)
James Bridle (Drone Shadows)
Adam Harvey (Privacy Gift Shop)
Omer Fast (5,000 Feet is the Best)
David Birkin (The Shadow of a Doubt)
Essam (NYPD Drone Art)
ScareMail (Ben Grosser)
America/Pardon Snowden (Larry Ayres and Miriam Dance)
Treason (Galt Aureus)
SkyWatch Spider (Zaq Landsberg)
ZXX Type (Sang Mun)
Banksy (GCHQ mural)
Post-Surveillance Art (Suzanne Treister)
PolyCopRiotNode (CH2)
The Personal Experience of Surveillance
Privacy World–A Fun and Secure Experience
A Screaming Comes Across the Sky (LABoral)
Observing Surveillance (Electronic Privacy Information Center)
Sanctum (Henry Art Gallery)
Photographer X (Lauren Grabelle)
NSA vs USA (Shahid Buttar)
Arnold Mesches (The FBI Series)
Interrogation (John Feffer)
Photo: Tomas van Houtryve
Visual art reframing contested social questions can be incredibly powerful. So is music.
I released “NSA vs. USA” on the anniversary of the Snowden revelations. It’s an original house track with conscious hip-hop lyrics about the long history of US intelligence agencies’ crimes against the American people. The music video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hciiZbJph1c) has been viewed nearly 8,000 times, and has been covered by media outlets (summarized at http://shahidbuttar.com/node/86) from NPR and Boing Boing to FireDogLake and Black Agenda Report.
Beyond being a piece of multimedia art, the song was written as a teaching tool. The lyrics (posted at http://shahidbuttar.com/NSAvsUSA) are supported by hyperlinks pointing to background articles, reports, and further sources for listeners interested in learning more.
Guess What!
http://observergal.blogspot.com/2014/11/surveillance-art-2-wall-of-shame.html
What happened to my comment from 15th.?
Starting with link #1: Heidi Boghosian (Ha, after listening to her on WBAI’s “Law & Disorder” for years (they have their own website, with wonderful outline/summary of show contents/text as well), being an artist, I just “saw” her name and realized the “ian” ending of her name is Armenian. Arshile Gorky was the son of an Armenian genocide survivor and embarrassed about it, covered it up; read a bio of A. Gorky, who took his name from the Russian author, and discovered his studio had a view of
Klein’s on the Square Dept. Store- that’s Union Sq. for you younger folks, and within the area of many of these shows; my spouse and I found the building put up where his painting studio had been, replaced by an apartment house – NYC is ruled by real estate, big corporations). Heidi Boghosian, “Law and Disorder” which is produced by people from the Center for Constitutional Rights, the National Lawyers Guild…very reliable sources.
First you start with the top 7, then you return to messenger. Remember to stay kosher and exercise, and basically. The art of typing.
Speaking of Scahill, the fact that he was surrounded by carnivores and exponent groupie audiences was a clear sign that he was about to be gang raped and eaten alive. Good thing he got out of there in time.
Wow. You have done an impressive collection of sites. I’m on the inside, looking out, so to speak. Can’t go to the shows, near and so far. I often wonder about surveillance after following Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill – both of their work, respectively, for many years as a WBAI longtime radio listener, and only in
recent decade, an internet user. I wonder how much self-censorship artists are doing: particularly those who are using their own names; many are not. I’m old and
have had experience knowing about COINTELPRO. Gov’t surveillance is not new but surely is more “everywhere” and “everything”. I have assumed my work online was under the radar, as is my work on paper, xerographics (my word for limited editions of political and/or art on paper, limited by limited funds). Those of us who are
outside the mainstream and “off Broadway”: alternative art scenes, make our own ways of showing art, whether it be outsider due to being a woman (not much has changed in the many decades I have been a sculptor in a man’s art world; galleries are still and museums are still largely sexist – the National Museum of Women in the Arts has presented data to back it up) or disabled and ill (longtime prejudice against disabled: I once entered a whole series of art shows to win awards and competitions, which I did, in the 1980s, so I could protest jurying at art shows, which largely is a statement about the juror’s taste in art. Women in the Arts, a large art group in NYC which I was a member of long ago, demonstrated and got a show at the Bklyn Museum of Art, which we got around jurying by each woman asking another woman what she wanted to show, and only space limitation kept the number limited. I don’t think anyone was left out. And the show was great. Works on Paper, Sept. 1975, catalog. How many women artists are in the show you are reviewing? I am going to post my link to my Flickr public photostream page: http://www.Flickr.com/photos/sanda-aronson-the-artist/
I have a question for others commenting, assuming most are younger, more aware as are the writers for this good site (which is included in the description section under one of my recent pieces in the page of about 55 or 56 pieces of art created for Flickr page). Why would someone have hundreds of thousands of photos as “Favorites” on his Flickr page? Is it to get people to visit? Other? Thanks. I have been sending people to Intercept. (I hear Glenn Greenwald regularly on DemocracyNow with Amy Goodman; Jeremy Scahill started there long ago…)
I loved this article! That is something new indeed!The kind of art a given period produces is always related to its deeper cultural trends. In this case it proves that global surveillance is neither a superficial nor a specific matter.This kind of art(whether you like it or not) shows how deeply the awareness of surveillance already permeates the general perception of the world itself. George Orwell the modest precursor, would probably be shocked at finding himself so intensely confirmed.
I don’t know what this post is, but it isn’t art, and it isn’t writing.
Says a prehistoric life form in a parallel universe
For anyone curious:
http://observergal.blogspot.com/2014/11/surveillance-art.html
One of the things I really appreciate about this piece is that it dignifies the examination of what is happening to us on a subconscious level when surveillance becomes confrontational in a daily context. No one needs art more than people who have trouble with surveillance. The harms done are invisible to the outside world. Eventually we are going to find ourselves sharing a type of PTSD experience en masse. What the hell would that even look like. My guess is that America’s expressions in art, in music, in writing fiction story over this are going to be very very important to finding our way out of the maze of successive intimidation. Let the art in.
So true, and I love your remark, Let the art in.
“No one needs art more than people who have trouble with surveillance.”
How true. There is more than one way to take that statement and they are probably all true. When I first read the above I was drawn to the surveillors needing art. These are humans engaged in spying on fellow humans. Amorality can’t be all encompassing in that I mean these are just people doing a job, most of them and those that are psychopathic aren’t going to be reached by art or any mechanism. The vast majority of the peoiple engaged in this warrantless spying are your neighbors and friends. Perhaps not yours, per se, but someone’s. All it takes to wake someone from their delusions is to find their trigger and I can’t think of a better vehicle than art. Factual evidence hasn’t been enough to turn the tide.
Excellent article Mr. Maass.
Although I may be overly hopeful I would like to point out that journalists, artists, and musicians historically lead the way in social reform.
A classic example of the this is the 60’s folk/rock war protest movement. Look what came of that. Success in mobilizing mass reform.
There are many examples to cite where creative genius (speaking to the soul) was able to harness the courage of populations to rise against societal/governmental repression.
I am clapping in approval at this time for the pioneer artists that you link to above; your deep insight in writing this article, and for humanity in general. It is a peaceful revolution in the making.
I love this….http://bengrosser.com/projects/scaremail/
Thanks.
Yes, the 60s are an interesting parallel.
Here is another one….this a recreation from the musical artists of the American Revolution.
Well worth listening to lyrics in this one…the parallel is striking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMZg4aeE5pE
quote”There are many examples to cite where creative genius (speaking to the soul) was able to harness the courage of populations to rise against societal/governmental repression. “unquote
Bullshit. The ONLY thing that ever harnessed the courage of populations is possessing a weapon. PERIOD. If you think a de-weaponised population can overthrow their oppressors, I’ve got an auction on ebay you don’t want to miss.
that ain’t art….
Thanks for this fascinating, eye-opening article. I’d had no idea that this surveillance-creativity was going on in the art world. Three cheers to the artists, and to you for pulling together this informative article. (So words do still have a purpose; they’re the material for your article!)
Right, I’m not out of a job yet!
Evocative images from the Stasi Museum in Berlin:
http://egorfine.livejournal.com/464589.html
(http://gadling.com/2010/12/10/stasi-museum-in-leipzig-40-years-of-spying-and-terror/ )
(Thanks for this terrific piece.)
I visited the Stasi Museum in February; eye-opening.
It looks like the Snowden archives have been exhausted and there are no more worthwhile stories to write about. Pity, since I was expectantly waiting for some personal emails to show up, like NSA analysts would typically be able to access, and which Snowden could therefore have downloaded to share with all of us. We now have to resign ourselves to insipid and inconsequential yarns such as this one.
Since this seems to be the most active thread… even though it’s a bit OT, I thought someone should post this link in case anyone has missed it. A very scary report…. be sure to also read the comments and find BehrHunter who has a link to an article about something that could be very well related…
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/14/government-planes-mimic-cellphone-towers-to-collect-user-data-report#comment-43617784
This was quite an interesting article. I was glad to see that there was a musical project mentioned; music is often a great medium with which to connect with others or send a message.
Some of these projects seem more interesting than others. I wouldn’t care to continue streaming or photographing my entire life, though. And a couple of them – that DNA one and the “coversnitch” one creep me out, frankly. But I have to agree that such projects do add a dimension to the consideration of these issues. And make me want to do something artistically, even though my artistic ability is very limited. Will let you all know if I come up with something—– and I still have that poem I posted waaaay back in the “I Hunt SysAdmins” thread (at least that’s what I remember). Wish I’d known they were going to do that poetry book.
*Omer Fast
Thanks for pointing that out–now fixed.
Ai Wei Wei has a lot of work that could fit into this list. As a Chinese citizen, he has been cognizant of excessive government surveillance a lot longer than most Americans. I saw this exibhit in Washington DC at the Smithsonian before the Snowden revelations and found it very ironic for a lot of reasons – one of which is that the government surveillance in our country has become as bad if not worse than it is in communist China.
http://www.pbs.org/art21/images/ai-weiwei/surveillance-camera-2006?slideshow=1
Ai Wei Wei also decided to post his own surveillance camera on himself with a live feed since he figured the Chinese government was doing it anyways.
This
“Paglen’s video installation, in a darkened room at the Metro Pictures gallery, projects the code names into slowly-rising columns of white type that crawl up the walls around you. The effect is literally destabilizing—with the code names rising as you stand still, you feel as though you are falling in a shaft of infinite surveillance”
really captures my imagination. I would love to see it.
If you live in NYC, it’s definitely worth your time.
Sometimes, I wonder whether it’s not just all a game of mirrors. Because, let’s face it : now most people know (a tiny fraction of what has been hidden from them for so long), what are they going to do about it ? What can they do about it ? What’s really going to change, considering the geostrategic context, once the usual postures and promises are but vague memories ? It seems a bit like collective therapy, except it’s not : instead of attenuating schizophrenia, it’s adding to it, making it really omnipresent and ubiquitous, wherever you look and whatever the medium. Everyone’s playing their small part in the big piece, as if the quality (= the credibility) of each of their individual acts weren’t the one and only factor by which they will be judged. Might an artistic eye not cynically consider these works of art as merely offerings to a new idol feeding on our time, our energy, and – worst of all – our imaginations ? Aren’t they just part of a same cocoon ? Are they a way for the artists to emancipate themselves (and the observer) from what they depict, or to follow the movement dictated by the scenery, like impotent artefacts in a Debordish nightmare ? Regardless of their creativity, might they no be compared to an imposed school dissertation about where the children spent their latest holidays, with the difference that the idyllic beach sights edged with palm trees or the snowy moutain tops have turned into the grim vision of a wall of emptiness the sum of our acquired instincts of dominion managed to erect ? Depressive thoughts ? Extreme lucidity ? Is there any difference ?… When all is said and done, isn’t the main result of all these ‘revelations’, explanations, images and representations that they somehow make the reality we despise more familiar, hence more tolerable, albeit subconsciously ? Is any ‘revolutionary’ thought possible by thinking in the box ? One set of solar flares, just one, would be enough… to have us dream of the old oak tree on top of the green hill again, the one that helped Winston stand tall… for a while. Shortly after the end of WWII, Dutch artist Karel Appel journeyed by train throughout Germany. In various train stations, he encountered children who were begging for some food.
http://www.stedelijk.nl/kunstwerk/2800-vragende-kinderen
There’s a major difference between the artists mentioned in this article and Appel. The former are expressing how they feel about a common reality or perception, whereas the latter looked straight into the eyes of a reality that wasn’t his own, but with which he somehow melted through his work. On the one hand, a collection of individuals related only by an abstract matrix, on the other hand, direct human empathy between individuals. If only both could coalesce… Anyway, I wonder what child beggars think of the bourgeois surveillance state these days…
Has anyone noticed whenever Glenn posts a new article regardless of subject matter there is a dearth of comments for anyone else. Not trying to drag Glenn down but rather elevating his colleagues. I realize Glenn is the backbone of TI and his mastery of the run-on sentence in his oratory is legendary along with his fearlessness at a time when it is sorely needed, however he has a good team working with him. None of them are neophytes and are worthy of their own readership. Good article Peter and worthy of comment, so I did, twice.
Thanks, appreciate it!
jg..
With all due respect to Mr Maass and his stellar article, it is in my humble opinion that there are better ways to promote said “colleagues” than utilizing Mr Greenwald as a scapegoat in your overview.
aloha
Sorry, Suave. My intention was not to use Glenn as a scapegoat and not being the wordsmith he is did not convey my thoughts in a thoughtful manner. I admire Mr.Greenwald for numerous reasons especially his tireless efforts in regards to the Snowden documents which were literally thrust upon him. I was merely observing that whenever Mr.Greenwald posts an article the comments for other authors seem to suffer. I take your admonishment and will endeavor to make my point at noone’s expense in the future. Thanks for making me accountable.
“these projects engage us with the problems of surveillance in ways that news stories and congressional hearings do not” – Peter Maass
This is just one example of the writing that brings me back to The Intercept. Insightful, meaningful, well sourced and, more importantly for me, broadening the narrative outside what has normally been available on the web or in main stream media.
I learn something new on a regular basis here, from writers and commenters alike. All of you, please keep on keepin’ on.
Thank you, that’s a lovely comment.
Maybe this relatively new art form or rather subject matter will have a positive effect . Time will tell, but that’s part of the rub. Are artists painting soup cans or wrapping islands with colored ribbons… anymore? These exhibits may be able to reach completely new segments of society in ways and at levels the printed word cannot do. This is a good thing, but after the wave of Surveillance Art has rolled on to the next beach(stretching the metaphor) and critiques are being offered for the “next big thing” in art, hopefully the printed word will still be fighting the good fight. We can hope that with the added impetus Art is bringing to the table, significant progress can be made in turning back the tide of the inexorable surveillance monster that’s gobbling up our privacy and freedoms. Speak up, people.
I think you’ve pointed out something important–this isn’t wrapping ribbons around islands (what was that about?), this is art directly in conversation with politics in ways that a lot of us can understand, in ways that broaden our perception of what’s going on. We need art like this.
I have seen an increasing interest in working with this subject matter here in NYC while attending the School of Visual Arts. Here is an example of some work on a level not as well known as say, Paglen, but “Essam” was very effective in his statement and his subsequent persecution by the NYPD was proof alone of why we need art like this more than ever.. http://www.freeessam.com
I should have included Essam in my list; thanks for pointing it out.
There’s also this bit of cinema verité, where the surveilled took a dislike to the surveillance. Angry Birds indeed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smv7cBzg-Ok
Love it!!! Thanks, Coram!
That’s what I call and interception, Hawk Ops!
Hawk ex machina.
Ubiquitous surveillance turns everyone into an artist. Life becomes a performance which is recorded, stored and then can be infinitely replayed, viewed and analyzed. We will endlessly critique each others lives, down to the most trivial details. Some will suffer from performance anxiety, others will wilt under the burden of outside expectations, but still others will find their true métier.
Benito
The totalitarian mind, like its wealthy cousin the corporate mind, will steal any and all cultural symbols, products, events and actions – even the very idea of being an artist – for its own particular dehumanizing and/or profit taking reasons. You may dress it up with flags and banners or try to evoke noble everyman sentiments and romanticism (we’re all stars now!) but it’s still theft and it’s still bullshit.
Beyond your “Trueman Show” hyper fantasy, having one’s data stolen or being caught up in surveillance – ubiquitous or not – makes one the “subject” and not the “artist.”
Nice try, though.
I suspect next you’ll be claiming it’s the bloodless surveillance state technocrats who are the true artists and that the rest of us just the lucky recipients of their attentions – if you’ve not already done so .
Because up is down.
BTW, love your schtick. : )
I do like your concept of the NSA as the ultimate “artist”. Their canvas is the supercomputer on which they create a digital representation of the lives of all humanity. Eventually, this immense work of art, housed at the data centre in Utah, will be appreciated as a masterpiece. It will provide a window, for future generations, into the lives of the inhabitants of the 21st century. As such, it might be said to represent our collective soul, as interpreted by the NSA.
Thank you, Benito for your gracious reply.
And what a work of art it will be.
For an added bonus, all forms of physical surveillance as understood today will no longer be necessary. Eventually – if not already – your masterpiece will begin to behave like a black hole, curving space/time in on itself and trapping massless particles of light velocity data, returning all paths to the singularity of the (NSA) centre.
Information will have no correlation to specific individuals or actions, and our beloved technocrats will become weavers of truth and certainty as needed.
Surely a perfect reality from your point of view.
Sometimes I wonder how seemingly “intelligent” people working in the “intelligence” community are blind to this montrosity they have unleashed on all of us, including them. When I think of how much good the hundreds of billions of dollars already spent on their(not mine) masterpiece, it saddens me greatly.How can they NOT see what they’re doing? My questions here are somewhat rhetorical but I’d still like to know the answers. I appreciate your comments, Benito. Speak up people.
“How can they NOT see what they’re doing?”
You’re likely looking for answers well beyond my understanding, but I’d point to dissociation, detachment, compartmentalization and illusion all helped along by a sense of power and a sizable paycheque.
But given time, those walls of delusion seem to crumble under the onslaught of cognitive distortion.
See: Speer, Albert & McNamara, Robert.
Benito, while it’s true that I wrote “surveillance – ubiquitous or not – makes one the “subject” and not the “artist” – which you then chose to focus on as your segue into the “masterpiece” bit – it in no way follows that those engaged in the surveillance of a subject are therefore artists. Also, despite your generous attribution, I was clearly suggesting that it would be you who might believe that notion and not at all that I would take that position myself .
Hey, I left that door ajar and I guess we had a bit of fun built on your somewhat less than logical interpretation.
But then, you are the trickster, aren’t you?