ON OUR WATCH

On Our Watch Oil on linen 36 x 56 cm 2020

I've been thinking about our current time of pandemic, protest, political mayhem, global strife and anxiety: I wrote the following, re: protests over historical statues, on Facebook and people seemed to like the idea. 

I've been thinking about the current furore over historical statues of people who are seen as representative of negative aspects of colonialism. Visual art clearly has power. It also offers ways to learn and question, so rather than destroy or discard these historical statues, how about commissioning contemporary artists to create work that responds to them. For example, historical pieces in tight spots could be moved to parks or other open spaces, where some historical statues are already situated, and new contemporary pieces can be placed with them. By doing this the pieces set up a visual dialogue that can inform us of the past, reminding us that the past delivers lessons for the present and the future. These new dialogues could involve historians, futurists & others along with artists. And, not only sculptors or 3D artists, but imagine open-air performances by actors/musicians/poets/dancers that respond to groupings of historical statues and contemporary sculpture/3D works. Imagine light shows, holographic work, or work that encourages audience/viewer participation. I envision a dynamism, that may not be comfortable, but it might potentially mean negative aspects of history help inform critiques and insights of not only the past, but also the present - and potentially - help us pave a positive and sustainable future.

Imagine too, how these kinds of projects would generate work and income for artists of all kinds!

HISTORY AND THE PRESENT

History offers an array of dastardly acts, immoral behaviours, cruel intentions, evil doings, gross discriminations, acts of proprietorial hubris and perverse prejudices. History also offers an array of remarkable achievements, acts of valour and bravery, demonstrations of learning, revelations of science, feats of cultural excellence and intellectual prowess. History offers an array of lessons for a present that can also claim both dastardly acts and commendable behaviours. 

Have we learnt history's lessons? Can we learn history's lessons? How do we learn history's lessons?

ON OUR WATCH

While I was painting my new work On Our Watch I was thinking about how contemporary threats to freedoms, futures, lives, environment and well-being are perpetrated and perpetuated. Unfortunately, I 'see' new modes of empire, created by techno-colonising forces.* These new kinds of empire potentially replicate similar biases, prejudices, acts of usury, violence and control that characterised many of the negative aspects of historical empire building. As invisible or hidden signals connect devices and nodes, they volumetrically occupy territory from land to orbiting satellites. New types of territorial and domestic infiltration, colonisation and empire building pose sovereign and individual threats - election manipulations, cyber-attacks, fake news, identity theft, the dark web, surveillance, targeting of all kinds eg: by advertisers, governments or weaponsied drones. 

In On Our Watch I have painted two Sky Guardian drones. The small blue squares mimic pixels, representing the ubiquity of digital technology. I have deliberately chosen the colour blue to suggest a 'take-over' of landscape/territory by virtual and simulated landscape proxies. Fake landscape! The drones are armed with multi-penile-like red missiles, ready and erect for action. I have chosen Sky Guardian drones because in late 2019 it was announced that this drone is the RAAF's preferred acquisition choice. It was chosen over the MQ-9A Reaper drone because it is "able to be certified to fly in civilian airspace". I will leave you to think about that.

Regular readers will identify the red tree as my version of the transcultural/religious tree-of-life. It represents life and humanity. The tree appears to be on fire. Has it been hit by a real or metaphoric missile? Will the tree recover?

I have previously painted 'pixelated' drones - images below. 

 Anomaly Detection 2 Oil on linen 120 x 180 cm 2017

 Anomaly Detection Gouache on paper 56 x 76 cm 2017

New Sky? Gouache on paper 57 x 76 cm 2016

Cheers,

Kathryn

DRONE SHOW

Drone Show oil on linen 122 x 152 cm 2020

This painting was sparked by a few thoughts. And, now that it is done, it is sparking a few more thoughts.

I called the painting Drone Show because the weaponise-able drones are in a formation, as if performing. There are three types of drones - Reapers, Predators and X47Cs. It's like a parade of drones! I choose the word parade deliberately, its connection with military parades acting as a provocation.

Perspective and Imaginational Metaveillance

As with many of my paintings, the viewer could be below the drones looking up at a wild cosmic sky, or the viewer could be above the drones, looking down upon a turbulent but beautiful landscape. Once this play with perspective is realised, the viewer can 'fly', in imagination, soaring above, below and around the drones. I love to play with perspective by inviting viewers to 'fly'. It turns a unique human kind of surveillance back onto the drones. I call this an act of 'imaginational metaveillance'. It is uniquely human because it involves imagination - something machine learning and artificial intelligence are not capable of - some aspirational tech-bros may so 'not yet'. 

I argue that imagination, or a simulation of imagination, are capabilities no-one should aspire to enable an AI or an AGI with. If this is an aspiration then its more about creating an artificial human rather than an artificial intelligence.   

Light Shows

I also called the painting Drone Show to reference displays of civilian drones programmed to perform mesmerising light shows. These kinds of performances are, for example, great substitutes for fireworks. Although the drones in these performances are pre-programmed they represent a basic form of drone swarming technology. A sophisticated drone swarm will have more autonomous functions - geo-locating, orienting, target identification and so on. While militarised drone swarming technology is still being developed in a number of countries, a drone swarm could, among other things, be armed, be used as a swarm of weapons, act as a surveillance net or scaffold signal transmission to other assets. Suddenly the idea of a 'light show' becomes more ominous.

Aesthetic Seduction

I have painted each of the drones in Drone Show with different colours. I have painted the drones in a pattern, a diamond pattern. This pattern, the colours and the wild beauty of the landscape/skyscape draw the viewer closer. Once close, the drones becomes more apparent. Why are they there? I am using aesthetic seduction to create a shock, to garner attention and to stimulate questions about drone technology. A militarised drone's function stands in sharp contrast to the beauty which is evident in the painting. This is a deliberate means of arresting the viewer's attention. I know many people are critically interested in drone technology, but I have noticed that many others are either in awe or indifferent to it. Both awe and indifference are potentially dangerous. Awe and indifference are risks.

Drone technology - civilian and militarised - needs our attention! 

One of my concerns is that civilian drone technology can potentially be militarised. Militarise-ability, by state or non-state actors is a vulnerability. 

Imagine a 'light show' of civilian drones that have been militarised by malign forces! 

On the not-so-happy note,

Cheers,

Kathryn

Other posts of interest:

Imaginational Metaveillance

WINGMAN

Sad Thinkings: Risk and Imagination

Martial Map

THE WIND ASKS, WHICH DIRECTION?

The Wind Asks, Which Direction? Oil on linen 81 x 102 cm 2019

This new painting The Wind Asks, Which Direction? is connected to another painting called Beware, Whispers the Wind [below]. 

In both paintings I am interested in how virtual landscapes and landscapes with superimposed screen-based computer graphics mediate our relationship with, and understanding of, environment. In The Wind Asks, Which Direction? red and white lines mimic computer graphics overlaid onto a landscape which could be real or not real? Is this an image from a computer game, or maybe an image on a remote drone pilot's computer screen? A compass exposes a tension between the real and not real, its four cardinal points are all 'N'. But does this 'N' mean 'north', or does it mean 'no direction', 'nowhere', 'nihilism', 'nothingness'? The compass has no dial.

Tree-of-life

Red trees-of-life, positioned in the background landscape, sway in the wind. However, one sways one way and the other sways in the opposite direction. Does this mean there is turbulence out in the landscapes of reality, the wind agitating for our attention? Does it indicate that when the wind blows in one place, it can blow another way in a different place - like in real life? Maybe the trees attempt to restore reality by demonstrating that the wind still exists? But, could these trees be sending a warning, that direction is lost in a world where the fake compass, a metaphor for the 21st century, has wielded its influence? The red trees-of-life differ from the white trees 'planted' on the red line graphic. The white trees are the same colour as the compass. The trees are as fake as the fake compass. What are we witnessing?

Pixels

The tension between reality and the virtual is also indicated by the small squares of colour that appear to form parts of the landscape. These squares mimic pixels. Are they indicators that the background landscape is a computer generated image? Or, do they indicate that this landscape pretends to be virtual, as a subterfuge - a strategic measure of exposure. Or, do they warn us that pixels are indicators of images formulated and generated for humans by machines - after all, machine learning and AI tools do not really need a generated image to scope for data?  

Resistance

As a painting The Wind Asks, Which Direction? act as a resistance. It does so by not relying on digital and cyber platforms for creation, exhibition and storage. Although not reliant on these platforms painting can still critique - and - from a distance, where there is room for perspective.

The Wind Asks, Which Direction? and Beware, Whispers the Wind are examples of my attempts to visually think through how militarised and militarise-able systems, platforms and devices occupy,  mediate and militarise landscape and extended environment. 

My Painting I Painted The Wind [bottom] was painted in 2001.

Cheers,

Kathryn

 Beware, Whispers the Wind  Oil on linen 61 x 97 cm 2019

I Painted the Wind Oil on linen 80 x 120 cm 2001

TARGET

Target Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016

Target

Fellow Brisbane-based artist Pamela See and I have collaborated on an animation [above] of my painting Target [top]. This was a interesting process for me to undertake, and I am grateful to Pamela for her suggestion to animate the work. 

Storytelling

As I reflect on the animation process, and the decisions made about how and what to animate, I am triggered to think about storytelling. As a painting Target contains a multiple of possible stories. It is up to the viewer to imagine what these might be. The painting, in a way, is a provider of clues or stimulants. The animation, however, is a story. This is because duration of time allows for a sequence of events to unfold. In this case a drone hovers around a tree - the tree-of-life. The drone briefly disappears, only to reappear as it spills forth two more drones. This swarm of drones then circles the tree-of-life. Suddenly the tree disappears and the drones fly off. 

How you interpret what the story might mean, is up to you.

And, More Storytelling

An alternative story, however, could be that as a drone hovers around the tree-of-life, branches from the tree reach out and circle [possibly strangle] the drone. As proliferating branches fill the screen the drone disappears. Another alternative story is that rather than the drone multiplying, maybe the tree could multiply as a 'swarm' of trees. These trees could circle the drone, and then the drone disappears. Or, rather than three drones swarming around the tree, hundreds of drones could plague the tree. Or, as the drones circle the tree, the tree's roots could become visible as they spread out, obviously continuing beyond the screen. 

There are lots of possible stories. 

I will leave it to you to imagine your own now. 

This is what I wrote about Target when I painted it in 2016. 

"The armed drone seems to target the tree - my representation of the tree-of-life. Yet, the cosmic landscape indicates, perhaps, that this painting depicts something from another world of time and place. Maybe the tree targets the drone?"

EXHIBITION    My Optic    IN NORWAY

At Arteriet Gallery

Pamela and I will be exhibiting various works in a group exhibition with Svetlana Trefilova, David Harris, and Li Gang at Arteriet, a not-for-profit gallery in Kristiansand, Norway. The gallery has a focus on contemporary art and technology.

The group exhibition My Optic pays homage to the emergence of the artist, as a profession, at the turn of the fifteen century. During the Renaissance art was considered a science due to its exploration of optics.

Exhibition date 4 - 11 July. Further information about the gallery is available at: http://www.arteriet.no/

Drone Shadow Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016

EXHIBITION IN BRISBANE

26 August - 8 September 

POP Gallery, 381 Brunswick St, Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 

POP Gallery is one of the Queensland College of Art, Griffith University, galleries. 

I will keep you posted with exact details over the next few weeks.

Cheers,

Kathryn

CHARTING THE INVISIBLE

Charting the Invisible Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2019

Charting the Invisible is another of my paintings that 'exposes' how signals operatively enable contemporary technologies to function in a networked and inter-connected manner. Without connectivity, many devices would be useless or near useless. By 'charting' the normally invisible connectivity and inter-connectivity of the modern technological world this painting can be understood as a kind of counter-map. Here, I focus on the 'map' as a subversive exposure and demonstration of the connection between militarised and civilian technologies. When you consider that security and policing activities are increasingly blurred with military activities, the militarise-ability of civilian technologies is an issue. Does this make everything dual-use? Additionally, while security, policing and military activities are generally considered necessary by many, malign entities using networked and inter-connected systems are more than unwanted interlopers. 

NODES AND DEVICES

Like my last painting and post Martial Map I have painted lines that join nodes and devices. These lines represent signal connections. For example, a ground control station is linked to an airborne weaponised drone. This control station is also linked to a communication satellite, which is also linked to the drone. The drone is linked to a mobile phone, also linked to the GPS and communication satellite. The phone is linked, then, to a car, and a computer. Some nodes and devices send signals beyond the edges of the painting, to indicate connection to other devices and nodes. And, there are more connections between all the devices, and some connections are still invisible!

TECHNO-COLONISATION

While the painting can be read as some kind of map, the cosmic landscape background positions the viewer in an ambiguous perspective. Is the viewer above or below, in front or behind, the net of signals? If they are below, the sky is netted, if they are above the planet is netted. If they are in front or behind the nets act as walls. Here, the netted appearance is important to me, as I 'see' this signal-net as an imposition on landscape, an occupier of space and a sign of a new kind of colonistion, a techno colonisation that holds us all hostage. Given the militarise-ability of civilian technology, in addition to designated militarised technology, does this colonisation come with a persistent readiness for defensive and offensive actions? If so, are we in a constant state of war preparedness, where the near light-speed delivery of data and instructions via signals expunges time for peace?  

On that 'happy' note.

Cheers,

Kathryn

MARTIAL MAP

Martial Map Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm

I have returned from overseas. In Toronto I presented on a round-table, themed to war preparedness, at the International Studies Association annual conference. I then had meetings in London and Berlin. 

EXHIBITIONS

And, I saw a lot of art, from the Rembrandt exhibition at the Rijks Museum in Amsterdam, to Is This Tomorrow at the Whitechapel Gallery in London, to Hito Steyerl's Power Plants exhibition at the Serpentine Gallery, London. Two exhibitions at the KW Institute in Berlin still occupy my thoughts. The exhibitions showed works by David Wojnarowicz and Reza Abdoh. Both artists brutally, honestly and sensorially reflected upon the AIDS crisis of the 1980s/early 1990s. I saw a number of exhibitions in Berlin, including Cian Dayrit's thought provoking counter mapping/cartography exhibition Beyond the Gods Eye at Nome Gallery. And, at C/O Gallery I saw two provocative photographic exhibitions - Double Take by duo Cortis and Sonderegger, and Before Sleeping/ After Drinking, a survey show of work by Boris Mikhailov. Matthew Day Jackson's exhibition Pathetic Fallacy at Hauser and Wirth, Somerset was a highlight. This quote from the gallery site gives you an idea about Day Jackson's motivation in this exhibition, "The overarching conceit is an interest in our compulsion to document, map and systemise our natural world as a method for understanding nature." Day Jackson's exhibition and Dayrit's exhibition were both highlights.

COUNTER MAPPING?

Since returning home the idea of counter cartography or mapping has occupied my thoughts. Are my paintings, where I expose signals that enable drone operations, a kind of counter mapping? In many of my paintings I paint proliferating nets of signals as imposed topographies that occupy landscape, from land into space. This volumetric occupation, I 'see', as a techno-colonisation of landscape and environment, facilitating an insidious control and manipulation of human behaviour and movement. I call my paintings 'new landscapes in the drone age'.

By exposing the nets of signals that enable militarised and militarise-able technologies I manifest a kind of map. These paintings expose the invisible, thus resisting techno-military forces by drawing attention to the insidiousness of inter-connectivity and networking. Additionally, the medium of painting enables the exposure of signals without relying on contemporary technologies that utilise connectivity, networking, for example, cloud storage, downloaded software - the internet. While I might upload images, the process of creation remains discrete. 

Martial Map 

The idea for Martial Map was inspired by reflecting upon IR scholar Antoine Bousquet's book Eye of War: Military Perception from the Telescope to the Drone. In this book Bousquet provides a compelling historical perspective on what he calls the development of the "martial gaze", the human eye's conscription into surveillance, targeting and destruction. But, the human eye cannot see signals. Yet, once Heinrich Hertz first transmitted and received radio waves in 1886, radio communication opened the door to modern day connectivity and networking, the enabling signal forces of contemporary militarised and militarise-able technologies. 

The word 'martial' describes something that is related to or suitable for war, related to military life or inclined to war. Martial Map shows how various nodes can be linked, and inter-linked. I have painted various nodes; GPS and communication satellites, credit cards with chips, a cruise liner, home security technology, a digital tv, a drone's ground control station, human beings holding a mobile phone, a car, 'cloud' storage in the form of a huge building, a fitbit, a street surveillance camera, airport security apparatus, a relay aerial and three weaponised airborne drones. The painting suggests how civilian technologies can be conscripted into the militarised network. Dual-use is clearly  a highly problematic and diffused concept in the contemporary world. 

Cheers,

Kathryn

BEWARE, WHISPERS THE WIND

Beware, Whispers The Wind oil on linen 61 x 97 cm 

Beware, Whispers The Wind 

An armed Reaper drone creates a false horizon across a landscape. The drone's wings slice through the air. Its wide area surveillance system hangs like a bulbous probe below the aircraft's chassis. Four Hellfire missiles and two guided missiles are poised ready for release. 

Orienting graphics impose a virtual map under the drone. This map penetrates the landscape, its virtual presence indicating that it can operate anywhere, everywhere. From screen to screen, its data driven operation isolates kill zones as the drone's sensors harvest more data to facilitate full spectrum dominance.

The drone's sensors are invisibly connected by signals to enabling devices on land and in space. Operational signals instruct the harvesting of data from other networked devices; domestic, civilian and military. An invisible cartography of signals nets planet Earth with instructional codes operating outside human dimensions of space and time.  

With Beware, Whispers The Wind I wanted to play with the tension between reality and virtuality. The white drone and white lines mimic the appearance of computer graphics. Is the painting an image of a computer screen? Or, is the tumultuous and colourful landscape real?  The viewer could be facing the drone, on a screen, from another aircraft or maybe you are a bird? The viewer could also be looking down upon a drone that soars upwards, the orienting graphics creating a virtual abyss. Maybe the drone is coming into land, somewhere on a screen, on a tarmac or on our collective subconscious?

But, on a distant horizon the red tree-of-life stands as a beacon. As it leans to one side it shows us the presence of the wind. Does the wind exist in a virtual world? Is the tree-of-life and the wind sending us a message? 

What do you think?

                                                 NEWS

I am on a roundtable at the International Studies Association annual conference in Toronto. The roundtable will be discussing "Researching War Preparedness: Challenges, theories and inter/disciplinary possibilities". Wednesday 27th 8.15-10 am.

I am thrilled to be talking about my paintings where I suggest that signals represent a techno-colonisation of landscape from land, to sky, and into space! That these signals enable networking and interconnection  across civilian and military systems poses the question - are we in a perpetual state of war preparedness/readiness, for offensive and defensive activities? 

DETAILS 

Researching War Preparedness: Challenges, theories and inter/disciplinary possibilities

Participants:

• Chair: Mark J. Lacy (Lancaster University)
• Discussant: Maria Stern (University of Gothenburg)
• Discussant: Mark J. Lacy (Lancaster University)
• Participant: Christine Agius (Swinburne University)
• Participant: Helen Dexter (The University of Leicester)
• Participant: Kathryn Brimblecombe-Fox  (University of Queensland)
• Participant: Victoria M Basham (Cardiff University )
• Participant: Hannah-Marie Chidwick (University of Bristol)
• Participant: Sara Matthews [Wilfrid Laurier] 

Abstract: 
This roundtable examines the possibilities and (interdisciplinary) prospects for advancing knowledge on war preparedness. In international relations and security studies, an overwhelming focus is on conflict and warfare, and while work on conflict prevention has a strong presence, war preparedness if often overlooked or only briefly addressed. War preparedness has been confined to military strategizing and predictive schemas and historicised too, with dominant associations focused on Cold War nuclear planning or civil defence during the Second World War. Preparing for war, however, is not solely an activity or ethos that is authored by state militaries. It requires the inculcation of citizens, public and private spaces and technologies, and is an ever-present part of everyday practices, images, discourses, and ideologies. Understanding war preparedness is vital for grasping how we theorise war and violence over time and space. Importantly, identifying how war preparedness is operationalised and rationalised requires critical engagement with dominant ideologies and material developments. This roundtable will explore the possibilities for theorising war preparedness and how interdisciplinary approaches may inform new approaches to understanding war preparedness and what this can also mean for peace.

Cheers,

Kathryn

PAY ATTENTION: THE DRONES ARE HERE

 Pay Attention: The Drones Are Here Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2019

AUSTRALIA AND DRONES

Australia is playing an increasingly active part in the development and procurement of airborne drones for military and associated purposes. Airborne drones are used for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance [ISR] purposes, with certain types of drones also capable of carrying weapon payloads.

Examples are::

*MQ 9B Sky Guardian drones have been chosen in favour of MQ 9 Reaper Drones. You can read about this decision HERE in Flight Global. These drones are weaponisable. For background on this decision please check out HERE in an Australian Financial Review article , and HERE is a Defense News: Asia Pacific article.

Triton surveillance drones are also on order. You can read about this news on the Australian Airforce website HERE

And, another drone will be manufactured here in Australia in partnership with Boeing. Currently called the "Loyal Wingman" project, you can read about it on the ABC News site HERE. And, an announcement on the current Defence Minister, Christopher Pyne's website HERE. And, on Boeing's website HERE

Australian defence forces have used surveillance drones for some time. For example the Scan Eagle drone has been used in Iraq and Afghanistan. You can read a 2007 article about the Scan Eagle drone HERE at Defence News. You can also read about a Scan Eagle drone now in the Australian War Memorial's collection HERE

* Updated Dec 3, 2019

 Not Waiting For The Future Gouache on paper 56 x 76 cm 2018

QUESTIONS

As Australia becomes more involved in militarised drone operations, procurement and developments, questions that are already being debated globally need to be debated here too. For example, questions about remote operations - surveillance, targeting and killing. The use of unmanned aircraft with sophisticated ISR capabilities, and possible weapon payloads, raises questions about asymmetric warfare. Increasingly autonomous systems employing machine learning and AI raise questions, for example, about human-in-the-loop decision making and the ethics of machine killing. The contemporary 'warfighter' could be a human being, but also an [semi] autonomous  machine. 

The appropriation of technological infrastructure and systems for surveillance and targeting purposes raises questions about the neutrality, or not, of contemporary interconnected technologies. What part does interconnected technology play in preemptive activities? The increasingly blurred lines between military, security and policing activities raise questions about the nature of  contemporary warfare, and its battle fields and spaces. The accelerating nature of technological development stimulates questions about the future of war, and the future of humanity. Are we in a new arms race? Questions about the role of science and technology come to mind. As do questions about legal and ethical frameworks that can be applied to accelerating developments. The speed of technological operation raises further questions that feed into debates about asymmetric war, human involvement, networked systems, social vulnerability, geopolitics, and more...and more.

Since 2015 I have been thinking about these types of questions. I have also undertaken formal research, completing an M. Phil [University of Queensland] that included research into contemporary militarised technology, particularly airborne drones.  

FIVE PAINTINGS

In this post I have included five paintings that reflect upon Australia and airborne drones. 

Pay Attention: The Drones Are Here [top] is my newest painting. An armed drone is pointed towards an upside-down Australia. Is the drone a new arrival, soon to join its Australian fleet? Maybe it is an Australian drone, maybe not. Australia is upside down on purpose, actually a few purposes! The small squares give the impression of pixels. Is the image a simulation? Are you another drone gazing down upon the scene? Is the painting a screen shot? Or, are you a human engaging your imagination in a way that turns human surveillance back onto the drone? Regular readers will recognise the cosmic perspective I love to use here - like in the other four paintings too. Lots of interesting questions and scenarios!

I'll leave you to ponder now. 

Cheers, Kathryn

 Aeropolitics Imagined Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016

 What If? Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016

Hot Spots Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016

HUMAN: Recognition, Identification, Targeting

HUMAN Oil on linen 31 x 36 cm 2019

In both these paintings, HUMAN  and Where to Hide? (below), I play with ideas of algorithmic human identification, and reasons for this identification. Clearly, as the cross-hairs indicate, I am thinking about targeting. However, reasons for targeting can range from orders to kill, to targeting by entities such as advertisers, pollsters, corporations, and governments. These seemingly benign entities target to seduce buyers, persuade voters, and to muster people into standardised behaviour [particularly online]. In this interconnected and networked age, the data that is collected, however, could/can be used to aid identification and targeting for more deadly purposes.

In both paintings I have appropriated the appearance of a computer screen or lens, giving a sense of removal from the scene eg: similar to remote airborne drone operations. But, is the operator human or machine? The algorithm of binary code 'instructing' HUMAN at the bottom of each painting references the use of machine learning to assist in target identification. Global debates about whether autonomous systems should go further and make the ultimate 'kill' decision have regularly occurred since 2013, eg: CCW at UNOG. However, politics and the law, are fast outpaced by enhancements in technological applications and systems developments.

HUMAN/HUMAN BEING
I purposefully did not 'instruct' in binary code the words HUMAN BEING because I wanted the single word HUMAN to suggest that algorithms identify using data-derived characteristics of humankind. While individuals are certainly targets, humanity is also in the cross-hairs, but do we realise it? Also, while individuals are targeted standardisation of characteristics leads to biases and mistakes, and the possibility of further standardisation. Could standardisation could pose a an existential threat?

TREE-OF-LIFE
I have painted the shadows of the seemingly targeted figures as trees-of-life. For me this indicates things the algorithm cannot access, like imagination and dreams. Each tree-shadow is an individual, representing life in all its array of personal and ancestral history, biology, spirit and soul. Can these all be reduced to data?

But, the tree-of-life represents another kind of 'code' of life, one that also speaks to humanity as a whole. The tree-of-life with its array of branches, twigs and leaves, stands in contrast with the zeros and ones. I am reminded of Jean Baudrillard's observation about a digital destiny where it will be "possible to measure everything by the same extremely reductive yardstick: the binary, the alternation between 0 and 1". (1) Here, standardisation can be viewed as a reductive process to enable the kind of measurement Baudrillard suggests. The tree stands as a resolute beacon of hope!

LANDSCAPE
HUMAN and Where to Hide? are part of my ongoing quest to represent landscape in ways that pose questions about humanity's future and the planet's future. I  think about computer graphics, imaging technology, invisible signals and undersea cables that enable networked operations. Are inter-connectivity and networking processes examples of standardisation? Is targeting made easier in a world netted by militarised and militarise-able signals that perhaps perpetuate standardisation? Is there anywhere to hide in a standardised environment?

There is more to say, but I will leave that up to you.

Cheers,
Kathryn

---

[1] Jean Baudrillard, Passwords, trans. Chris Turner (London and New York: Verso, 2003), 76.

Where to Hide? Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2019

LANDSCAPE DECEPTION

 Pacific Currents Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2019

DECEPTION

What do I mean by 'Landscape Deception", the title of this blog post? I think it can mean a number of things  eg: perhaps landscape itself employs deceptive means, perhaps landscape is hijacked by fake landscapes that deceive? 

Regular readers know of my long-term interest in landscape generally, and my more specific interest in what I call the militarisation of landscape. I see the latter as an insidious occupation of landscape by the signalling systems that enable near light speed operation of miltiarised technology and militarise-able technology. Here, I not only include things like drone operation, but also, things like manipulation of social media, hacking into financial and communication systems, monitoring of personal devices, access to personal data and so on. That militarisable technology includes civilian systems reliant on signals and cables, and their associated infrastructure such as satellites, data centres, relay stations, cannot be ignored.

The three new paintings in this post reflect upon ideas of deceptive landscape, or the deception of landscape. 

PACIFIC CURRENTS

MULTI MISSION

Pacific Currents [above] depicts the flow of Pacific water currents on the left. On the right I have painted a map of the undersea cables that connect across the Pacific ocean. These undersea cables, while tangible, are also essentially invisible. Yet, they enable the operation of 21st century networked technology. 

In Multi Mission [below] cabling from Creech airbase in the Nevada desert connects with the US Air Force base in Ramstein, Germany. From there signals sent to and from a satellite enable airborne drones to undertake missions. Signals sent by subterranean and undersea cables, and signals sent by wave frequencies into and from space, are invisible. I 'see' them as creating new 'topographies' that net the planet from underground/sea to space. 

 Multi Mission Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 

DECEPTION PERSPECTIVE

The invisibility of these new 'topographies' can be associated with deception. In Deception Perspective [below] I have painted cross-hairs to create an illusion of perspective. That the cross-hair on a camera or gun helps draw a subject/victim closer cannot be ignored. It is a way of using targeted perspective. 

In the painting I have painted three large red cross-hairs in a row. I have then painted white cross-hairs in diminishing sizes to give the illusion of perspective. These cross-hairs parody the cross-hairs on lenses, computer screens, imaging devices. They are part of the insidiously invisible signaling net that wraps the planet, the new landscape of deception.

So, is landscape deceived or deceiving. Are we deceived or are some of us deceiving? Is anyone even aware of what is happening?

These three paintings are part of my - signalscapes, dronescapes, militarised landscapes work
Cheers,
Kathryn

LIFE + RISK + LEAVES

 Cosmic Testimony Gouache on paper 56 x 76 cm 2017

As I mentioned in my last post, I am on crutches with a full leg brace. It is difficult to stand and sit at a desk for a long period of time, let alone sit in a car. I am 1.8 m tall with long legs and when one of these legs cannot bend and the other has a slight injury, even simple things are difficult. I hope to get back to my studio practice asap though!

LEAVES
In this post I present three paintings from 2017. Each of the paintings includes leaves. In my mind they are leaves that have fallen from the tree-of-life. Each of these paintings also include figures. As regular readers know I do not often include figures as I am careful not to appropriate other people's stories. However, the tree-of-life is often my figure substitute, a symbolic representation of human life and all life, at the same time.

The Leaves are Leaving Gouache on paper 56 x 76 cm 2017

Each of the three paintings also include radiating lines that appear like the rays of the sun. But, are they? Well, they could be, if that's what you want to believe. However, for me, they are the surveillance and targeting signals of an airborne drone.That the signals take on a fake sunshine appearance is deliberate.

I ask, what are we not noticing? What risks are we oblivious to? Are we noticing the effects of ubiquitous surveillance? Are we noticing what is happening to the leaves of the tree-of-life?

Leaves can fall off a tree because the tree is deciduous. The fallen leaves provide mulch on the ground. A cycle of life continues as the tree, in springtime, sprouts new leaves. But, leaves can fall off a tree due to lack of water, heat stress or poisoning. The leaves fall as the tree dies.

The leaves in my paintings are metaphors.........................................

Cheers,
Kathryn

Can the Leaves Still Dance? Gouache on paper 56 x 76 cm 2017

FAKE EYES: IN THE SKY

Fake Eyes-In-The-Sky Oil on linen 30 x 45 cm 2018

EYE IN THE SKY

An airborne drone is sometimes called an 'eye in the sky'. In fact, there is a movie called  Eye In The Sky . Starring Helen Mirren the movie presents various dilemmas associated with targeting and attack decision making by remote drone operators and other defence personnel. 

What sort of questions are posed by calling an unmanned air vehicle, which is remotely piloted and weaponised, an eye in the sky? Firstly there are questions about attributing the machine with animal, human or a non-human, abilities ie: seeing. Can a drone really see? Is imaging technology really representative of an eye, or a set of eyes? Is machine vision, in terms of autonomous reviewing of image data collected by a drone feed, another kind of seeing? What are the existential implications if we ascribe human abilities to increasingly autonomous machine systems? Do we inadvertently relinquish something?

I have previously written about the  the word 'vision' used in terms such as 'drone vision' and 'machine vision'. Vision, when associated with human vision, is not only about seeing, but also dreaming, imagining and visionary thinking. For example,. I 'see'pictures in my head when i read a book, even a non-fiction book! Can a drone dream, imagine or come up with some kind of visionary idea? The answer is no. Can machine vision, tasked with reviewing image data, imagine or dream? No, it scopes rather than sees. If anomalies are detected does machine vision then imagine outcome scenarios of what might happen, like a human would imagine? 

BLINDNESS

Ascribing human abilities of seeing and vision to the machine may, paradoxically, blind us! That poses the question, if a drone can see, is drone blindness also possible? This, I think, really penetrates the question, can a drone see, because blindness is about not seeing rather than being turned off or being dead. Human blindness does not exclude other kinds of vision - dreaming, imagining and visionary thinking. That a drone cannot dream, imagine or come up with visionary ideas indicates a kind of blindness that raises further questions about ascribing human abilities of sight and vision to the machine. 

There must be alternative words to describe a drone's imaging capabilities and machine vision capabilities - the one I have come up with is scoping. Scoping does not indicate abilities to imagine or dream, but it does indicate abilities to target and attack. 

Fake Eyes-In-The-Sky

In my painting Fake Eyes-In-The-Sky two fake eyes hover, each painted with small 'pixels'. The red and green colours indicate night scoping and infrared technologies. Drones are not 'eyes-in-the-sky, they are scope-in-the-sky! Each fake eyes' pupils are centred in a scope's cross hairs. These eye-drones are clearly scopes, camera and/or weapon, their signals aimed at the tree-of-life, a white beacon in the distance. 

That the tree provides perspective is indicative of hope. 

Fake Eyes-In-The-Sky is another dronescape, plus it is a cosmicscape. Apart from being an exploration of contemporary weaponised technology, it is also a landscape. 

____________________________________________________

My last post was called Seeing Through the Fake Window

You might also like to read The Drone: Do Not Embody

Cheers,

Kathryn

BEWARE THE SHADOW

Beware the Shadow Oil on linen 30 x 30 cm 2018

As a metaphor, the shadow represents the dark side. 

In my painting Beware the Shadow a shadow drone appears to be armed. The dark side, armed!  Does this mean that the shadow reveals the truth, that the white drone is weaponised with concealed technology that can target and kill? Does the shadow reveal a blindness to reality? In Beware the Shadow, the weapons are metaphors too.

If you stand back from your screen, this painting appears very 3D!

I have previously written about drone shadows, for example, Shadowy Drone Play and Drone Life Shadow Play

 Drone Life Shadow Play Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016

Shadowy Drone Play Gouache on paper 30 x 42 cm 2016

Cheers,

Kathryn