Extracted Interview with Alessandro Ludovico for
Neural / Issue 32 - Machine Affection (spring 2009)

You defined your artistic practice as "minimal robotics". In this exemplary definition, you
wanted to include a specific aesthetic and / or its attitude to be the ideal basic element
for sustainable robot projects?
-
I chose this term with a certain reference to Minimal Art, an art form of the late 1960s
and early 1970s: a reduced design combined with stripped elementary electronics,
mostly without a designed cover or wrapping/packaging. Moreover, simple basic circuit
concepts (primary structures), few electronic components, very little power consumption
and minimal output. I think my robotic installations act as a reference to other
kinetic/robotic art and electronic sound installations, because they enable us to
experience the elementary essence of electricity (chaotic charge and discharge,
complex transformation processes). In relation to power consumption and autonomy
they also represent an ideal for sustainable robot projects. And my installations are
extremly limited due to the way they are constructed, not able to develop any further,
unable to complete duties or manage complex interactions.
[.....]-
--
In some installations you hid chirping solarsoundmodul-based robots in the wild, and I
remember that once I was experiencing them and I started wondering which sound
came from a real bird and which one from one of your small robots. Were you able to
"measure" if, and how your "autonomous audio kinetic installations" were able to
dialogue with other living beings?
-
No, I can’t read out or measure these things. There are lots of varied elementary
interactions. All the modules are interconnected with the outside world - the solar
modules act as energy supply and sensor. The specific local light setting is converted
into sound, rhythm and movement. The modules are hyper-sensitive, they respond
differently to light incidence, light intensity, temperature, wind, as well as humidity and
rain. Further they are subject to daily and seasonal cycles. In the past I made some
experiments with interlinking modules and plants. The modules reacted to the plant’s
capacity, which depends on the plant’s water balance. A simple communication
mechanism can be observed, since the plant is stimulated differently by the modules
dependent on changes in the plant’s metabolism. Watching the plant over a longer
period I could detect some minor changes in its growth. Sometimes the communication
is a bit fuzzy (diffuse). For instance, in installations with lots of vibration motors I
sometimes find accumulations of spiders, having their webs built between the modules
and communicating with each other in a curious way.
[.....]
--
The acoustic fields in your installations is matched with micro mechanical movements in
what you call "living particles," expressing what used to be called "electronic life-forms."
In your opinion is the correspondence between quality kinetic and sound that indicate
something alive for us?
-
Yes, that's right. It is the correspondence between kinetics and sound which reaches the
viewer. Also a certain sound and kinetic aesthetics is needed. The sound as well as the
kinetic patterns of the Living Particles are based on identical circuit designs of charge
and recharge of lowest energy quantities. Besides there are internal connections
between the various modules. Therefore an invisible energy correspondence exists on
the one hand and an effect correspondence, such as sounds and movement, on the
other. Both permanently synchronize and the pulsing of the system feels familiar to us. I
believe that this is noticeable and it allows us to sense a certain living quality in this
bare system of electronic parts and wires.
[.....]
--
In the last decade you've conducted dozens of workshops. Which are the most
interesting reactions of participants you've noted, during and after the creation of their
small robotic creatures? Are they based on age and profession (kids reacts differently
from artists; for example)?
-
The participants always enjoy the workshops. It is a lot of fun to build your own robotic
creature. As soon as the circuit starts working the robots begin to sing and jerk - there is
always a great Hello. It’s a magic moment and the constructor’s pride is often mixed with
a little fear, that continuing soldering could possibly damage the just created little robot.
Time and again it is amazing to see, that such a wimpy, handcrafted creature can
arouse empathy, can even activate a certain care in the builder. Kids mostly respond
stronger and their creatures are also more felicitous and coherent. It is difficult to say
why, but childlike curiosity and imagination fits perfect with simple analogue electronics.
In recent years I organized more and more parent-child workshops together with
Christian Faubel (derstrudel.org). Together adults and kids sit and realize their robot
projects and age and profession have no relevance any more.
--
How long the sound creatures you create during the workshops are supposed to last?
How many creatures have been created so far?
-
Due to the fact that there are no wear parts, they should last several decades - probably
considerably longer. But in reality the robots often already get damaged during their
transport home (wires are ripped off etc.) and can't be fixed again by the participants
themselves because there is no soldering iron at hand. For some time now Christian
Faubel is thinking about opening a "robot hospital", where participants can sent their
broken self-built robots and get them repaired for free. I think we should offer this service
very soon. It is difficult to say how many robots have been created yet, but so far a lot
more than one thousand creatures have been built in about 70 workshops.