Re:Humanism Art Prize 2020
An interview with Daniela Cotimbo, heart, head and soul of Re:Humanism
The idea, the genesis, the first call, the ten winners awarded at La Galleria Nazionale di Roma, the exhibition at Albumarte, the Cultural Association, all the way up to “RE:DEFINE THE BOUNDARIES”, the new call arriving at MAXXI in 2021.
Contemporary art, artificial intelligence, humanism, would you tell us how was the idea of Re:Humanism born? What is the path that will lead you, next May, to the MAXXI Museum?
Re:Humanism was born in 2018 after a chat with Alfredo Adamo, CEO of Alan Advantage, who is the hearth of every initiative we promote. Alfredo had been in Boston for one of his annual visits and there he got exposed to a series of opinions and inputs by several stakeholders. They were all talking about the strong need humankind has to refocus technological development on design and sustainability. Values of which Italy has been advocate for centuries.
To me, as an art historian and curator, the link between his suggestions and contemporary art was immediate. We thought of an art prize since this was the best way to have a clear idea about the most interesting realities in the industry and the result of the first edition was astounding. To be honest, I didn’t expect to find so many projects in line with the topic. In the last two years they even tripled, maybe because we’re increasingly mastering this technology.
This is exactly what we wish. The second edition — besides highlighting even further this goal of ours — was born out of affection for the project. We couldn’t give it up, it’s become one of the pillars of Alan Advantage. All the remainder is happening quite spontaneously. Many have joined with a common goal in mind and are helping us out in growing the art prize. Having the winners exhibit their works at MAXXI or Romaeuropa Festival is exactly one of the goals we achieved thanks to the support and cooperation of different realities.
RE:DEFINE THE BOUNDARIES is the 2020’s edition of the call. Technology, when it is human-centered, helps us widen our boundaries, while the current pandemic forces us home and builds new walls. How can we redefine our boundaries, today, then?
We could talk about the concept of boundary for hours. I always thought of boundaries as something mobile, fluid. For instance, just looking at a geographical map, how many times have boundaries changed in the course of history? In this sense (well, not only) boundaries are a problem, they can even become limits. With this second edition, we hope to look at boundaries as something to reconsider constantly. In particular, I’m talking about the boundary between human and machine, men and nature, progress and governance. We have to be careful not to let others define our boundaries. Quite the contrary, we should redefine them when things change. Today, more than ever, in a world confined by a pandemic we have the opportunity to reconsider many of our daily experiences. How do we do this? I believe with constant critical thinking and better design methods.
Artists can choose among 5 topics to outline their vision of the future in the age of artificial intelligence. Let’s talk about the first one: “Body and identity”. Maybe the hottest topic in the last five years. How does it fit in Re:Humanism’s agenda?
True. I don’t know whether luckily or not, but it is. Or at least in the way I believe you mean it. I guess it is unfortunate since we’re far from living certain matters with ease, especially concerning genders. The issue of identity in relation to technology is wide. If I say “smartphone” or “internet” all of us from an older generation remember a “before and after” (’cause yes, we lived in an era where we didn’t jump out of the chair for every notification!). Today, AI is challenging these boundaries even further. Just think of the healthcare industry where algorithms can diagnose serious illnesses in advance (will we live for longer?). But also the way we live romantic relationships in a world where we can be entertained by a chatbot or meet people by means of algorithms. There’s so much more ahead!
“Anthropology of Artificial Intelligence”: this alone sums up the spirit of Re:Humanism. In an increasingly closer future, how will we relate to thinking machines?
Nice question! First off, how will we define these new entities? They are thinking beings, items or hybrid life forms? If we had to think like Transhumanists do, we should then envision these thinking machines as scans of our brain. How can we be sure that we will effectively establish a hierarchy between us and them? But sci-fi apart, I can tell you that today one of the real issues we should solve is how to integrate technology into our daily lives. I mean, our body, for instance, is not accustomed to perceive the movements of a robot. We should learn to live together with them. But having an all-human-centered design is not necessarily the best approach. Maybe an AI performs better in other ways.
“AI policies and abuses”: the dark side (fortunately, history teaches us so) has always inspired artists’ lateral thinking, who react with their work. Are you expecting this to be the Art Prize’s category most candidates will opt for?
If Re:Humanism were a prize open only to those who fiddle around with algorithms, I’d say yes. It would be one of the hottest topics. We know that certain states decided to ban surveillance technology, since it’s largely based on algorithms that supported racial and gender biases. We know there have been algorithms behind the election of Trump and even our economic fate is regulated by financial algorithms. However, the world has abruptly woken up about this matter and I don’t think it will fall back asleep. Many artists have been working on this for a while now. The true question is: should we push the off button or try and imagine different approaches to these technologies?
“Machine Learning, Robotics and Computer Vision”, a topic which, as we read on the website, reflects on “Alien knowledge and algorithmic dreams” How does an AI feel? Can you reassure us?
This is meant to be the most ahead-of-time topic, to give the artists space to feel and imagine an algorithmic consciousness. If we have to find a more practical link, we can say that the aesthetics of AI, from the Deep Dream onward, got a foothold not only in the artistic and cultural fields but also in marketing and advertising. Being able to understand this aesthetical phenomenon is definitely one of the central topics in the many researches we carry out in the cultural industry. Then, we all have a certain fascination towards this kind of topic, it helps to overcome the boundary and put yourself in someone else’s shoes, which it never hurts. I think that every speculation we do on tech tools is just a way to know ourselves better.
Last but not least, “A vision for the planet’s future”, maybe one of the most relevant topics nowadays. What roles should algorithms play to oppose the great challenges of climate change and health emergencies?
If we think of what we’re living today, we have few reasons to be positive. However, humankind’s push towards progress always leads us to look for better conditions. We know that AI can provide us with a number of solutions, as much as we know that its infrastructure entails high energy expenditure and environmental impacts. I would like to have the artists tell us a different way to relate to these topics. The human-centered perspective didn’t present many positive results. For a long-time it made us feel allowed to take advantage of the law of nature and brought us to emergency situations, like today’s. We have to learn how to read the world we live in as part of our daily lives and not as something abstract, exogenous and hierarchically below us. Personally, I believe the solution is never to go back. Technology can be an opportunity to reconsider our relationship with the world that surrounds and — I’d say — crosses us.
Ok, let’s take a step back to the Art Prize 2019. 10 finalists, 14 awarded artists. Is Re:Humanism still in touch with any of them? Will they play a role in the 2020–21 call?
The 10 winners of last year were amazing. Re:Humanism kept in touch with each of them, and we also cooperated with some in other projects, in particular with Enrica Beccalli, Roula Gholmieh and Lorem at the Romaeuropa Festival. We also featured Lorem as one of the judges for the second edition this year. I liked the idea that one of the winners could encourage the new participants. I’d like to stress the fact that we kept in touch with the artists that didn’t win as well, we contacted many applicants to plan future events together. Re:Humanism is now a cultural association, with the aim to take roots on the territory it was born in with a number of initiatives. Hence, it is always worth keeping in touch and sharing visions and projects.
This year, you have many sponsors and eminent partners, each on the front line of an international and unique Art Prize, confirming Re:Humanism’s success. Who would you like to mention and what of Re:Humanism convinced them to take part in the art prize?
It wouldn’t be fair mentioning some, I’ll mention all of ’em: Alan Advantage, Enel, Romaeuropa Festival, Kappabit, Filosofia In Movimento, Pi Campus, EIA Factory, Hueval, and Artribune. Moreover, this year we have a panel of super judges, that is curators Federica Patti, Ilaria Gianni and Valentino Catricalà, the managing director of Ars Electronica, Michael Mondria, the well-known philosopher, Luciano Floridi, the product director of Google, Trond Wuellner, the director of the MIT-IBM Watson Lab, Maro Martino, all accompanied by us organizers. There’s many more people each with their skills and experiences that contributed to the project, we’ll definitely introduce them later. I believe what we do is and has been transparent from the very beginning. We are moved by our best intentions and with a clear goal: to realize something constructive and shareable. In the long term, this is more valuable than any brand awareness initiative.
We’d like to end this interview with a story from your personal life: how did you get into art, how did you become a tech enthusiast and how did you mix these two in your career. We’re all ears!
My career path has been a rather traditional one. Art has always been up my alley, since I was a little kid — also thanks to my father’s inputs, he was an architect. After I graduated from Art School I realized that what I truly loved was to unveil the creative processes, explore new contexts, spark new reflections. Therefore, I gave up the brushes and I went to university, where I graduated in Art History. Since then, I never stopped looking for opportunities to propose new projects to artists, galleries and museums as a contemporary art curator. Technology is also an old interest of mine. My bachelor’s dissertation was about the artistic context in the virtual world of Second Life. But I have to thank the curiosity of Alan Advantage if this bond between two apparently different subjects materialized.
Daniela Cotimbo
Art historian and independent curator with more than 10 years of experience in the organization of cultural projects and exhibitions. Since 2018, she’s been a consultant for Alan Advantage. Her research focuses on contemporary issues through her affinity with a wide range of expressive media, especially new technologies. She actively contributes to a number of contemporary art reviews, such as Inside Art, Artribune and Arte e Critica. She’s the mind behind Re:Humanism Art Prize, the first art prize devoted to the relationship between art and Artificial Intelligence. Moreover, she’s the President of the newborn ReHumanism Cultural Association.
