Zentrum für

interdisziplinäre Forschung

[Version 1 February 2008]

IMAGINING OUTER SPACE,

1900-2000
An International Conference

February 6-9, 2008

Organization: Alexander C.T. Geppert

– Program –

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

15.00 Welcome Reception and Opening Remarks

Ipke Wachsmuth and Alexander C.T. Geppert

16.00 Introduction
Alexander C.T. Geppert
European Astrofuturism, Cosmic Provincialism. Historical Problems and Historiographi-
cal Perspectives

16.30 Keynote Lecture

Steven J. Dick
Space, Time and Aliens. The Role of Imagination in Outer Space

17.30 Coffee

18.00 Feature Presentation I

Philip Pocock
SpacePlace. Art in the Age of Orbitization

20.00 Dinner Downtown: "Brauhaus Joh. Albrecht"

 2

Thursday, February 7, 2008

09.00 Panel I: Theorizing Outer Space

Chair: De Witt Douglas Kilgore
Debbora Battaglia
Galaxies of E.T. Discourse. An Anthropologist's First Contact with the Science of Weird
Life
Thomas Brandstetter
Imagining Inorganic Life. Crystalline Aliens in Science and Fiction
Benjamin Lazier
The Globalization of the World-Picture. Towards a History of Earth and Artifact in
Twentieth-Century Thought

11.00 Coffee

11.15 Panel II: Personalizing Outer Space

Chair: Bernd Weisbrod
Christina Wessely
Cosmic Spectacular. Rocketry, Weltanschauung and the Quest for Cosmic Ice in
Weimar Germany
Thore Bjørnvig
Transcendence of Gravity. Arthur C. Clarke and the Apocalyptic of Weightlessness

13.00 Lunch

14.00 Panel III: Localizing Outer Space

Chair: Andreas W. Daum
Kerrie Anne Dougherty
Spaceport Woomera
Sven Mesinovic
Inner Space and Outer Space. Similarities, Differences and Connections

16.00 Coffee

16.15 Panel IV: Screening Outer Space

Chair: Peter Becker
Burghard Ciesla
Outer Space, Inner Fear. Cold War SF-Films in East and West
Henry Keazor
A Stumble in the Dark. Gerry Anderson’s Space 1999
Werner Suppanz
Nazis in Space. Distant Worlds as Projection Screen of Cultural Memory

18.00 Feature Presentation II

Screening of Historical Films

18.30 Dinner at ZiF

 3

Friday, February 8, 2008

09.00 Panel V: Fictionalizing Outer Space

Chair: Angela Schwarz
Claudia Schmölders
Unwriting Heaven. Tunguska Region, June 30, 1908
Steffen Krämer
Ancient Heroes and Early Christian Ascetics. Archetypes of Modern Science Fiction
Rainer Eisfeld
Projecting Landscapes of the Human Mind on Another World. Changing Features of an
Imaginary Mars

11.00 Coffee

11.15 Panel VI: Visioning Outer Space

Chair: Alexander C.T. Geppert
Pierre Lagrange
A 'Symmetrical' Explanation for Flying Saucers
James I. Miller
Encountering Aliens in the French Countryside. UFOs and the Fabrication of a New
World in Quarouble, France, 1954

13.00 Lunch

14.00 Panel VII: Politicizing Outer Space

Chair: Kai-Uwe Schrogl
Monica Rüthers
Outer Space, Children’s Material Culture and Soviet Imagery after Sputnik
Michael J. Neufeld
Smash the Myth of the Fascist Rocket Baron. East German Attacks on Wernher von
Braun in the 1960s

16.00 Coffee

16.15 Panel VIII: Communicating Outer Space

Chair: Ralf Bülow
Guillaume de Syon
Between the Bubble and the Moon. Visions of Space Travel in Francophone Comic
Strips
Bernd Mütter
Per Media Ad Astra? Outer Space in West Germany’s Media 1957-1987

20.00 Dinner Downtown

 4

Saturday, February 9, 2008

09.00 Panel IX: Automatizing Outer Space

Chair: Paul Ceruzzi
James Schwoch
Short, Nasty, and Brutish. The Curious Life of Telstar, 10 July 1962 - 21 February 1963
Gonzalo Munevar
Self-Reproducing Automata and the Impossibility of SETI

11.00 Coffee

11.15 Panel X: Designing Outer Space

Chair: Peter Davidson
William R. Macauley
Inscribing Scientific Knowledge. Interstellar Communication, Universal Laws and Con-
tact with Cultures of the Imagination
Tristan Weddigen
Alien Spotting. Damien Hirst’s Beagle 2 Mars Lander Calibration Target and the Ex-
ploitation of Outer Space

13.00 Snack

14.00 Conclusion
Chair: Steven J. Dick
Helmuth Trischler
General Commentary

16.00 End
Project Proposal and Briefing - 05 April 2006

SpacePlace: Art in the Age of Orbitization

Prepared by Prof. Philip Pocock, in consultation with Prof. Dr. Peter Weibel, CEO ZKM.

Conceptual Launch Pad: Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Systems of the World (Galileo
1632)


It
was
not
Galileo's
astrophysics
and
math
that
led
directly
to
his
imprisonment
during
the
Inquisition. 

Ironically,
it
was
a
play,
Galileo's
Socratic
dialogue
from
1632
titled
A
Dialogue
Concerning
the
Two

Chief
Systems
of
the
World
that
infuriated
the
Pope
enough
to
place
him
under
house
arrest.

After
all,
'Mathematics was rated at the time as a thing for technicians,'
MIT
Prof.
Giorgio
de
Santillana


posits
in
his
book
The
Crime
of
Galileo
in
1955.
Galileo's
dramaturgical
choice
of
a
Socratic
dialogue,

encouraging
readers
to
reflect
and
think
independently
and
critically,
was
far
more
potent
publicly
than 

any
virtuoso
display
of
abstract
mathematical
reasoning
could
be
at
the
time.

Galileo's
Dialogue
convincingly
and
playfully
revealed
before
all
the
world
the
needless
absurdity
of
a 

dogma
upholding
a
geocentric
world
view,
while
affectively
making
his
Eppur si muove
(And
yet
it
does

move!)
argument
in
favor
of
Copernicus'
heliocentric
world
view,
with
no
loss
of
mythology
and
delight 

and
the
common
sense
gains
such
acceptance
would
mete
science,
technology
and
culture.



Ironically
as
well,
it
was
the
same
invention
that
Galileo
went
partially
blind
peering
through
to 

empirically
substantiate
Copernicus'
view
from
his
1543
treatise
Revolutions
of
the
Celestial
Orbs
-

namely,
the
telescope
or
spyglass
-
that
soon
after
its
invention
turned
its
optical
gaze
back
on
us
to 

center
the
worldview
again
on
humankind
(as
we
tend
or
like
to
place
or
see
ourselves?)

With
the
speed
of
a
couple
of
centuries
telemedia
have
placed
Earth
once
again
at
the
center
of
another

virtual
geocentric
or
geo-centroid
world
scheme.
A
telematic
universe
starring
planet
Earth,
orbited
by

surveilling
spyglass
satellites,
shining
stand-ins
for
planets,
Fox
and
CNN
competing
with
Venus
and 

Mars
for
media
attention,
SkyTV
acting
as
an
ersatz-Jupiter,
day
and
night.
Nam
June
Paik,
a
TV
art 

pioneer
said
it
best
titling
a
TV
installation
from
1965:
Moon is the Oldest TV.


Impetus to Launch Space Art Now: Open Discourse Concerning the Weaponization of, or the
Cultural Utilization of Outer Space?

Space
vehicles
and
inter-planetary
travel
first
appear
in
the
great
epic
of
India,
the
 Mahabharata,
at

220000
lines,
the
world's
longest
poem,
composed
by
sage
Ved
Vyas
perhaps
2500
years
ago:

'Arjuna, blazing like the sun itself, ascended the celestial car (Vimana). And after he had become
invisible to the mortals of the Earth, he beheld thousands of cars of extraordinary beauty. And in that
region there was no sun or moon or fire to give light, but it blazed in light of its own, generated by
virtue and ascetic merit.'


Volume
III,
Vana
Parva,
Section
XLII

Translated
by
Kisari
Mohan
Ganguli,
1886-1890.


Arjuna,
both
warrior-prince
and
human
monad
(symbolic
individual,)
apparently
embarked
a
Vimuna 

(space
vehicle)
soaring
up
in
a
blaze
through
cloud
cover
into
deep
dark
outer
space.
He
was
taking
two 

discreet
journeys
in
parallel:
One,
a
cultural
mythological
journey,
beholding,
for
instance,
the
celestial 

city
of
Indra,
while
at
the
same
time
setting
out
on
an
aerial
military
foray
to
slay
tribal
opponents
in 

the
ancient
Mahabharata
War,
letting
his
iron
arrows
(Baan)
fly
and
find
their
targets
from
on
high.


Although
space
culture,
science
and
technology
have
undeniably
made
quantum
leaps
in
many
regards 

since
the
Mahabharata,
their
shared
policy
issue
as
to
which
path
to
take
concerning
Earth's
utilization 

of
Near
Earth
and
Outer
Space
remains
the
quandary
it
was
for
Arjuna
2000
years
ago
-
the

weaponization
of,
or
the
cultural
utilization
of
space?

Accelerating Weaponization of Near Earth Space: 1960 to the Present.



Vice
President
Lyndon
B.
Johnson
quipped
in
1961:
'Control of space means control of the world.'



The
United
Nations
1967
Treaty
on
Principles
Governing
the
Activities
of
States
in
the
Exploration
and

Use
of
Outer
Space,
including
the
Moon
and
Other
Celestial
Bodies
adopted
unanimously
by
the
General

Assembly
in
1963,
since
ratified
by
98
states
and
additionally
signed
by
27
states,
clearly
sets
limits
to 

the
militarization
of
space
in
Article
IV:
'Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the
Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install
such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.'



The
Outer
Space
Treaty
also
condemns
any
'propaganda designed or likely to provoke or encourage any

threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression, and considering that the aforementioned
resolution is applicable to outer space.'


In
1996,
US
Space
Commander-in-Chief,
Gen.
Joseph
W.
Ashy,
fanned
his
space
defense
policy
cards

flat
out
on
the
table
in
Aviation
Week
and
Space
Technology:
'It's politically sensitive, but it's going to
happen. Some people don't want to hear this, and it sure isn't in vogue, but absolutely we're going to
fight in space. We're going to fight from space and we're going to fight into space. That's why the US
has development programs in directed energy and hit-to-kill mechanisms. We will engage terrestrial
targets someday - ships, airplanes, land targets - from space.'


In
2001,
shortly
after
9/11,
the
Bush
administration
withdrew
the
United
States
from
the
Anti-Ballistic 

Missile
Treaty
and
vastly
increased
the
missile
defense
budget
in
2002,
the
same
year
his

administration's
Quadrennial
Defense
Review
defined:
'A key objective is not only to ensure US ability
to exploit space for military purposes, but also, as required, to deny an adversary's ability to do so. '



Following
up
at
the
2003
US
Air
Force
Association
Los
Angeles
symposium,
Pete
B.
Teets,
US
Air
Force

Undersecretary,
declared:
'Space is the ultimate high ground. Our military advantage there must
remain ahead of our adversaries' capabilities, and our own doctrine and capabilities must keep pace to
meet that challenge. É We haven't reached the point of strafing and bombing from space. Nonetheless,
we are thinking about those possibilities.'
He
went
on
to
emphatically
acclaim:
'The United States
wields airpower more effectively than any other fighting force in history precisely because it has
embraced these three principles: We jealously gain and maintain control of the air even though others
may try to deny us that control. We aggressively apply airpower in every conceivable manner to
achieve our war-fighting objectives, from global vigilance to global reach to global strike. We proudly
and actively support and nurture a culture of airpower professionals. We do all this better than anyone
else.
We must do the same in space! If we do not pursue control of space, then someone else will. If we do
not exploit space to the fullest advantage across every conceivable mode of war fighting, then someone
else will. If we do not develop a new culture of space professionals- a new form of war fighter- then
someone else may do so first, with dire consequences awaiting our first engagement with such an
adversary. Our success at wielding airpower has come with a realization that we need to do it before-
and better than- anybody else. Let us do the same for space.'



In
2006,
the
United
States
Air
Force
Space
Command
Headquarters
website
breviloquently
advertises

its
mission
to
the
world
online
in
bold
blue
type:
'To defend the United States of America through the
control and exploitation of space.'
And
the
current
US
Space
Commander-in-Chief
Gen.
Lance
Lord
has

voiced
his
vision
for
US
Near
Earth
Space
policy:
'Space superiority is not our birthright, but it is our
destiny. Space superiority is our day-to-day mission. Space supremacy is our vision for the future.'

Decelerating Institutional and Private Support for Awareness and Cultural Utilization of
Space



It
may
well
be
that
it
is
a
pan-cultural,
almost
innate,
human
urge
to
maintain
a
mythology
for
outer 

space.
It
is
equally
arguable
that
the
mythological
aura
of
the
'red
planet'
has
raised
interest
and 

investment
for
current
space
exploration
goals
and
innovation
in
the
arriving
two
or
three
decades.
Like

the
natural
sciences,
cultural
production
is
a
physical
response
to
an
environment
(René
Dubos),
yet, 

like
mythology,
cultural
production
is
a
shared
psychic
response
to
the
human
environment
as
well.
And 

that
includes,
certainly
since
the
invention
of
the
telescope
and
Galileo,
outer
space.



Subculture
feeds
mainstream
culture.
The
cultural
utilization
of
space
is
no
different.
While
unfolding
an 

extended
urban
or
hyper-urban
mythology
for
space
travel
and
discovery,
it
inspires
and
expands

mainstream
culture
as
well
when
visionary,
meanwhile
nourishing
hard
science
and
technology
with 

data
and
design.
Far
more
than
most
other
subcultural
activities,
inventing
and
constructing
space 

culture
has
immensely
more
at
stake,
and
indisputably
as
well,
in
the
offing
for
humankind.



When
aesthetically
wise
and
pertinent,
thereby
affectively
influencing
public
awareness
and
opinion, 

open
development
of
space
culture
cuts
a
path
and
rudders
much
of
the
course
back
to
the
Moon
and

on
to
Mars,
space
exploration
and
exploitation
in
general
afect
lifetimes
to
come.
Don't
forget
it
was
a 

cultural
discourse
that
Galileo
initiated
which
set
off
a
cultural
chain
reaction
-
Jules
Verne
and 

Konstantin
Tsiolkovsky
to
name
only
two
-
catalyzing
the
modern
era
of
space
science
and
technology

culture,
Apollo
11
and
the
Mars
Express.


Space
artist
and
activist,
Arthur
Woods,
considers
in
his
1993
address
to
the
44th
International

Astronautical
Congress,
The
Exploration
of
Space
by
Artists
and
Writers,
that:
"Visual
artists
and
writers 

have
created
fictional
images
and
scenarios
on
the
development
of
space.
Such
visions
are
the
primary

way
that
the
general
public
is
introduced
to
ideas
about
space
exploration.
Artists
and
writers,
in
fact, 

lay
the
foundation
which
makes
future
space
activities
understandable
by
the
general
public
and
thus 

secures
the
necessary
political
support."
Art
that
is
not
cosmetic
must
precede
its
application,
applied 

art
or
design.
As
such,
art
inscribes
design's
very
foundation.
In
spite
of
the
apparent
masking
that
the 

seemingly
endless
and
exorbitant
technical
complexity
behind
a
space
programme
may
provide,
it 

illudes
.It
is
a
mirage,
and
art
or,
more
generally,
cultural
production,
remains
in
the
key
public 

supporting
role
for
furthering
the
space
exploration
and
travel
industry.
Without
art,
Galileo
would
have 

been
left
with
abstract
mathematical
principles
to
convince
an
already
indoctrinated
public
that
they 

were
no
longer
at
the
center
of
the
universe.
Perhaps
Galileo's
greatest
public
success
was
his

knowledge
that
there
is
an
art
to
science.


The
legendary
video
artist
and
Satellite
Art
pioneer,
Nam
June
Paik,
in
1988
noted
in
interview
with

media
artist
and
anthologist
Eduardo
Kac
the
need
for
a
peace-instilling
role
for
art
in
the
global
public's 

perception
of,
and
position
on
the
actual
and
potential
uses
of
the
Earth's
orbit
and
satellite
space: 

'Since today we have satellites, we want to use them, discover what we, artists, can do with them. We
want to try something new, in the tradition of Monet and Picasso. These same instruments (satellites)
are used in the applied arts, which are essential to humankind because they are useful in everyday life.
But there is also the military use of satellites. We want to use satellites for pacifist purposes. '
It
is
not

outlandish
to
imagine
or
even
forecast
that
the
greatest
contribution
space
exploration
and
discovery 

may
make
humankind
all
in
all
is
in
the
arts,
and
not
in
science.



US
Air
Force
Undersecretary
Pete
B.
Teets
already
made
it
clear
that
space
culture
is
a
cornerstone
for

the
US
Space
Command
and
a
budget
priority.
The
Hon.
Pete
Teets
understanding
of
space
culture
is

that
'If we do not develop a new culture of space professionals - a new form of war fighter - then
someone else may do so first.'
Would
it
not
seem
plausible
that
without
the
democratic
check-and-
balance
that
an
appropriate
cultural
counterweight
from
the
arts
would
serve
in
raising
public 

awareness
for
other
courses
for
space
culture
to
take,
little
would
stand
in
the
way
of
the
election
by

the
US
Defense
Dept.
to
continue
a
space
culture
policy
bent
on
the
pride
that
total
military
domination 

of
space
would
instill.
And
is
it
not
equally
plausible
that
such
a
policy
may
spark
the
insurgency
of
a 

space
arms
race?



Faced
with
Teets'
gamble,
it
seems
prudent
here
to
respond
preemptively,
if
that
is
still
possible,
and
be 

first,
not
by
developing
a
counterculture
of
professional
space
belligerents,
but
instead
first
fighting
to 

find
funding
to
search
for
and
develop
a
meaningful
cultural
panoply
for
space
professionals.
It
seems 

to
be
democratically
prudent,
even
prophylactic,
for
orbital
and
Earthly
peace
and
stability
that
art 

affectively
contradict
the
Teetsian
doctrine
for
all
our
outer
space
and
its
acculturation.
Not
by
reacting 

in
protest
and
feeding
his
message
to
the
press
as
a
first
line
of
defense.
Not
by
acting
circumstantially, 

didactically
or
mimetically
by
restaging
space
programmes,
such
as
mirroring
the
panoptic
surveillance 

of
Earth
as
a
primary
focus,
enabling
a
reading
of
cultural
production
in
space
as
a
mere
military-
industrial
spin-off.
The
fact
is
that
many
works
of
space
art
to
date
fall
close
to
this
category
due
to 

insufficient
and
narrowband
funding
for
the
production
of
ideas
and
works
which
as
a
result
all
too
often 

remain
aloof,
rarely
connecting
to
the
aesthetic,
conceptual
and
philosophical
concerns
which
orbit
and 

are
under
the
influence
of
other
major
genres
of
activity
in
the
contemporary
arts.

NASA and ESA's Space Culture and Education Expenditures



NASA's
budget
released
for
2007
apparently
demonstrates
a
new
more
myopic
view
of
the

interdisciplinary
nature
and
synergy
of
art
and
technology.
At
NASA
the
decline
in
cultural
funding 

continues
exponentially,
all
the
more
so,
when
measured
against
an
increase
in
general
spending. 

Educational
funding
fell
at
NASA
between
2005
and
2007
from
179
to
28
million
US
dollars.
Biology
and

physical
science
expenditure
took
a
nose
dive
during
the
same
period
from
925
to
145
million
US

dollars,
while
total
new
obligation
spending
increased
at
NASA
to
10,364
million
US
dollars.
In
2007 

from
8,371
million
US
dollars
in
2005.
Numbers
sometimes
speak
louder
than
words.



From
the
European
Space
Agency
website:
'ESA's
budget
for
2006
is
an
estimated
Û2904
million.
É

European
per
capita
investment
in
space
is
very
little.
On
average,
every
citizen
of
an
ESA
Member 

State
pays,
in
taxes
for
expenditure
on
space,
about
the
same
as
the
price
of
a
cinema
ticket.
In
the 

United
States,
investment
in
civilian
space
activities
is
almost
four
times
as
much.'
In
ESA's
budget 

breakdown
by
programme
there
is
no
listing
of
a
discreet
education
or
cultural
budget
allotment
or 

programme.
There
are
however
several
ESA-
and
partner-funded
educational
and
cultural
programmes

such
as
the
International
Space
University
established
in
1987
in
Strasburg
France,
Art
Catalyst
UK 

research
project
Developing
a
Cultural
Policy
for
the
International
Space
Station
in
2006,
as
well
as

ESA's
Erasmus
User
Centre's
Artist-in-Residence
programme
in
Noordwijk,
the
Netherlands,
also

encouraging
the
development
of
cultural
uses
for
the
International
Space
Station
(ISS),
with
Japanese 

space
artist
Ayako
Ono
having
just
finished
a
residency
in
February
2006.



Culture
is
a
mirror
of
production,
the
mirror
that
the
public
sees.
Artistic
vision
draws
perspective,
and 

perspective
not
only
draws
factories,
it
draws
opinion.
Cultural
funding
is
all
the
more
important
to 

innovation
and
discovery
in
a
domain
of
activity
as
invisible
as
Near
Earth
and
Outer
Space.
Successful 

and
safe
interplanetary
travel,
Near
Earth
Space
tourism
and
other
neo-cultural
products
and
practices 

are
hard-to-imagine
without
art's
generic
ability
to
cognitively
extend
the
human
senses
of
sight
and 

sound,
even
touch.
The
Canadian
media
pundit,
Marshall
McLuhan,
quipped
that
artists
are
society's 

antennae,
making
the
invisible
visible
and
the
inaudible
audible.
Cultural
funding
goes
hand-in-hand 

with
transducing
and
transmitting
the
practices
and
purposes
well
known
to
insiders
in
the
space 

science
and
tech
community
but
only
to
the
public
at
large
through
cultural
representation,
that
like 

metaphor
and
mythology
motivates
understanding,
rewarding
public
and
private
agency
investment
in 

space
programmes
and
services.

SpacePlace: Art in the Age of Orbitization and The Orbitants
Two-Stage Plan 



There
are
two
stages
to
this
project.
The
first
populates
a
context
for
the
second.
Stage
One
comprises

a
mobile
interactive
repository
encompassing
space-related
art
produced
since
Galileo
Galilei's
Dialogue

Concerning
the
Two
Chief
Systems
of
the
World
first
appeared.
Like
his
characters,
Space
is
the
Place

will
also
be
'orbitants.'
The
database
entries
weigh
in
favor
of
contemporary
art
and
media.

Nonetheless,
architecture,
film,
literature,
music,
painting,
sound
are
in
abundance.
Stage
One
is
titled 

SpacePlace:
Art
in
the
Age
of
Orbitization.


With
Stage
One's
aggregate
of
contextual
space
art
content
launched,
in
stable
orbit
and
aggregating 

more
space
art
content,
from
the
wings,
Stage
Two
lifts
off.
Stage
Two
is
the
launch
of
an
art
satellite 

(or
pico-payload
to
the
ISS)
that
interacts
from
orbit
with
a
series
of
art
installations
or
ground
stations 

at
various
far-flung
cultural
venues
and
museums
on
Earth.
Stage
two
is
titled
 The
Orbitants.
It
is
time

for
art
about
orbit
to
enter
orbit.



A
poetic
diversion
or
detour
not
to
define
or
denote
orbit,
but
to
ignite
insight
enough
to
form
an

understanding
of
orbit
is
key
to
recognizing
the
current
transformation
of
our
environmental
paradigm

underway
from
one
of
influential
globalization
to
perhaps
total
orbitization.



After
Galileo's
long
night,
the
dawning
of
the
age
of
orbitization
not
only
continues
to
stimulate
debate 

between
peaceful
and
enriching
versus
belligerent
and
dominating
visions
in
the
greater
space 

community,
it
indicates
the
need
for
aesthetic
and
philosophical
research
which
space
art
in
its
broadest 

sense
can
only
provide.
Notions
and
connotations
of
orbit
and
orbitization
underpin
this
entire
two-
stage
project
proposal:
SpacePlace:
Art
in
the
Age
of
Orbitization
(Stage
One)
and
The
Orbitants
(Stage

Two).


The
environmental
paradigm
shift
from
globalization
to
orbitization
is
illustrated
on
a
recent
cover
of
the 

German
Spiegel
magazine.
Hovering
a
bit
above
page
center,
it
shows
a
shipping
container
cube
on

which
the
image
of
the
Earth's
surface
is
texture-mapped.
Not
only
the
globe
but
also
globalization
has 

become
a
marketable
commodity
to
be
bought
and
sold
often
through
cryptic
orbital
channels
in
an 

invisible
marketplace,
closed
to
many
and
overseen
by
supra-orbitant
bodies,
usually
the
military.
This 

transportable
cubic
globe
on
the
cover
hangs
suspended
by
chains
and
a
crane
hook,
balanced
against 

a
black
sky
above
a
horizon
below
which
appears
a
stark
moonscape,
that
uncannily
calls
to
mind 

planet
Earth,
perhaps
a
future
Zombie
Earth.
The
illustration
is
emblazoned
with
typography
that
reads: 

Spiegel
Special
-
International
Edition
-
Globalization:
A
New
World.
What
this
illustrates
is
that 

globalization
is
no
longer
our
most
far-reaching
context.
It
is
effectively
no
longer
the
border
guard

containing
our
world.
The
global
village
has
become
exactly
that,
now
surrounded
by
a
territory
that
is 

orbital
in
nature.
Its
nucleus
no
longer
residing
at
the
system's
geometrical
center
but
rather
a 

collective
of
city
centers,
financial
hubs,
parliament
forums,
even
art
centers
to
which
orbital
culture 

both
gravitates
and
attempts
escape.


Globalization,
once
the
most
influential
environmental
process,
acted
invisibly
to
all
but
the
most
tuned-
in
art,
science
and
technology
antennae.
Environments
and
the
processes
causing
their
formation
are 

almost
invariably
invisible
by
necessity.
Unless
unsharp
or
out-of-focus
to
most,
an
environment,
a 

background
by
definition,
cannot
work
as
a
background.
Ironically,
the
most
influential
orbital 

environment,
called
Near
Earth
Space,
is
not
near
at
all,
unless
eyes
and
ears
are
updated
with
audio-
visual
transceivers.
Orbital
influences
on
human
activity
and
the
process
of
orbitization
itself
remain
for 

the
public-at-large
out
of
sight
(and
out
of
mind?)
This
particular
blindness
is
exacerbated
by
the
recent 

apparition
of
globalization
as
an
entity
resembling
its
depiction
on
the
Spiegel
cover,
yet
still
assumed 

to
be
that
which
it
once
formed,
the
environment,
when
in
actuality
it
only
contains
this
history
as
a 

memory,
a
souvenir.
And
this
is
exactly
why
the
orbital
is
stealthily
emerging
as
our
all-purpose,
all-
inclusive
environment,
and
orbitization
the
formative
process
to
which
we
adapt
as
orbitants, 

aggregating
and
syndicating.



Globalization
like
preceding
paradigms
marking
the
course
of
some
civilizations
has
been
drawn
out
of

the
environment
it
once
comprised,
distilled
by
a
new
generation
of
controlling
commercial,
cultural, 

industrial,
military
and
social
technologies'
that
extend
to
those
with
reach
access
to
a
greater
context, 

promising
a
greater
sphere
of
influence.
This
newly
formed
context
or
environment
is
of
course
the

space
of
orbit,
and
it
supersedes
the
globe.
From
its
commanding
and
well-camouflaged
position, 

orbitization
oversees
the
processes
of
urbanization,
cyber-urbanization
and
globalization
under
the

watchful
eye
of
supra-orbitant
commanding
organs.
Orbitization
has
all
but
grounded
globalization
like 

organized
clusters
of
Lilliputians
landed
Gulliver.
Globalization
under
the
influence
of
orbitization 

becomes
a
giant
figure
in
a
humungous
landscape
that
is
mostly
sky.



The
orbitization
process
dubiously
began
as
Galileo
empirically
disproved
geocentricity
with
a
spyglass. 

The
spyglass
and
its
progeny
are
immobilizing
planet
Earth
at
the
center
of
a
new
geocentric
model
-

the
center
of
a
swarming
militant
media
cosmos
of
orbiting
control,
under
supra-orbitant
control.
That 

surmounts
and
surpasses,
relegates
and
regulates
even
global
activity,
all
machine
and
human 

communication
and
exchange
not
only
on
but
also
around
the
planet.
To
be
secured,
if
deemed

advantageous
or
necessary,
to
change
the
political
or
economic
course
of
the
globe,
or
a
lesser
regime,

a
supra-orbitant
power-that-be,
may
heed,
apply
or
perfect
orbital
the
space
supremacy
war
tactics

that
US
Air
Force
Space
Commander-in-Chief
Gen.
Lance
Lord
described
to
the
American
Congress
in

2004
as:
'Simply
put,
it's
an
American
way
of
fighting
É
freedom
to
attack
as
well
as
freedom
from

attack."
Since
uttering
this
new
space
war
stratagem
to
the
American
people
with
next
to
no
critical 

response
in
the
mainstream
American
press,
both
China
and
Russia
have
used
diplomatic
channels
to 

call
for
international
solidarity
against
the
military
domination
of
Earth's
orbital
space,
with
little 

success,
and
no
resolution
from
the
UN.



US
Space
Command's
repeated,
provocative
space
supremacy
policy
announcements
open
themselves

up
to
temptation,
to
partial
interpretation
by
some
competitive
nations
and
observers
as
a
doctrine 

abetting
orbital
hit
and
run
tactics
with
supreme
impunity
and
without
a
trace,
and
everywhere
to
hide. 

If
so,
it
is
imaginable
that
a
space
race
might
become
more
aggressively
Aresian
than
competitively 

Olympian.

J

Jean
Baudrillard
writes
of
orbit
in
his
essay
The
Pataphysicist:
'Outside of this gravitational pull which

keeps bodies in orbit, all the atoms of meaning lose themselves or self-absorb in space. Our true
artificial satellites are the global debt, the flows of capital and the nuclear loads that circle around the
Earth in an orbital dance. Debt circulates on its own orbit, with its own trajectory made up of capital,
which from now on is free of any economic contingency and moves about in a parallel universe. It is not
even an orbital universe. It is rather ex-orbital, ex-centered. The only way to avoid this is to place
ourselves straightaway on an alternative temporal orbit, to take an elliptic shortcut and go beyond the
end by not allowing it time to take place.'


Orbit
is
the
elementary
unit
of
space.
Orbit
is
the
raw
material
of
space.
Orbit
is
a
path;
it
is
a
journey. 

Orbit
is
a
worlding.
Orbit
is
an
energy
storage
and
transmission
device
in
one.
Orbit
is
a
frequency,
a 

clock.
Orbit
is
a
wave.
Orbit
is
a
pump.
Orbit
is
a
mandala.
Orbit
is
influence,
crash
or
escape.
Orbit
is
a 

twisted
zone
of
power,
or
the
center
has
left
the
circle.
Alles dreht sich um alles.


Stage One: SpacePlace: Art in the Age of Orbitization


The
bottommost
layer
of
Stage
One
is
a
content
repository
of
art
from
all
genres
and
media
that
relates

in
the
broadest
sense
to
an
orbital
theme.
There
are
currently
60
plus
artists,
musicians
and
filmmakers

in
the
database,
with
more
than
300
awaiting
entry.


A
content
management
layer
sits
on
top
of
the
raw
content
repository.
It
is
designed
in
such
a
way
that 

each
repository
artist
is
a
'member'
able
to
manage
his
or
her
entries.
Some
may
not,
and
the
system

will
manage
their
'orbitants'
for
them.
Others
may
join
in
by
becoming
real
members.
As
such,
the 

content
management
system
is
akin
to
a
social
software
platform
such
as
the
well-known

myspace.com.
Each
artist
is
represented
by
their
space-related
artwork,
and
has
a
personal
profile,

including
their
base
location,
their
astrological
sign,
friends
and
favorites,
an
about-me
entry,
and
an 

email
address.
When
their
audience
decide
to
become
members
and
join,
the
typical
high-culture 

barrier
between
cultural
producer
and
culture
consumer
is
blurred.
Space
and
space-related
artists
and

audience
orbit
the
repository
on
similar
terms
as
members.
As
such,
the
Stage
One
audience
is

prosuming
(producing
and
consuming.)
Audience
members
become
participants
with
the
ability
to
orbit 

the
orbit
art
entries
in
the
repository
through
a
custom
web
and
a
mobile
interface.
Audience

participants
may
upload
or
launch
text
messages
and
digital
images
from
their
mobile
phones, 

aggregating
content
as
comments
and
attachments
to
any
existing
orbit
art
repository
deemed
fitting
or 

appropriate.


A
folksonomy
nomenclature
layer
organizes
the
content
by
keywords,
a
tagging
system
that
is
not

imposed
as
taxonomy
systems
are,
but
emerges
in
an
open
and
shared
manner.
The
folksonomy
tag

layer
organizes
the
repository
contents
to
the
screen,
acting
as
the
navigation
paradigm.
The
numerous

word
tags
are
represented
by
icons
of
the
authors
of
the
contents
each
tagword
represents,
and

mapped
onto
the
screen
according
to
a
visual
system
in
which
each
icon's
screen
location
and
size
is

controlled
in
real
time
by
factors
such
as
content
relevancy
and
frequency.
The
viewers
and
participants

on
both
the
web
and
mobile
portal
are
confronted
by
visual
tagclouds
with
which
they
interact
in
Stage 

One
-
SpacePlace:
Art
in
the
Age
of
Orbitization.


The
Stage
One
interface
is
to
be
exhibited
in
June
at
the
ZKMax
public
media
space
in
the
heart
of 

Munich
Germany.
With
little
to
no
regular
security
or
maintenance
crew,
the
visitor's
cell
phone
is
the 

best
choice
as
interface
device,
conceptually
as
it
links
to
the
orbital
space
of
telecom
satellites
passing 

overhead,
and
pragmatically
as
a
remote
controlling
computer
with
joystick
and
keyboard
built-in
and 

operated
and
maintained
by
its
owner,
able
to
navigate
the
space-related
art
content
and
with
mobile 

interaction
control
what
is
displayed
on
two
large
projection
surfaces
for
Stage
One
-
Space
Place:
Art

in
the
Age
of
Orbitization
in
ZKMax
Munich.

Stage Two: The Orbitants

Stage
One
sets
the
stage
for
Stage
Two
-
the
launch
of
The
Orbitants
art
satellite.
With
Stage
One's

context
concerning
space
and
orbit-related
art
and
cultural
production
since
Galileo
forming
its 

environment
and
informing,
raising
public
awareness
of
space
issues
online,
Stage
Two
-
The
Orbitants,

compliments
the
general
by
the
specific,
adding
depth,
in
fact
reach,
the
broad-based
appeal
of
Stage 

One
-
SpacePlace:
Art
in
the
Age
of
Orbitization.


The
Orbitants
art
satellite
requires
considerable
funding
to
acquire
the
necessary
services
including
the

involvement
of
an
aerospace
satellite
system
team
with
experience
or
interest
in
launching
a
pico-
satellite,
preferably
based
in
a
technical
university
lab
with
prior
success
with
pico-sats
(University
of 

Tokyo?)
or
sponsored
by
a
professional
satellite
launch
service
provider.


A
pico-sat
is
not
recoverable
and
slightly
adds
to
the
current
concern
of
potentially
dangerous
orbiting 

debris.
This
consideration
along
with
the
apparent
low
success
rate
of
student-launched
pico-sats 

(mostly
around
30%),
it
may
be
advantageous
to
prepare
The
Orbitants
pico-sat
to
be
launched
as
a

payload
that
is
delivered
to
the
International
Space
Station.
On
board
the
ISS,
there
will
be
very
limited 

time
available
for
it
from
the
ISS
crew,
should
the
onboard
pico-sat
require
any
attention.
Still
this 

scenario
is
more
promising
than
a
disabled
pico-sat
hurtling
alone
in
orbit,
and
allows
for
the
pico-sat
to 

return
to
Earth.

The
Orbitants
pico-sat
or
similar
payload
will
be
little
more
than
a
relay
and
a
switch
with
controller
and 

power
supply.
As
an
orbiting
switch,
The
Orbitants
art
satellite
basically
starts
and
stops,
while
within

range,
participatory
sound
and
light
shows
taking
place
in
ground
stations,
mobile
sculptural 

installations
constructed
for
the
project
in
various
museums
on
Earth.
Either
in
its
own
orbit
or
aboard 

the
ISS,
The
Orbitants
becomes
a
90-minute
day,
triggering
a
sunrise
as
it
enters
the
range
of
one
of

its
ground
station
installations
housed
in
one
of
several
museums
worldwide.
Ground
station
installation 

illumination
becomes
brightest,
audio
peaking,
when
The
Orbitants
satellite
is
least
distant
from
the

target
ground
station,
finally
triggering
a
sunset
in
the
ground
station
installation
as
it
moves
out
of 

range.
This
sunrise-sunset
pattern
continues
when
The
Orbitants
passes
in
and
out
of
the
range
of

further
ground
stations
in
museums
worldwide.
A
total
of
four
ground
station
installations
are
foreseen; 

each
unique
and
sculptural,
reflecting
in
architectonic
form
and
imagery
their
immediate
locale
and 

situation.



One
ground
station
functions
as
a
nomad
and
is
no
name
in
its
appearance,
blending
in
as
it
roves
from 

venue
to
venue,
intended
to
be
the
project's
festival
participating
ground
station.
All
ground
stations 

are
primarily
constructed
from
recycled
PC
housings
that
act
as
a
sort
of
modular
brick.
Some
faces
of

some
PC
housing
bricks
are
painted
with
portraits.
Other
PC
housings
have
texts
laser-cut
out
on
their 

sides.
Still
others
are
adorned
with
silicon
caulk
drawings.
And
the
odd
PC
will
be
fastened
to
and 

support
a
working
flat
screen
to
display
messages
received
from
The
Orbitants
as
it
passes
overhead.

This
ground
station
is
foreseen
for
traveling
shows
and
temporary
events.



Another
ground
station
resembles
a
conceptual
barbeque
party,
with
kebab
skewer
sculptures

representing
orbital
themes
revolving
slowly
over
a
grill
that
is
heated
symbolically
by
the
sound
of
the 

Earth
turning
playing
streaming
from
an
amateur
online
space
radio
station
over
charcoal
grey
speakers

built
into
the
base
of
the
barbeque
grill,
itself
a
bricollage
construction
of
mini-satellite
dishes
and 

discarded
PC
housings.
This
ground
station
situation
is
foreseen
for
Germany.


A
third
ground
station
is
nested
under
a
flimsy
net
handmade
from
household
silicon
caulk.
Intended
for 

China,
the
roof-like
installation
is
multi-peaked
and
porous,
all
in
all
a
sort
of
virtual
Asian
pavilion.
The 

roof
tiers
are
nothing
more
than
stretched
net
made
of
grey
household
silicon.
Embedded
in
the
silicon

at
some
junctures,
in
random
patches,
are
quaint
and
individual
model
trees
purchased
from
hobby 

makers
on
eBay.
Within
some
silicon
lengths
computer
and
power
cables
are
wired
and
hook
up
to

palm-sized
flat
screens
used
for
message
reception
from
The
Orbitants
art
satellite
when
it
deposits

new
messages
it
only
recently
itself
when
they
were
beamed
up
to
it
by
guests
in
the

groundSpacePlace:
station
it
last
orbited
over.



A
fourth
ground
station
is
sunken,
partially
below
ground,
inspired
by
the
subterranean
astronomical 

observatory
designed
and
built
by
Tycho
Brahe
in
the
late
16th
Century.
All
four
of
The
Orbitants's

ground
stations
have
some
of
their
PC
platinum-colored
metal
surfaces
transformed
into
canvases

adorned
with
painted
and
reproduced
images
and
icons
associated
with
Stage
One
-
SpacePlace:
Art
in

the
Age
of
Orbitization,
in
order
to
close
the
loop
and
complete
the
project.



Participants
visiting
each
ground
station
are
greeted
by
flat
screens
scrolling
messages
relayed
by
The

Orbitants
from
participants
at
the
ground
station
it
last
passed
over.
In
response
to
messages
received

from
a
previous
ground
station,
participants
at
the
actual
ground
station
type
messages
into
a 

repository
that
are
subsequently
transmitted
to
The
Orbitants
once
overhead.
In
concert
with
the

sunrise-sunset
sound
and
light
show
triggered
by
The
Orbitants
relative
proximity,
the
effect
is

stunning.
As
The
Orbitants
moves
out
of
range
and
the
sunset
program
is
complete,
participants
are
left

in
subdued
light
to
ponder
new
messages
scrolling
on
ground
station
screens,
freshly
deposited
by
The 

Orbitants
as
it
orbits
the
Earth.




Credits:
Prof.
Philip
Pocock,
The
Orbitants
project
concept;

with
Prof.
Peter
Weibel,
CEO
and
Director,

ZKM
Center
for
Art
and
Media
Technology
Karlsruhe
Germany
2006.