By Will Frank, Arts and Culture Reporter
Across the world, Alvin Lucier is composing his latest project at the Art Gallery of Western Australia. But here’s the twist: he died in 2021.
The exhibit is constructed around 20 wall-mounted brass plates with mallets that are periodically struck, sending a ringing vibration throughout the room. What controls these mallets is the recently deceased Alvin Lucier. In the center of the room lives a small enclosure that hosts two white blobs (“brain on a dish”), which send electrical signals to the mallets, creating his newest compositions.
The blobs are cerebral organoids, three-dimensional structures that resemble a developing human brain. They were created using Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell (IPSC) technology. Lucier’s cells were donated before his death in 2021.
Cerebral organoids on a mesh of electrodes (Photo courtesy of media release from the Art Gallery of Western Australia)
The “Revivification” project came to fruition in 2018, when Lucier and an assembled mix of artists and scientists came up with the prospect of generating art after death. The team includes artist Nathan Thompson, Guy Ben-Ary, and Matt Gingold, along with University of Western Australia neuroscientist Stuart Hodgetts.
Lucier, in correspondence with his team, donated his blood for the project in 2020. They reprogrammed the blood cells into stem cells, which are what the “brain on a dish” is composed of, in the middle of the exhibit. The neuronal structure rests on a mesh of electrodes, which corresponds to the mallets that sit behind the brass plates. A statement from the gallery describes the process as generating “complex, sustained resonances that fill the space with sound.”
“Experimentation in the arts is just as vital as it is in the sciences and other fields.”- Ruth Waalkes
Alvin Lucier, pictured here in 2017 in Cambridge, Massachusetts (Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons)
Associate Provost for the Arts and Executive Director for Moss Arts Center at Virginia Tech, Ruth Waalkes, is responsible for setting strategic direction and creating programmatic priorities for university-level arts initiatives. She leads the overall development, artistic programming, and operations of Moss Arts Center.
Waalkes noted, “Experimentation in the arts is just as vital as it is in the sciences and other fields. When the arts center was in development, we formulated the concept for what is now the Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology (ICAT) as a key element of the overall arts initiative here at Virginia Tech. ICAT has a variety of lab spaces here and supports many different types of projects at the intersections of science, engineering, arts, and design. Some projects are predominantly using art and design methods to explore a research topic, and some utilize technology and scientific data to create works of art. I do see these collaborations continuing to expand here at Virginia Tech through ICAT and other departments on campus.”
In his prolific 90 years of life, Lucier was known for his experimental edge, frequently drawing from the physics of sound in his music. One of his most famous works, “I Am Sitting in a Room,” consisted of him recording himself reading a passage, playing the tape, and re-recording it, and repeating the process until the words became too jumbled to register. He became a pivotal figure in the experimental music scene, revolutionizing the standards of how composition is thought of. His philosophy of composing focused on a shift from the traditional musical elements to experimenting and pushing the boundaries of experimenting with the properties of physical sound.
When asked how “Revivification” challenges the traditional notion of authorship and creativity, Waalkes commented,
“Art-making that crosses the boundaries of technologies and the sciences is a big topic now, particularly with the proliferation of artificial intelligence. Many people are experimenting with these new tools, and it will be very interesting to see what paths both performing and visual artists take. In [this] case, I would say that the creative authors are a collaborative effort – Alvin Lucier who provided the concept, and plus all of [the] others who devised and implemented the installation. However, the final product created needs to resonate with and provoke a response [from] its audience beyond the novelty of the process, I believe, to be considered a ‘successful’ work of art.”
Through his avant-garde work with echolocation, brain waves, and room acoustics, the lines became blurred between music, science, and art. This is what garnered the attention of the artists and researchers at the Art Gallery of Western Australia.
The team’s objective is greater than the act of preservation or paying tribute to a legend; they are, “fundamentally reimagin[ing] artistic immortality by creating a living extension of Lucier’s creative essence,” the team told Forbes.
Still, it would be more accurate to attribute creativity to the “interaction” itself between humans and machines, rather than putting it solely on the robot or technology side…” – Myounghoon Jeon
The installation raises complex ethical and philosophical questions. Not only does this technology allow a lab-grown brain to compose music from the creative mind of a deceased artist, but it also challenges the status quo understanding of creativity, consciousness, and agency.
Myounghoon Jeon, an Industrial and Systems Engineering/ Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) Professor at Virginia Tech, wrote a survey paper about robotic arts in 2017. AI technology has grown exponentially since then, and so have his thoughts on how the technology can be used.
Jeon remarked, “In the paper, I argued that artists interact with technologies or robots (even though they don’t have consciousness) by receiving feedback and adjusting their interactions accordingly. This goes beyond just “responsiveness” or “reactivity” to something, but we can call it “interactivity”. Still, it would be more accurate to attribute creativity to the “interaction” itself between humans and machines, rather than putting it solely on the robot or technology side, given that human input or “curation” plays a significant role in shaping both the style and meaning-making. At that time, I mentioned that it could still be difficult for machines to make a new “concept” or engage in “meaning-making”. But with recent AI advancements, my thought has evolved more. So, now I can imagine that AI can even make original concepts or artistic directions, which might imply that the interactions with those machines can be more meaningful.
The cells are not done growing either. The team is hoping to learn if they are capable of changing in response to the environment they are housed in. Noise from the gallery viewers is converted into electrical signals and is fed back into the “in vitro brain”. The group is aware of the strangeness this exhibit invites to mind. Part of their mission is to raise the questions of creativity and art: Can it exist outside the human body, and if it can, should it? They are trying to define what the ethical or philosophical guidelines should inform future collaborations between neuroscience, AI, and the arts.
Jeon stated, “Regarding AI and artistic ownership, we should be careful when reusing or building [on] previous or existing work. With large language models (e.g., ChatGPT), it is easy to absorb and reproduce others’ ideas without clear attribution. Knowing where the source comes [from] and acknowledging it would be critical. When working with biological or neurological data (or even posthumous material), ethical collection and consent are crucial (e.g., IRB and consent procedure). In the example here, Lucier himself volunteered for this artwork, so there would be no problem. However, future applications may raise many more complex ethical challenges that we must thoughtfully navigate.
The Revivification Collective uses cross-disciplinary expertise of emerging technologies to initiate a critical public conversation of the blurred lines surrounding modern technology and its place in art culture. We are in a new age— an age of unprecedented biotechnological advancement, empowering thought-provoking and philosophically challenging notions of what constitutes art. Never before has the idea of ‘consciousness’ been as critical in defining what art is.
Jeon observed, “I agree that ‘consciousness’ is critical in creating art. At the same time, many scholars and artists recognize that ‘randomness’ or ‘happenings’ are also key in contemporary art. In the work we’re discussing, there was certainly conscious intent from the creators, researchers, and Lucier. However, the lab-grown brain cells lack consciousness, so there is no ownership or authorship there. Still, they could introduce unpredictable elements into the process (i.e., randomness). I believe that both consciousness and randomness meaningfully contribute to the art piece ultimately.”
Where we go from here is uncertain. The rapid growth of technology and the use of artificial intelligence seem to come straight from an Asimov story, but it is impossible to turn a blind eye to this technology. Discovering the reaches of this technology is the goal of this exhibit, it is meant to raise discomfort, to make us stop and reflect on humanity’s trajectory. After all, that has always been the intention of great art.
> THE NEWS FEED < 
