12AFTERIMAGE/December 1983

NOTES TOWARD A
HISTORY OF
IMAGE-PROCESSEDVIDEOSTEINA AND WOODY VASULKA
LUCINDA FURLONG
Ed .'s note : This is thesecond in aseries ofarticles on imageprocessed video. The first article examined the contributionsof Eric Siegel, Stephen Beck, Steve Rutt Dan Sandin, andBill and Louise Etra to the developmentof electronic imaging
devices [see Afterimage, Vol. 11, Nos. 1 & 2 (Summer 1983),
pp. 35-38] Future articles will discuss the work of Ralph
Hocking and Sherry Miller at the Experimental Television
Center, Nam June Paik, Shalom Gorewitz, Barbara Buckner,
Sara Hornbacher, Peer Bode, and others . The project isfunded by a video writing grant from the New York StateCouncil on the Arts Media Program.
Despite the fact that many video artists whose work is
categorized as image-processed reject this term, it can be
useful in describing work by people who not only use similarequipment but share an attitude which treats the video signal
as a plastic medium . Beyond such generalizations, however,the designation can be misleading since, as a genre, "imageprocessed" conflates any and all tapes which contain manipulated and/or synthesized imagery. This acknowledges obvious technical similarities but doesn't account forthe variety
of approaches which produce works that can be more precisely interpreted . Of course, one interpretation doesn't
necessarily preclude another, but an attempt must be madeto get beyond the all too familiar responses to this work-thatis, either total rejection or total embrace.
The intent of this project, then, is twofold. The first is to
identify-without becoming dogmatic-some of the different
approaches, some of the social and artistic contingencies,
and how these are manifested in the work. The second-but
by no means secondary-goal is to contribute to a broader
history of video that emphasizes the parallel and overlapping
activities of artists.
Probably the most common way image-processed work
has been described is as an exploration of the basic propertyof video-the electronic signal . There are many examples ofthis fundamentally formalist characterization which, I think,provides a way to lend modernist credentials to an art form
that has had a difficult time gaining acceptance-critical attention, funding, marketability-by traditional art institutions .
For example, in December 1971 the Whitney Museum's
first video exhibition, assembled by the late film curator DavidBienstock, consisted almost entirely of image-processed
tapes. In the program notes, Bienstock wrote,
It wasdecided insteadto limittheprogramto tapes whichfocus on theability of videotape to create and generate its own intrinsic imagery,
rather than its abilityto record reality. This is done with special video
synthesizers, colorizers, and by utilizing many of the unique electronic properties of the medium (emphasis added) .'More recently, Sherry Miller, assistant director of the Experimental Television Center, wrote in Exposure,Electronic image processing uses as art-making material those properties inherent in the medium of video. Artists work at a fundamental
level with various parameters of the electronic signal, for example,
frequency, amplitude, or phase, which actually define the resulting
image and sound.2
Yet another recent example is the catalogue introduction to"The Electronic Gallery," an exhibition that included tapes by
a number of .people who use the Experimental Television
Center . In it Maureen Turim writes,
The Center explores video as an artistic medium . To figure out, togive form to, to embody, to displaythe various properties that a video
system can possess.3
Such generalizations pose a number of problems . It ishighly questionable whether synthesized or manipulated
video can claim to embody allthe medium's "inherent properties ." Couldn't one easily argue that video's instantaneity andpotential for interactivity are also inherent? More important, I
think, is another point Turim makes, "Ultimately, though, theworks gain their communicative impact in reference to otherconcepts and issues .'These quotes referto any and all kinds of image-processed
work. However, of all the prominent artists associated withthis type of video, Steina and Woody Vasulka have been consistently associated with technological experimentation andall the ensuing formalist implications. Their work has been
described as systemic, didactic, formal, and syntactic, andthe Vasulkas-who are both very articulate-have encouraged such readings . Turim's comment may be worth considering, though, since the effects and meanings of their work

cannot be so neatly confined to these categories . As Shalom
Gorewitz has remarked about some of the Vasulkas' multipie-monitor pieces that he saw at The Kitchen in the early
1970s,
They could talk about it being didactic and minimalist, but when you
saw it streaming down apyramid of monitors, it was so lush and exciting visually. It was an incredibly sensual experience to be presented
with . . . . I wouldn't call [their work] minimal, and I wouldn't call it pureresearch, because there's a lot of pleasure on a sensual level whenseeing it.s
Beyond being prolific and playing enthusiastic roles inpioneering electronic imaging, the Vasulkas-as founders of
The Kitchen-were also major contributors to the development of an intellectual and institutional framework for video,
and they have continued to nurture and promote video withina variety of contexts . I'll begin, then, with an account of theirinvolvement in the early years of video and a discussion of
how their work reflected-or in some cases, didn't reflectattitudes dominant in the '60s about technology, art, and the"establishment."
Born in Iceland, Steina Fteinunn Bjamadottir studied violin in
Reykjavik and at the Music Conservatory in Prague from 1959
to 1962. She also played in the Icelandic Symphony Orchestra
in 1964 . In Prague she met Woody Vasulka, who was studying
at the Academy of Performing Arts, Faculty of Film and Television . Woody Vasulka, following family tradition, had at firststudied industrial engineering in Brno, Czechoslovakia, hisbirthplace. Privately, however, he was writing poetry and fiction and found that he had no use for engineering because it
involved too much mathematics . Feeling more affinity withliterary tradition, he studied documentary filmmaking . This interest developed out of his desire to work individually as hehad as a writer, rather than in a group; documentaries could
be produced by one or two people, whereas feature work involved many more . However, documentary had its limits too,and Woody found that film in general was "absolutely aclosed medium to me . . . . I was exposed to all the narrative
structures of film, but they weren't real to me . . . . I could never
express myself in what was called the narrative cinema . ,6
The Vasulkas' decision to emigrate to the United States
was based on cultural rather than political considerations . As
Woody explained, "I was never attracted to this kind of political system," but "one cannot live in the twentieth century andnot deal with America directly ." 7 When the Vasulkas arrived
in New York City in 1965, they had much to deal with, not leastof all learning English. While they spent most of their time
during their first two years in the U.S . getting oriented, there
were many avant-garde activities going on with which theywould later become involved. These activities-loosely labeled"intermedia"-grew out of intermingling music, dance, theater, and film communities .
In November 1965 Village Voice film critic Jonas Mekas
proclaimed in his weekly column, "The medium of cinema isbreaking out and taking over and is going blindly and by itself. ,8 In 1966, he wrote, "Suddenly, the intermedia shows
are all over town ."9 Light shows, slide shows, multiple film
projections, light-motion art, sensoria-these were the activities of people like Jackie Cassen, Elaine Summers, Jud
Yalkut, Aldo Tambellini, Stan VanDerBeek, Ed Emshwiller,
Gerd Stern, Nam June Paik, and many others . Many, thoughcertainly not all, of these events were inspired by Marshall
McLuhan's influential media theories . Because of the widespread impact and popularization of McLuhan's writing, it
may be helpful to briefly review his arguments.
McLuhan begins with the assumption that modern humanexperience is characterized by the simultaneous reception ofvast amountsof information in theform of sense stimuli: sight,
smell, hearing, touch, and taste. Because the attempt to communicate and process this variegated experience is subject
to distortion, some methods of communication are betterthan
others . According to McLuhan, a medium which "extends one
single sense in 'high definition"'-such as a photograph-is
a hot medium, whereas a medium which provides only minimal extension of a sense-such as print-is cool .' ° In otherwords, cool media demand a high level of participation, orcompletion, by the receiving audience, while hot media donot.
In McLuhan's formulation, the electronic communications"explosion" of the :1960s created a new form of perception
which makes these stimuli directly apprehendable throughthe senses . Since he views all media as "extensions ofman," television and radio act as cybernetic extensions of
the human nervous system . As McLuhan wrote in 1964,

Today, after more than a century of electric technology, we have extended ourcentral nervous system itself in a global embrace, abolishLUCINDA FURLONG, a video critic and videomaker, is workingon a ing both space and time as far as our planet is concerned. Rapidly, we
history of image-processed video.
approach the final phase of the extensions of man-the technologi-

Clockwise from top left : The Kitchen in 1971 . Frames from Evolution(1970) . Framefrom Participation (an undistributed compositetape, c.
1970) . Frame from Spaces (1972) . The Vasulkas' studio in Buffalo,
N.Y ., 1973-79 . Frame from 1-2-3-4 (1974) . Frame from Golden Voyage (1973) . Some of the "cooks" in The Kitchen, 1972 ; from left toright : Dimitri Devyatkin, Shridhar Bapat, Rhys Chatham, Steina Vasulka. The Vasulkas' studio in New York City, 1967-73 . Installation
view of Matrix (1971) . All video tapes by Woody and Steina Vasulka.

AFTERIMAGE/December 1983

13

cal simulation of consciousness, when the creative processof knowing will be collectively and corporately extended to the whole ofhuman society, much as we have already extended our senses andour nerves by the various media."Thus, McLuhan's "global village," a harmonious world "tribe"
linked via a network of instantaneous communication, wouldevolve.
Jonathan Miller has pointed out that McLuhan's overly optimistic vision could only have been achieved by "stressing
the immediate mental effect of the various media at the ex12
pense of neglecting the messages they actually convey ."themediumitself-regardlessThis emphasis on the effect ofof its content-is the basis for the famous dictum, "Themedium is the message ." This aphorism fit quite neatly withformalist art discourse ; identifying those qualities specific tovideo as an art medium not only coincided with McLuhan'sideas but Clement Greenberg's formalism.
McLuhan's theory has since been discarded by somescholars because his utopianism completely contradicts thefact that electronic media have been used as instruments ofsocial control . Moreover, as Raymond Williams has shown,
this analysis represents a technologically determinist approach to history, which posits technology as a force in itself-responsible for changes in society and the human condition-rather than something developed with specific purposes in mind . In Television: Technology and Cultural Form
Williams counters McLuhan : "All media operations are in effect desocialised ; they are simply physical events in an
abstracted sensorium, and are distinguishable only by theirsvariable sense-ratios (emphasis added) ."'Still, as I said, many artists were creating intermedia sense
environments, openly embracing McLuhan's ideas." These
events-as well as others less explicitly derived from McLuhan-were commonly known as "expanded cinema" (theterm was laterused as the title for Gene Youngblood's futuristic survey of such work).
While the Vasulkas 'read Mekas's column regularly andwere peripherally aware of underground filmmakers, they attended very few of these events in the first years they were in
New York . Steina continued studying violin, while Woody
started working on commercial and industrial films andexhibits in 1967 . In 1969 he started using video. His employer, Harvey Lloyd, was using closed-circuit, multiple-monitor
video displays as well as multi-screen projections and thisstructure eventually became the model for much of the Vasulkas' early work .
For Woody, video provided an alternative to film which hefelt was an exhausted medium . In 1978 he recalled,

I was educated in film, which I understood as an extensionof narrativity into space. So at that time, I was very concernedwith literary forms
presented in cinematic ways, which I linked directly to the economic
structure of existing productions-studios, laboratories, equipment.
Only much later, after I had worked in film productions in New York
City, did I achieve any independence, or manage to personalize theprocess of image-making, and that came about as aresult of working
with electronic equipment.' 5
Beyond the compromises entailed in working in the film industry and the limitations of conventional cinematic narrativity, Woody also had an initial fascination with what might becalled the phenomenology of video: "When I first saw video
feedback, I knew I had seen the cave fire . It had nothingto do1swith anything, just a perpetuation of some kind of energy ."involvement
Like many other early video artists, Steina's
was inspired by Howard Wise's exhibition, 'TV as aCreative
Medium," held in the spring of 1969 . "I went in there and saw
Einstein [a tape by Eric Siegel utilizing the video colorizer hedesigned and built], blasting out, and it quite blew mymind ."" Soon, both the Vasulkas were using Lloyd's equipment after work, and eventually Woody began bringing it
home . At that point, they realized that theonly way they could
really experiment was by living with the equipment. "Whatstarted happening," Steina recalls, "was that every day
Woody would come home from work at five o'clock, and I
would have another piece for him. He got so jealous because
in the evening he was tired. So he just came home from work
one day and said, 'I'm quitting!"' Using some borrowed equipment and some that they bought, in early 1970 the Vasulkas
began to work more "systematically," making feedback loops
and using audio inputs to generate and alter the video signal
inside black and white monitors .
Although many of these experiments were not original
since others had done them before, the excitement of thattime was generated by the sense of being pioneers . There
was a camaraderie among people who were making discoveries about the potential of video-as an electronic
phenomenon and as a tool for social change . As Steina describes this animus,
Our discovery was a discovery because we discovered it. We didrVt
know all those people had discovered it before us . It was just likefeedback : pointing thecamera at the TV setand seeing feedback was
an invention that was invented over and over again. As late as 1972,
people were inventingfeedback, thinking they hadjust caught thefireof the gods .

Part of the excitement, too, had to do with the informality of
exchanges among people. Tapes were shown in lofts or atclubs, and information spread through word of mouth orsometimes via small ads in the Village Voice or the East Village Other. But, says Steina, "It's different [now], it was a secret then . People would come and say, "if you go to that loft
there, there's a lot of [video] stuff." And Woody summarized
the attitude in a 1972 New York Times article :"What is special
about video art at this time is that it isn't yet trapped in rigid
rules. There are not yet any clich6s, and the artists haven't
had time to develop the maniacal egos one finds in the otherarts. All the video artists are like one big family and thinking
about video's big future .""The video "family" was not homogenous, though . The Vasulkas were more interested in art and the counterculture

14

AFTERIMAGE/December 1983

Left : frame from Vocabulary (1973) . Right: frame from Grazing (1975) .

Soon events at The Kitchen started to get regular coverage they have become artists, and have used the electronic tools whichthan in politics. Consequently, they found themselves
they had created. . . . We've always maintained this very close, symsituated somewhere between the established artists who in the Village Voice and periodically in the New York Times. biotic relationship with creative people outside industry, but who havefestival,David
The
Kitchenduring
its
1972
video
were doing conceptual pieces in mainstream galleries and Describing
the same purposeless urge to develop images or tools, which we allpolitically active community access groups . Referring to the Shirey wrote in the Times, "Visitors to The Kitchen should not then maybe call art.24
people who formed such groups as Global Village, People's expect a well-appointed theater for the projections . They willreferring to people like Eric Siegel, Stephen
Video Theater, and Raindance Corporation, Steina de- be confronted rather with a loft-like room, honeycombed with Here Woody is
Bill
Hearn,
Steve Rutt, Bill Etra, George Brown, Shuya
wires, videotape recorders and a roomwide battery of TV Beck,lineates these distinctions :Don MacArthur, and younger people like
Abe,Dan
Sandin,forthehardware;commentingontheNone of them were particularly interested in art, although alotof them monitors ." So much
Brewster, Jeffrey Schier, and Ed TanDavid
Jones,
Richardwork
istediously
rehe
said,
"Although
part
of
the
that
software,had art backgrounds. . . . This was their anti-art statement . . . so
nenbaum-allofwhomhave designed and/or built electronic
inspired
set us immediately on the fringe, because we were never really inter- petitive, displaying little imagination, there is enoughested in politics . I saw it as an American internal affair that was very talent to warrant a visit." 2odevices for artists .
interesting for me to watch as a foreigner, nothing else .
While a number of people in the late '60s and early 70s
What kind of programming prompted this assessment? AlHence,inadditionto
Kitchen's
were
working with video colorizers, mixers, and synthesizers,
this,boundaries
were
fluid.
originallywantedtolimit
The
Despitethough the Vasulkas
making the kind of work for which they were best known, the program to electronic music and video, they found that there the Vasulkas took a different approach . "Our idea right from
Vasulkas were shooting documentaries for the Alternate was too much interesting work going on to justifysuch a purist the very beginning was not to have a synthesizer. We always
Media Center as well as compiling their own informal attitude . Consequently, programming was actually more var- wanted to have open-ended boxes," Steina explains . Not
documentaries of the downtown cultural scene. "We just ied. Open video screenings, originally organized by Shirley only did they take a modular approach, but they wanted tostarted going everywhere and asking to tape people," says Clarke, were held on Wednesdays . Rhys Chatham, an elec- control the tools by using another electronic input, not by
Steina . Subsequently, they edited some of these events to- tronic musician who had studied with Morton Subotnick, be- using their hands to move a control knob until an image
gether in atape called Participation (which is undistributed) . It came music director . A "Monday Series"-kicked off with a looked right. Most devices that incorporated colorizing, mixis a kind of countercultural happening circa 1969-71 . In it, Jimi performance by LaMonte Young and Marian Zazeela-soon ing, and synthesizing functions could be controlled either
Hendrix performs a New Year's Eve concert at the Fillmore spilled over to Tuesday nights .21 Thursdays and Fridays through external inputs-known as voltage control-or by
East ; a group of Andy Warhol's actors-among them On- were taken up, says Steina, by other "general events that now control knobs. By opting for input-only control, the Vasulkas
dine, Taylor Mead, Candy Darling, and Holly Woodlawn- have a name : performance art." Rock concerts were often were imposing an organizing structure that was derived notargue viciously on the DavidSuskind Show over whether or held on Saturdays, and seminars and workshops on such from theirown preconceived ideas about what might make an
not they'd been exploited ; there are scenes from a transves- timely topics as perception and cybernetics were held on interesting image, but from the system itself . This is not to elevate their approach over one that Steina has called "knobtite musical by playwright Jackie Curtis ; Don Cherry plays Sundays .22
but to illustrate that artists had certain choices intomentionan
twisting,"
jazz
inWashington
Square-not
point
for
a
variimpromptu
In its entirety, The Kitchen provided a focal
assortment of other events that today elicit pure, undiluted ety of informal music, video, and other categorically elusive ac- how their tools could be used .
Behind the Vasulkas's particular decision was their desire
nostalgia.
tivities which would have otherwise remained invisible to a
For the Vasulkas these varied activities typified American large public. Although a few of the names, e.g ., LaMonte to understand the inner workings of electronic phenomena.
culture. In an unpublished 1978 document, they stated,
Young, Alvin Lucier, Nam June Paik, are now known outside "There is a certain behavior of the electronic image that is
involved re- unique . . . . It's liquid, it's shapeable, it's clay, it's an art mateWe were interested in certain decadent aspects of America, the of new music and video circles, most people
lesser-known
downtown
scene,
but their rial, it exists independently," Woody has stated .25Video's
time-underground
rock
and
roll,
homosexual
mainedpartofaphenomena of theartists explored, but the
way,
we
.
theater, and the rest of that illegitimate culture. In the same
contributions were nonetheless crucial to The Kitchen's vital- plasticity was something that many
were curious about more puritanical concepts of art inspired . by ity.
Vasulkas took a fairly rigorous, didactic, and conceptual ap,
McLuhan and Buckminster Fuller . It seemed a strange and unified
the fact that the video image
In the fall of 1973 the Vasulkas moved to Buffalo, N.Y . to proach . They were fascinated by
front-against the establishment.
organized as voltages
fromelectricalenergyisconstructedIn
teach a video workshop at the Center for Media Study.
This thread-"against the establishment"-ran through 1974 Woody became a faculty member at the State Univer- and frequencies-a temporal event.
every aspect of video activity then, whether it was electronic sity of New York at Buffalo, where Steina also later taught .
Initially, they identified two properties peculiar to video.
feedback, media environments, or documentaries in which They remained in Buffalo until 1979 . The Vasulkas had al- Both audio and video signals are composed of electronic
video, andthe subjects provided their own verbal "feedback." It was only
ready begun their investigations into the phenomenology of waveforms. Since sound can be used to generate
after video began to become more institutionalized that video, but they probably couldn't have had a more intellectu- vice versa, one of the first pieces of equipment the Vasulkas
their tapes illuspeople began to define their turf. In retrospect, it is very hard
ally compatible environment . In the same department were bought was an audio synthesizer . Many of
to see abstract or manipulated video-now divorced from its Paul Sharits, Hollis Frampton, and Tony Conrad-all trate this relationship-one type of signal determines theentailed construction
original context-as "anti-establishment ."filmmakers who were, in different ways, dealing with struc- form of the other. Their second interest
In February 1971 the Vasulkas had their first public show- tures of moving images .
of the video frame. Because timing pulses control the stability
ing of tapes on three consecutive evenings at Max's Kansasof the video raster to create the "normal" image we are accustomed to, viewers rarely realize-unless their TV set breaks
City . A different program-electronic work, gay theater performances, and the Fillmore concerts-was presented eachdown-that the video signal is actually a frameless connight, and all were displayed on five monitors . A friend in thetinuum . This fact, discovered accidentally, fascinated the
dialogue with the tool and the image, so we would not Vasulkas, particularly Woody.
Our
work
is
a
found
a
space
that
Andy
Mannik,subsequently
audience,
preconceive an image separately, make aconscious model of it, andhad been the kitchen of the Broadway Central Hotel on then try to match it . We would rather make a tool and dialogue withthat time, I was totally obsessed with this idea that there was no
Mercer St., and he asked the Vasulkas if they had any use for it . . . . Butit is more complex, becausewe sometimesdesign the tools, At
singleframe anymore. I come from the movies, where the frame was23
earned working at the Alternate Media and so do conceptual work as well .
it . Using money they earned-working
extremely rigid, and I understood that electronic material has no limiCenter, the Vasulkas andspent two months renotation within its existence. It only has limitation when it reaches thetheir work as a dialogue with the screen because the screen itself is a rigid time structure.26
vating .' 9 The Electronic Kitchen opened on June 15, The Vasulkas often speak of
their work that
1971, and the old hotel was converted into the Mercer Arts tools they use. In fact, tools are so central toits designer on theirvidBy altering the timing pulse of the video signal, the Vasullist
each
one,
along
with
creditto
theyCenter .
theThisinformationisusefulinaconsiderationofkas
could treat an image that continuously drifted horizoneography.
The original idea behind what eventually became simply
construedasacharacterizaIn the three-segment tape Evolution (1970), they aniVasulkas'
work,
but
it
might
be
tally.
which
artists
toestablishanelectroniclabin
The Kitchen wasoftechnolVasulkas
as"tool
cultists,"
worshipers
mateda picture of the various stages of human evolution
could experiment with sound and images . (Because elec- tion of thevariousnegativesocial
uses
to
which
using
horizontal
drift. Eventually they were able to control theogy
oblivious
tothetronic sound and electronic imaging operate on many of theassessment is speed of the drift with an external timing source called thetechnologies
have
been
put.
I
don't
think
this
to
explorethis
relationprinciples,theVasulkaaswantedsame
de- Horizontal Drift Variable Clock . This tool was built for them inship .) In the evening, they had what they called a Live Audi- valid, for behind their development and use of imaging
nor 1972 by George Brown and allowed them to deviate from theneitherexclusively
formal
vices
is
a
setof
concerns
that
is
LATL-during
which
the
audience
ence Test Laboratory-or
technological.
standard horizontal frequency.
response to their experiments would be tested . As Steina re- purelyin
thisseries,priortotheinAsI
discussed
in
my
first
articleThe Vasulkas then extended their experiments with erasauditoriumorcalls, "it wasn't supposed to be any kind ofdesign of video ing the boundaries of the single frame in a series of multipleof
consumer
video
products,
thetroduction
wherepeoplecould
space.
It
was
just
a
place
'legitimate'industry . monitor works. Said Woody: "The electromagnetic spectrum
come in and interact with the people making the video." For equipment was geared toward broadcasting and
we
now
take
for
granted-color
exists, organized or unorganized, totally in space. Confining it
Much
of
the
equipmentan"esdifficult
to
think
of
their
space
as
the Vasulkas, it wasforexample-wereandlightweightportapaks,
to a single monitor is like a view through a camera or a single
tablishment" institution. They didn't want to become adminis- camerasIt
was
unaffordablefor
mostpeople.
projection frame. ,27 Unlike other multiple-monitor displays
eitherunavailable
ortrators or even have an office or phone.
thedevices
associatedwith(now known as installations), which were often based on
What began as an informal laboratory, however, quickly even more difficult to acquire
synthecolonizers,
mixers,and
McLuhan's notion of the simultaneous reception of sense
image-processing-keyers,evolved into a full-time alternative space. Like many organiequipment
wasusually
more
suitasizers.
What'smore,
thatdata, those by the Vasulkas did not mimic "information overwasto
inthelate'60s
andearly'70s,
thegoal
zations foundedfor
artists'experiments.
load . '21 Rather, their early multiple-monitor works were increate an open and flexible situation and, importantly, not to ble for producing special effectsthanoutequiptended to violate the single frame confined within a single
artists
foundthemselves
seeking
everConsequently,
curate . In the early days at The Kitchen no one wassimple image would
turned away, and artists would bring their own crews and ment designers who, in one way or another, were mavericks box. In many of these early pieces, a very
monitors.
Spaces1 and Spaces 11
Woody
recalls,
sweep
acrossabandofwithintheelectronics
industry.
As
often their own equipment. As for payment, artists received
horizontal drift and video-acti(1972),
forinstance,featuredcollected,
they
could
choosetono fixed fee, but if money was
I discovered that in the United States there's an alternative industrial
textures andtake it, split it, or leave it to The Kitchen . Most let The Kitchen subculture which is based on individuals, in much the same way that vated sound. In Spaces 11, three layers of visible
image
planes,visibleon all monshapes
were
keyed,
andthemonthly
calendarandprokeep the money, which paid forthe
art is based on individuals. . . . These people, the electronic tool de.
simultaneously,
swept
horizontally
signers, have maintained their independence within the system . And itors
vided a furid of petty cash .

AFTERIMAGE/December 1983

While the Vasulkas initially focused on two basic areashorizontal drift and the audio-visual relationship-theybegan to expand their repertoire of effects by commissioning
various people to build specialized video equipment . As
Steina recalls,
In the spring of 1970, which was the first year we were working, we
met Eric Siegel, and we immediately fell in with him very well . And hemade use of equipment we had gotten, and we got to use his colorizer, and he helped Woody to build one. He made the boards, andthen Woody wired everything together, which was the first wiring experience that Woody got into with video. As soon as we got the firstmoney from the State Arts Council [NYSCA], we set a little aside fortool development, and our tool person became George Brown.
In addition to the Horizontal Drift Variable Clock, Brown
constucted a switcher in 1971 . He also made a cascading or
multi-keyer in 1973 . Unlike most keyers, which key two images-one over another-the multi-keyer could key up to six
images . This allowed images to be manipulated to create
foreground-background relationships. In 1974 Brown also
made a programmer, a digital device which could store andreplay a sequence of operations such as a switching or keying order.
Between 1971 and 1974 the Vasulkas made numerous
tapes utilizing these tools in increasingly complex combinations . Black Sunrise (1971), described by the Vasulkas as a"performance of energies organized into electronic images
and sounds," is a continuum of constantly permutating
abstract images which variously resemble a landscape or anaurora . Elements (1971) consists of variations on video feedback that are processed through a keyer and colorizer. The
Vasulkas called these tapes, as well as Key Snow (1971),
Electronic Image and Sound Compositions. And in many ofthese works the video was a function of the audio. In the program notes to the 1971 Whitney show, they said of thesetapes, "They resemble something you remember fromdreams or pieces of organic nature, but they never were real
objects, they have all been made artificially from various frequencies, from sounds, from inaudible pitches and theirbeats."
These were the kinds of tapes that-with their colorful
swirls of abstract imagery-were dismissed by many critics
because they looked like a moving version of modern
abstract painting, which was then becoming unfashionable.
For the Vasulkas, however, their work was based on various
manifestations of electromagnetic energy rather thanabstract art.
Other tapes from this period can be correlated with modern
art, though . Home and Golden Voyage (1973) are based on
bizarre juxtapositions found in Rene Magritte's paintings,
which, the Vasulkas felt, were similar to the effects they were
producing. Using the colorizer, multi-keyer, and switcher, as
well as horizontal drift, Home consists of three sequences inwhich still lifes are set in motion-e .g ., an apple drifting past ateapot on a kitchen stove. Golden Voyage refers directly to
Magritte . It is a sort of animation of his painting The Golden
Legend. "We were looking at this picture and we were joking
about how many cameras we'd need to reproduce it," Steina
explained. "Of course, three . One camera would be on theframe, one would be on the landscape, and then one camera
would be on the bread .,,29 These images were combinedusing the multi-keyer and set in motion via horizontal drift.
Loaves of French bread embark on a journey. They travel
across various backgrounds-a mesa, a beach, a buildingas well as a reclining nude woman . Initially mere loaves, thebreads take on phallic connotations as they encircle thewoman-an attempt at absurdist humor.
Many of their other tapes made during this time are lesssymbolic . For instance, in Vocabulary (1973), images of ahand and a sphere are manipulated with a keyer, colorizer,
and the Rutt/Etra Scan Processor in order to "convey in a didactic form the basic energy laws of electronic imaging." Thetapes 1-2-3-4 (1974) and Solo for 3 (1974) are even more didactic in that images of numbers are permutated in various
foreground-background relationships determined by the
programmer . In Solo for 3, three cameras focus on three different-sized images of the number three. The image planes
are layered with the multi-keyer, and sequenced by a digitalmusical instrument . The numbers drift, controlled by the variable clock . The result in both cases is a Sesame Street-styleinterplay of numbers, but with a synthetic soundtrack .
In 1974 the Vasulkas acquired a Rutt/Etra Scan Processor,
a device which allows the video raster-as well as the images displayed on it-to be reshaped through magnetic de-flection . To Woody the appeal of the Rutt/Etra was its capacity to visually display in a precise manner the most basic elements of the video signal-electronic waveforms . It was thisdevice that catalyzed his preoccupation with an aesthetic thatwas fundamentally didactic . For the next few years, the Vasulkas collaborated less . Woody described how the scan processor influenced his work :Compared to my previous work on videotape, the work with the scan
processor indicates a whole different trend in my understanding of
the electronic image. The rigidity and total confinement of time sequences have imprinted a didactic style on the product. Improvisational modes become less important than an exact mental script anda strong notion of the frame structure of the electronic image. Emphasis has shifted towards a recognition of a time/energy object andits programmable building block-the waveform .3b
The idea that video images were nothing more than electromagnetic energy constructed in time was central for
Woody, and he made numerous tapes and films from 1974 to1977 depicting the process. Many of these used audio andvideo noise as the image source . One of the clearest illustrations of what he called "time/energy objects" is found in The
Matter (1974) . In it a generated dot pattern is displayed on theraster . The three primary waveforms-sine, square, andtriangle-are fed into the Rutt/Etra and used to shape theraster display so that the dot pattern assumes the shape ofeach waveform . Woody illustrated these, kinds of changes
more systematically in a set of grid-like displays consisting ofstill photographs that depict the various states of the raster
when controlled by the primarywaveforms in conjunction withalterations of the scanning process. While these pieces were
designed as reductive exercises, other tapes and films apply
some of these principles to camera-generated images . Because the Rutt/Etra processes the signal in such a way thatlight energy-or brightness-can be converted to magnetic
energy, the illusion of three-dimensionality is created. This isaccomplished by connecting the incoming video signal to thevertical deflection system-or the magnetic force that "pulls"
the image vertically-so that the brightest portions of animage stand out. As Johanna Gill described the effect, "whatone is seeing is a topographical map of the brightness of animage; where the image is bright, it lifts the lines [of the raster] ; where it is black, they fall .,,31
Woody's tapes Reminiscence (1974) and C-Trend (1974),
the film Grazing (1975), and the tape Telc (1974) by Woody
and Steina, all transform camera images-landscapes, street
scenes, sheep grazing-into topographic renderings . Thesetapes and films all start with a referent that is "real," so that
one can more easily see the process of magnetic deflection
than with less specific imagery. These tapes possess eerie,
web-like qualities. However, neither those qualities in themselves nor what they might symbolize interested Woody.
Rather, this type of imaging challenged the dominance of thecamera, and this challenge had implications that extended tofundamental perceptual issues .
The theory that Woody first articulated in the mid-'70s andhas continually refined reevaluates not only cinematic form
but what we generally call "reality ." "Since we look at reality
throughoureyes, the reality has total dependence on perception, on how images are formed in the eye."'32 In otherwords,
because the camera lens has come to represent an extension of human vision, it has been equated with a truthful rendering of reality. .
According to Woody, electronically-generated, non-camera images-based on neither the lens northe eye-indicate
the potential for a new visual code that would supplant thetraditional lens-bound mode of visual organization which hascome to be accepted as most "real ." He described his goal in1978 :
I can at least unleash some attack against the tradition of imaging,which I see mostly as camera-obscura bound, or as pinhole organizing-principle defined. This tradition has shaped ourvisual perception,
not only through the camera obscura, but it's been reinforced, especially through the cinema and through television . It's a dictatorship of
the pinhole effect, as ironic and stupid as it sounds to call it that .
Woody's work with the Rutt/Etra, which he characterized as"the inevitable descent into the analysis of smaller and smaller time sequences," was a first step toward discovering a
new code . The code was derived from nature, in that the devices he was using-in particular, the Rutt/Etra-were capable of revealing and displaying as waveforms the electromagnetic forces that occur in nature . These become perceivable as sounds and images only when artificially proces-15

sed by oscillators, and displayed on oscilloscopes or video
monitors, or processed through devices like the scan processor. Hence Woody's pursuit was not so much the investigation of video's inherent properties as a formalist end in itself;
rather, it was more phenomenological, directed at challenging culturally determined notions of what constitutes reality .
Meanwhile, Steina took a different, though related, tack in
Machine Vision, a series of tapes and installations begun in1975. By utilizing a variety of mechanized modes of camera
control-originally built by Woody for film work-Steina
began to set up apparatuses designed to disassociate thecamera from a human point of view .
Habitually, by looking, we keep selecting, subjectively "zooming,"and "framing" the space around us . 1 wanted to create a vision thatcan see the whole space all the time . . . . And it too derived from mywatching sq many videotapes, watching an individual "delivering" youspace. . . . It was a challenge to me to create a space that would notdeal with the idiosyncrasies of human vision .°Signifying Nothing (1975), Sound and Fury (1975), andSwitch! Monitor! Drift! (1976) are all documentations of
Steina interacting with studio set-ups in which two motorizedcameras monitor not only the surrounding space but the
movement of the othercamera . The most complex of these is
Switch! Monitor! Driftl, which consists of 13 scenes that variously combine the two cameras' automated movements withassorted effects achieved by keying, switching, horizontal
drift, and scan processing . The result is not merely technologically impressive, but cerebral : the dislocation of the picture
plane forces the viewer to make sense of the surrounding
fragmented space. In these tapes Steina is observing thesystem observing her and repositioning herself in the spacein response .
In the installations Allvision No. 1 (1978) and No . 2 (197879), set up respectively at theAlbright-Knox Gallery in Buffalo
and at The Kitchen, these contraptions become at once kinetic sculptures and activators of the seeing process.
Two cameras are mounted on the ends of a slowly revolving axis witha perfectly spherical mirror at the center of the axis . On the monitors,
viewers see an artificially created 360-degree image. While the viewers are part of the "real" space, they can at the same time see themselves in the "imaginary" dimension created on the screens35
Allvision fragments and reconstructs reality and, in so doing,
challenges us to participate in the deciphering process.
Robert Haller aptly summed up this series : "[These pieces]sunder the sense of the 'true' in favor of the act of perception,
demanding active seeing rather than the passive look ."36
At this time Steina also began to use herviolin to control thevideo image. Violin Power (1970-78) begins with Steina playing a classical piece and proceeds from that to electronic
music. The violin-patched through an audio synthesizerto avideo switcher-then activates switching between two different camera views of Steina playing. (This scene constitutes
one segmentof Switch! Monitor!Drift.j Similarly, in other segments the violin generates other image and sound distortions. Violin Power is another demonstration of the Vasulkas'
use of sound to create video. For Steina, both sound and imaging devices are instruments. In this case, starting with a
traditional musical instrument, the relationship is eloquently
made obvious.
Much of her subsequent work reiterates thesethemes, but
her methods vary, as do the results. For example, for Urban
Episodes (1"980) Steina constructed yet another motorized
contraption in downtown Minneapolis which could perform
automatically the four basic camera movements-pan,zoom, tilt, and rotation . Various mirrors were mounted in frontof the lens and, combined with the camera's movement, confound our sense of what's reflected and what's real . More recently, in a group of tapes called Summer Salt, she utilizes
the various mirrors and mechanical devices as well as preprogrammed switching to present images of the southwestern U.S . that once again pose questions about vision . However, these tapes seem to be less programmatic, less cerebral than some of her Machine Vision pieces . For instance, inSomersault (1982), a mirrored sphere is fastened a short distance from the lens, creating a fish-eye effect . Steina becomes a contortionist, jumping, bending, and twisting her
body in a humorous mock-gymnastic performance .
Until 1977, all of the machines the Vasulkas employedwith the exception of the programmer-operated according
to the parameters of analog electronics, in which changes inthe signal-audio volume, video brightness-are interpolated as voltage changes that vary continuously. An image orLeft : frame from The Matter (1974), by Woody Vasulka. Right: installation view of Machine Vision (1975), by Steina Vasulka, in Cathedral Park, Buffalo, N.Y.

sound is produced through amplitude and frequency variations that are subject to distortion . By contrast, in the digitalmode the parameters of a signal are sampled at discrete timeintervals, and these samples are translated-through ananalog-to-digital converter-into a binary code . When displayed, this code is transformed into discrete picture elements, or pixels, each one controlled individually or systematically by a computer . Pixel size varies according to theamount of memory available : more memory capacity allows asmaller pixel size, thus providing the greatest resolution .
In the mid-'70s, the implications of digital computers wereconsiderable : not only was digital imaging more precise, but
for Woody it offered a third model for imaging based not onelectromagnetic energy but on mathematical systems. But inthe mid-'70s computers were so complex and expensivethat
an extensive programming background was essential foranyone who wanted to employ them . Moreover, getting animage on the screen was not too difficult but manipulating it inreal time was. Producing a recordable output was yet anotherstumbling block-a problem exacerbated by the fact thatcomputer designers and video designers hardly communicated.
The Vasulkas began work on a digital system in 1976 . Don
MacArthur fabricated a prototype and Walter Wright wrote its
firstprograms; both men had experience with computers37 But
it was Jeffrey Schier, then a student at the State University of
New York at Buffalo, who designed and built, with Woody, amore complex system called the Digital Image Articulator or
Imager. Because of the enormous time and energy required-by Steina's count, Woodysoldered over 20,000 connections-all of the Vasulkas' efforts in the late '70s were directed toward building the Imager . (The tape Cantaloupe,

completed in 1981, is Steina's documentation of the process .) In 1977 and 1978 the Vasulkas made several tapes titled Update, which are visual summaries of their work with theDigital Image Articulator.
This system can take two video inputs, digitize these, andthen perform a series of operations on those two images
based on logic functions derived from the Arithmetic Logic
Unit (a standard computer component) . Depending on which
logic function is operating, the numerical codes-and hence
the images-are combined in different, but absolutely predictable ways . Such combinations revealed the system's
inner structure to the Vasulkas, and also constituted what
Woody has called a syntax .
What was surprising tome was to find that thetable of logic functions
can be interpreted as a table of syntaxes-syntactical relationships
which are not normally thought of as being related to abstract logic
functions . Because the logic functions are abstract, they can be applied to anything . That means they become a unified language, outside of any one discipline .38

To illustrate his ideas, Woody organized a set of grids-justas he had in 1975 with analog images-which represent the
precise visual manifestations of this syntactic structure .
In video terms, however, an important property of the Imager was its capacity to perform theseand otheroperations inreal time . This was substantial, since a video signal could
now be digitally processed as it passed through the Imagerpractically instantaneously-contrasted to the kind of computer imaging in which a program is entered and one must
wait minutes or hours, depending on the program's complexity, for the computer to perform the operation.
Artifacts (1980) is a sort of demonstration tape that uses
the logic of the computer to combine real-time, digitized, cam-

Top: frame from Violin Power (1978), by Steina Vasulka. Middle left : framefrom Digital Images (1978), by Woody and Steina Vasulka. Middle
right: "Binary Images" (in progress), an exhibition by WoodyVasulka. Bottom left :frame from Artifacts (1980), by Woody Vasulka. Bottom right:
frame from Somersault (1982), by Steina Vasulka.

era-generated images and texture so that effects like keying,zooming, and multiplication of the image are achieved .
Woody described the tape as a "collection of images initiatedby basic algorithmical procedures, to verify the functional operation of a newly-created tool ." Artifacts reiterates the Vasulkas' analogy of their work as dialogue with a tool . In the tape,
Woody explains, "By artifacts, I mean that I have to share thecreative process with the machine. It is responsible for too
many elements in this work. These images come to you as
they came to me-in a spirit of exploration ."Steina also utilized the digital system, but within much lesstheoretical constraints . In several tapes, among them
Selected Treecuts (1980), she juxtaposes variations of trees
through programmed switching-digitized and non-digitized .
This "rhythmic collage," as she describes it, is paradoxical inthat it not only mesmerizes, but directs the viewer's attention
to two different representations-analog and digital-of thesame reality.
Woody's project of using a linguistic model for imaging ishardly novel ; rather, much of his thinking proceeds from his
film background . A number of film semioticians haveexamined, in Christian Metz's words, "the ordering and functioning of the main signifying units used in the film message . ,39 Similarly, Woody has attempted to discover whatsome of the signifying units might be for electronically-generated and manipulated images. Some important qualifications
should be interjected, however. He did notwant to remain limited to images generated by the camera, nor did he want torely on traditional narrative structures . But, as Metz has
pointed out, "The cinema was not a specific 'language' fromits inception, but only became so in the 'wake of the narrative
endeavor ."' He continues: "The pioneers of 'cinematographic
language'-Me lies, Porter, Griffith-could care less about'formal' research conducted for its own sake . . . men of denotation rather than connotation, they wanted above all to tell astory."4oIn 1978, after the Vasulkas made some of the first of theirdigital experiments, Woody expressed an interest in applying
electronic imaging codes to a narrative: "The process of understanding these structure became aesthetic to me . But I
also suspect that I feel again some kind of need to express literature. . . . Beyond dealing with these minimal image structures, I can foresee a larger structure of syntactic or narrative
conclusions coming out of this work . ,41 Woody's most recent
tape, The Commission (1983), sets out to dojust that . The 45minute tape is narrative; Woodycalls it an opera, but it is moreakin to modern fiction, relying heavily on the spoken word .
This apparent irony, however, is countered by his strategic
use of both audio and video effects as narrative devices. Initially, the extreme slow pace of some sections of The Commission is completely mystifying and frustrating. At the sametime, the work is so carefully structured and the texts so compelling that upon repeated viewing the viewer can discern
various themes unfolding, building, and resonating .
The Commission is a metaphor for art-making as realized
in the story of two eccentrics-the violinist Nicco16 Paganiniand the composer Hector Berlioz. Both are self-indulgent,
theatrical, and ultimately tragic . As such, they represent archetypal artist-characters . Paganini, played by video artist
Ernest Gusella, is a sickly, agonized, romantic figure, near
death, who describes his grotesque, fantastic visions. Berlioz, played by composer and performer Robert Ashley, is acerebral and rather fussy character who speaks in abstractions. A male narrator is never seen, but his tale of Paganini's
life-interspersed between scenes-provides continuity as
well as a context for the otherwise opaque texts.
The script was written by the respective players, who seem
physically and temperamentally well-suited to their roles. In
Ashley's case, his Berlioz is much like his other performances ; he adopts the same elliptical ruminating with thesame sing-song delivery . However, in The Commission
Ashley's opacity is appropriate to the depiction of a self-absorbed and self-interested man. Similarly, Gusella's Christlike appearance suggests a tortured artist, who is abused
even in death. If it's Paganini who actually dies in the end, it's
clear that Berlioz-lost in his own world of tea and toast-is
not much more lively .
Without embarking on a textual analysis of The Commission,
I would like to suggest a few of the ways that Woody-and
Steina, who did the camerawork for the tape-have applied
some of the techniques developed in their previous work . In
each of the 11 segments, a different effect is employed
and then exercised through a series of variations. This enables correlations to be made between that particular device
and the scripted text . And since action is minimal, the text isthus underscored, rather than diffused .
Perhaps most important, though, is the almost obsessive
repetition in every segment : interweaving of nuances andvariations of sound, image, and, in the process, meaning. At
the opening of the tape, we are told that toward the end of his
life, Paganini lost his voice and had to speak through his "beloved illegitimate son." The exactment of this relationship becomes a metaphor for interpretation but is also a device
which aids the audience in apprehending the story. In thenext scene, a gaunt Paganini whispers-through the use of asound processor-into the ear of his son. The son repeatsnot always accurately-what his father has just said . In subsequent scenes, sections of the texts are also repeated, andthe voices are all processed in a variety of ways that reinforce
the actors' speeches . For instance, in one segment, the narrator describes the intense feeling of expectation that a follower of Paganini experienced when he thought he would get
an opportunity to hear the virtuoso play. The pitch of the processed voice rises and falls as he tells of his anticipation andeventual disappointment .
The video, too, is carefully conceived . In one scene Paganini hands Berlioz an envelope containing a commission for a

AFTERIMAGE/December 1983

17

Frames from The Commission (1983), by Woody Vasulka .

musical score, acting as an intermediary for an anonymous
patron . Here images of the two men are rapidly switched . This
device-first used in Steina's Sound and Fury-emphasizes
the gesture of giving ; however, the stiff jerky movement which
results also provides a visual counterpart to Paganini's false
pretenses . Woody also uses the potential of the Rutt/Etra
very effectively in the scene of Paganini's embalming : theweb-like effect used earlier in Woody's "time/energy objects"
is used here in conjunction with Bradford Smith's set to vividly
create a death chamber space .
Such instances demonstrate how the Vasulkas' electronic
devices may be used as narrative devices in the future .
Woody has made a difficult tape that attempts to rethink complex problems of characterization, plot, and even representation .

In trying to distinguish between various videomakers' workwith imaging devices, my first impulse was to invoke an old
dichotomy within modernist art discourse-that is, to make a
distinction between two basic appropches that can be identified as formalist and expressionist. According to thisframework, the first approach would be represented in the"first generation" of video artists by the Vasulkas, while thelatter would descend from Nam June Paik . Having established these two points, one could chart an axis along which
other artists could be placed . However, as closer scrutiny of
the Vasulkas' work clearly demonstrates, such a dichotomy
does not hold . In spite of the formalist implications of what
they have done, they have also suggested how some of theimaging practices might be used to challenge representational conventions . In the next article, I will discuss other artists'work in relation to the flip side of the modernist coin-expressionism .

exhibition catalogue (Binghamton, N .Y. : University Art Gallery,
State University of New York, 1983).
4. Ibid., n .p .
5. Interview with the author, June 22, 1983.
6. Johanna Gill, Video: State of the Art (New York : Rockefeller
Foundation, 1976), p. 46 .
7. Except where otherwise noted, all quotes from Woody Vasulka
are from interviews with the author, March 18, 1983.
8. Jonas Mekas, "On New Directions, On Anti-Art, On the Old andthe New in Art," The Village Voice, Nov. 11, 1965, reprinted inMovie Journal (New York : Macmillan Co ., 1972), p. 208.
9. Jonas Mekas, "On the Plastic Inevitables and the Strobe Light,"
Ibid., p. 242.

10 . Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Extensions of
Man (New York : Signet Books, 1964), p. 36.
11 . Ibid., p. 19 .
12. Jonathan Miller, Marshall McLuhan (New York : Viking Press,

22. In addition to the Vasulkas and Chatham, other "cooks in The
Kitchen"-as they were initially called-were Dimitri Devyatkin,a video artist who, with George Chaiken, organized a computer
video festival ; Shridhar Bapat, a video artist who organized avideo festival with Steina in July 1972 ; Michael Tschucdin, rockmusician, composer, and founder of the Midnight Opera Company, a rock band that played on weekends . Also involved inmusic programming were Jim Burton and Bob Steams, who became director of The Kitchen in the summer of 1973 .
23 . Gill, p. 48 .
24 . Hagen, p. 20 .
25 . "The Vasulkas," Cantrills Filmnotes, No . 13, (April 1973); quoted
in the program notes for "Video Art Review," a series of 18 programs presented by Anthology Film Archives, March 1981 .
26 . Gill, p. 47 .

1971), p. 6.
13 . Raymond Williams, Television : Technology and Cultural Form
(New York : Schocken Books, 1974), p. 127.
14 . See, for example, Mekas's description of a piece by Gerd Sternwith Jud Yalkut and Brian Peterson at the Filmmakers
Cinematheque, Movie Journal, p. 215; also his description of amulti-monitor display at Global Village, Movie Journal, p . 360.
15 . Charles Hagen, "A Syntax of Binary Images : An Interview with
Woody Vasulka," Afterimage, Vol . 6, Nos . 1 &2 (Summer 1978),p. 20 .
16. Gill, p . 46 .
17. Except where otherwise noted, all quotes from Steina Vasulka
are from interviews with the author, February 1982 ; March 19,
1983 ; and Aug . 28, 1983 .
18. David L . Shirey, "Video Art Turns to Abstract Imagery," New YorkTimes, July 4, 1972, p. 6.
19 . Rent for the first year was covered by $8,000 the Vasulkas received from the New York State Council on the Arts. Because by

NOTES

law NYSCA cannot fund artists directly, all projects are fundedthrough non-profit organizations . According to NYSCA records,
the Vasulkas-as a part of the group Perception-were funded
in 1971-72 through Howard Wise's Intermix (later called Electronic Arts Intermix) . Besides the Vasulkas, Perception originally
included Eric Siegel and Vince Novak . The following year, still
under the Intermix umbrella, they formed Vasulka Video as away of getting funding for their tool development. Perception expanded to include Juan Downey, Frank Gillette, Beryl Korot,
Andy Mann, Ira Schneider, as well as Gillette and Siegal .
20 . Shirey, op. cit.
21 . Among the new music composers and performers were Laurie
Spiegel, Jacob Druckman, Emmanual Ghent, Phill Niblock, Frederick Rzewski, Gordon Mumma, Alvin Lucier, Tom Johnson,
Charles Madden, and Charles Dodge .

1 . David Bienstock, program notes for "A Special Videotape Show,"
Whitney Museum of American Art, 1971 .
2 . Sherry Miller, "Electronic Video Image Processing : Notes toward
a Definition," Exposure, Vol . 21, No . 1 (1983), p. 22 .
3. Maureen Turim, "Process Video," in The Electronic Gallery,

SELECTED VIDEOGRAPHY
Steina and Woody Vasulka
Sketches (1970) 27 min ., black and white .
Calligrams (1970) 12 min ., black and white .
Sexmachine (1970) 6 min ., black and white .
Tissues (1970) 6 min ., black and white .
Jackie Curtis' First Television Special (1970) 45 min ., black
and white .
Don Cherry (1970) 12 min ., color . Co-produced with Elaine
Milosh .
Decay # 1 (1970) 7 min ., color .
Decay #2 (1970) 7 min ., color .
Evolution (1970) 16 min ., black and white .
Discs (1971) 6 min ., black and white .
Shapes (1971) 13 min ., black and white .
Black Sunrise (1971) 21 min ., color .
Keysnow (1971) 12 min ., color.
Elements (1971) 9 min ., color .
Spaces 1 (1972) 15 min ., black and white .
Distant Activities (1972) 6 min ., color .
Spaces 2 (1972) 15 min ., black and white .
Soundprints (1972) endless loops . color.
Home (1973) 17 min ., color .
Golden Voyage (1973) 29 min ., color.

27. Ibid.
28 . An example of this influence is found in a NYSCA grant proposal
by Perception after the Vasulkas formed Vasulka Video . Des-cribing the group's multi-channel projects, it said : "Through theapplication of sybernetic [sic] principles, multi-channel systems
demonstrate in microcosm, the future posture of global communication ."29 . From a talk given at the Museum of Modern Art in the "Video
Viewpoints" series, 1978 .
30 . Woody Vasulka and Scott Nygren, "Didactic Video : Organizational Models of the Electronic Image," Afterimage, Vol . 3, No. 4(October 1975), p. 9.
31 . Gill, p . 49 .
32. Ibid., p. 50 .
33 . Hagen, p. 23 .
34 . Quoted in program notes for "Video Art Review," Anthology Film
Archives, March 1981 .
35 . From program notes for exhibition at The Kitchen, 1978-79.
36 . Unpublished paper by Robert Haller.
37 . At the Experimental Television Center, then in Binghamton,
N .Y ., Ralph Hocking and Sherry Miller began to discuss the possibility with MacArthur and Wright in 1975 . The original plan wasfor the Center and the Vasulkas to get the same computer anddevelop compatible software. This proved to be less realistic
than originally thought, and the Center opted for a less softwaredependent system .
38 . Hagen, p . 21 .
39. Christian Metz, "Some Points on the Semiotics of the Cinema,"from Film Language; reprinted in Film Theory and Criticism,edited by Gerald Mast and Marshall Cohen (New York : Oxford
University Press, 1974), p. 103.
40 . Ibid., p . 106 .
41 . Hagen, p . 21 .

Vocabulary (1973) 6 min ., color .
Noisefields (1974) 13 min ., color .
1-2-3-4 (1974) 8 min ., color .
Solo for 3 (1974) 5 min ., color .
Heraldic View (1974) 5 min ., color .
Telc (1974) 5 min ., color .
Soundgated Images (1974) 10 min ., color .
Soundsize (1974) 5 min ., color .
Update (1977) 30 min ., color .
Update (1978) 30 min., color .
Six Programs for Television (1979) : Matrix, Vocabulary,
Transformations, Objects, Steina. Digital Images, all 29
min ., all color.
In Search of the Castle (1981) 12 min ., color .
Progeny (1981), with Bradford Smith . 19 min ., color .

Cantaloupe (1980) 28 min ., color.
Urban Episodes (1980) 9 min ., color .
Selected Treecuts (1980) 10 min ., color .
Exor(1980) 4 min ., color .
Summer Salt (1982) 18 min ., color.

Steina Vasulka
From Cheektowaga to Tonawanda (1975) 36 min ., color .
Signifying Nothing (1975) 15 min ., black and white .
Sound and Fury (1975) 15 min ., black and white .
Switch! Monitor! Drift! (1976) 50 min., black and white .
Snowed Tapes (1977) 15 min ., black and white .
Land of Timoteus (1976) 15 min ., color .
Flux- (1977) 15 min ., color.
Violin Power (1978) 10 min ., color .

Steina and Woody Vasulka
Tissues (1970) two channels, black and white .
Soundprints (1971) two channels, black and white.
The West #1 (1972) three channels, black and white .
The West #2 (1983) two channels, color .

Woody Vasulka
Explanation (1974) 12 min ., color .
Reminiscene (1974) 5 min ., color.
C-Trend (1974) 10 min ., color .
The Matter (1974) 4 min ., color .
Artifacts (1980) 22 min ., color.
The Commission (1983) 45 min ., color .

SELECTED INSTALLATIONSSteina Vasulka
Machine Vision (variations, 1975-83) .
Switch! Monitor! Drift! (1976) .