Marc Horowitz on closed loops, speculative systems, and rhizomatic logic

Huge fan of Byung-Chul Han. I started with The Scent of Time in 2017 when it was translated into English, I believe. This and Virilio got me into thinking about accelerationism, and then I entered CCRU and Nick Land and doses of Moldbug. There’s a lot to unpack here. As I got sober, I began to love the idea of slowing down and “lingering,” as BCH would refer to it in this book. Pushing back against the constant drive to be efficient and productive — vita activa. This leads to a sort of meaningless existence rooted in fleeting things. Sounds somewhat religious, lol. I have since read his other works; The Burnout Society is also a favorite.

Nick Land — Dark Enlightenment, techno-capitalism, anti-humanism — this is a darker view on accelerationism that I wanted to understand. I also picked up his book Fanged Noumena, his collected writings. This is a counterbalance to, say, Han, in that it basically leans into the idea that when we shed our skin and become machines, we’ll be in a much better place. I read it almost as non-fiction. Do I buy it wholesale? Absolutely not. But I think it’s good to be aware of the total context of ideas and philosophies surrounding accelerationism. I know the mention of the name Nick Land can lead to problems and people will automatically group me into some anti-humanitarian, technocrat-loving, authoritarian… artist. People will just see the name and say, “Oh, that guy is such-and-such,” and then the cancellation begins. The power of that — the mere mention of a name — without even knowing how X person fits into the artist’s logic is extremely myopic and depressing. I am open to all knowledge, to receive all ideas and people. And Nick Land is part of this study for me.

To name systems based on an amalgam of their writings stems from research of their philosophies, and in this way, I can make it all speak together in the titling and in the work.

These works are 'hand-made', did you consider using tools like hashslips, and if so why did you decide against them? Do you feel any kind of visual or conceptual affinity towards the solana scene/avant gay nfts and their stereotypical traitmaxxed aesthetic?

So the paintings are kind of contradictory — something that vacillates between maximal, accelerated, activa energy and, on the other end, the contemplative, the slowness of “handmade” — giving the system space to breathe. Honestly, I just haven’t invested the time in learning tools like Hashlips. I may or may not at some point, IDK.

I love the Solana art scene, avant gay NFTs, yes. My friend Dan Keller — who got me into ETH when it was $30, lol — and now the avant gay scene kept bombing my feed with this work. I also shared a studio with Parker Ito a long time ago; I’ve always loved what he did. These works are insane in the best possible way. I’m so glad we’re not in the phase of ridiculous, infantile PFPs — sorry, my take. I was just never into it; I couldn’t understand why you wouldn’t want to make something impossibly incoherent or batshit in this space. And I feel the avant gay NFTs are hitting those notes.

But I’m also from a much different generation — arguably the best — Gen X. We’re hard AF, give little fucks, had little parenting, and have lived through the rise of ubiquitous computers, internet, post-internet. I worked in Silicon Valley out of college doing IPOs. Yes, I went to business school. I do like this convergence of business, marketing, traitmaxxing, alternative currency, artists representing and promoting themselves… in the NFT scene. I don’t love the immense amount of noise and grind and burnout and the hyper flash-in-a-pan aspects of it. But it does make it exciting — like building a gold-mining town and then another. Boom-and-bust cycles at this accelerated level are definitely a rush.

Why did you want the titles themselves to function like a system (and can you expand on what that means), are they part of the artwork in your eyes?

To expand on my above thought: “To name systems based on an amalgam of their writings stems from research of their philosophies, and in this way, I can make it all speak together in the titling and in the work.”

The first piece is called Genesis, as this is the beginning of anything — an idea, a solar system, a black hole — and in this certain circumstance, a series of digital paintings. This is my first full body of digital paintings released to the public as NFTs. The last painting is called Terminus — the end. Everything in between are mashed-up words taken from the authors mentioned above to form the rhizomatic growth of systems that can originate from a kernel. And then those systems expand and form new lines of their own. It can get overwhelming quickly; things die, give way to others. It is an organic process for me — and one that I really enjoy — taking the time, slowing down, hence not using a generator.

Maybe the next body of paintings may incorporate some auto-generated aspects, IDK. I do like this vacillation between handmade, IRL paintings made digital and used as layers, with this sort of rotating psychosymbology. I did a painting show in Jackson Hole where I printed some more fleshed-out base layers on canvas and then added paint — https://1833marcive.com/high-stakes — they’re maybe closer to my proto-avant-gay NFT love, lol.

You describe the series as a “closed loop” - in what sense do you mean this?

Good question. In this case, I believe it is a closed loop of its own logic. It’s limited in the sense that, in this way of working, it can be pretty infinite, and as someone who has a lot of interests and a propensity toward ADD, I needed some boundaries — as you would have in any experiment or system. The “scales” or “registers,” or as I call them “relational paintings,” are the checkered works based on real paintings. They’re direct photographs of those works that appear over and over in this series, signifying this closed loop. They measure the system, measure themselves, measure the screen, the surroundings, the viewer. They are metronomic in a sense, as you see the system expand and contract. They act as a constant — a center and a periphery all at once.

A closed system is a structure that constantly monitors and modifies itself in pursuit of stability, control, or efficiency. In this case, nothing truly external enters this system — meaning the system defines its own reality over and over again, stabilizing and then destabilizing, trying to find meaning and logic within its own created rules and self-serving obligations.

You created these works using images from real oil paintings on mylar and canvas, which you photographed and then manipulated digitall, can you expand upon what kinds of tools you used? And were the oil paintings you used existing paintings from your career or new paintings created for the purpose of bringing these digital works to life?

I used a medium-format and SLR digital camera to capture my physical oil paintings, then imported the photos into Photoshop and isolated the paint. Easier to do when it’s on mylar as it pops and it’s easy to cut out — plus Photoshop has excellent AI tools for selecting objects now, thank god.

I had made these oil-painted works on mylar a few years ago and clipped or sewed them to color-field paintings on canvas so one could see the layer of oil paint that wasn’t actually on the canvas. It could be swapped out or layered, and the oil paint lost none of its vibrance as it was atop plastic atop a solid color. See https://1833marcive.com/time-pools — here I added elements in the closed “pockets” that the sewn mylar to canvas made: fake fruit, cinema gels, photos, drawings, nicotine tablets, studio detritus… This way, a viewer could pick up the painting and rotate it or shake it around and get a whole new composition. It was my answer to the fluidity and quickness of digital painting in its physical form.

Out of this grew this push-pull between the digital and physical — each informing the other. No beginning or end. Kinda like a studio reservoir that I can keep drawing from, hence again the system approach.

Do you see the series as more optimistic about or more critical of technology?

Definitely more optimistic. I’ve been working with computers since the Apple IIc — yes, I am dating myself. I remember writing thousands of lines of BASIC code for a little drawing of a boy holding up some flowers that I made for my mom — almost a proto-digital drawing. From there I got into early gaming, and I even made digital paintings using Apple’s MousePaint (ala or proto-Oehlen digital paintings). I went on to making more physical works and sculptures as a kid, and we moved around quite a bit, making it hard to have a solid base — which I suppose pushed me toward performance art. Then business, then art again, and here we are, back to where I started in a way. My point is that this tech has been around a while, and it’s an exciting time to be a part of the conversation again.

This is your first time releasing digital paintings - why haven’t you done so previously, and why have you chosen to do so now?

The timing just didn’t feel right until now — and now it does.