SECTION 1 - via - School of Visual Arts

Dr. Stafford: Well, I’m trying really hard. I see where you’re going with this but no, I mean it’s
an interesting thing what you’re saying but I’m trying to point out some differences here. This
has to do with the polyopticality. I don’t want to go, I’m resisting this pre-figure although of
course what did I say with camera obscura, that, of course, certain things in certain ways prefigure
but they do so much more than pre-figuration. They are about so much more.
Question: Did you look at all the finding connections with sound processing technologies? I
mean I’m vaguely aware of sort of free electric music and stuff.
Dr. Stafford: You know, [sounds like “Atanasus Cuhrer”?] I mean again that I threw out
because I was really trying to hit the mirror business but you know he invented—he was quite
amazing. He invented all sort of crucible instruments. Actually there’s a guy in Germany now
who has tried to put some of his music, these strange sounds of the universe. I have a disc, I
should have brought it along and played it to you. Cuhrer also invented a device for over
hearing secret conversations, very baroque, very contemporary, but the musical dimension is an
interesting thing. It’s clear in the phantasmagoria, everybody writes about the weird wail of the
harmonica. That is in everything so sort of coordinate those and there are other examples as
well. I have not myself personally gotten so deeply into that but surely that is a very good
question because these are really sensory scenarios and you’re quite right. Smells you know,
smells were unleashed you know like the smoke. We have descriptions of that plus all the
people fainting, hallucinating, screaming all sorts of things like that going on. So, it’s quite a
process but thank you for raising your question.
Question: You gave us this wonderful background on the entertainment, artistic and scientific
uses. Were these early optical devices used for surveillance as well?
Dr. Stafford: For surveillance—well I just gave the example of Cuhrer.
[Overlapping Voices]
Dr. Stafford: For spying you mean for spying? Yes, yes.
Question: Or for in terms of control like observing prisoners or students.
Dr. Stafford: No but . . .
[Overlapping Voices]
Dr. Stafford: Actually in my Artful Science when I first got involved in all this; it’s a long, long
love affair. Your question reminds me of something. You have to understand that particularly
as time went on—let’s say by the time you hit the 18 th century—there are also all of these books
that appear and I’m thinking of one book now to answer your question [sounds like “Ed
Mackioltz”?] eight volumes, well it depends whether it’s in court or [Indecipherable] but
anyway make your own and there are sections in there that say, if you want to spy on your lover
like you can imagine some of these myriad things. Those are great. Yes, they’re quite witty and
funny and excruciatingly comely. I’ve been thinking how in the hell would I make this thing?
But it tells you, first you do this, then you find the closet, then you do that, but be sure to drill
the hole here and then there has to be—so, there is that, there is that dimension. Now, whether
it was used—now we know, for example anamorphic the thing that’s interesting—see nobody’s
really studied—iconography as well that’s what I think is really important as well even if you go
back to anamorphic images from the 16 th century keeping things whole bind. Of course, the
15