ESSAY by Simon Penny
The Pursuit of the Living Machine
T
echnological innovation has trans-
formed nearly every aspect of our
culture over the past 200 years
and undoubtedly will continue to do so.
But the ashy pronouncements that ac-
company specic achievementsa dis-
ease-resistant tomato, for instance, or
an agent to sort our E-mailtend to
obscure their underlying motivations.
For centuries, artists and inventors have
attempted to imitate nature (a process
known as mimesis) and to simulate the
qualities of being human (anthropo-
morphism). These twin drives, which
lie at the very heart of Western culture,
blur the lines between animate and in-
animate, between human and machine.
In this vein, one of the most telling
recent developments is articial life, the
generation of lifelike behavior by com-
puter programs in a digital environ-
ment. The rules governing the behavior
of the programs are modeled on genet-
ic and evolutionary processes. Thomas
S. Ray of the University of Delaware has
proposed creating a digital wildlife pre-
serve on the Internet in which software
organisms might compete for memory
space and develop into new forms. He
has argued that digital creatures would
evolve unusual abilities and that these
organisms could then be captured and
domesticated. According to the tradi-
tional Christian view, we humans have
a God-given right to harvest the prod-
ucts of biodiversity. In a novel twist, A-
lifers seem to be harnessing the mech-
anism of biodiversity itself, or at least
one model of that mechanism.
Although rmly grounded in com-
puter science, the articial-life project is
remarkably reminiscent of certain ar-
tistic enterprises of the turn of the cen-
tury. Paul Czannes dictumArt is a
harmony parallel to naturends a
strong echo in the goals of articial-life
research. Mimesis also links A-lifers with
the modernist artists following on from
Czanne. If we accept that researchers
are not actually creating life but rather
simulating it based on their understand-
ing of biological communities (that is,
operating parallel to nature), then their
goals are very like those of the modern-
ist artists, who aimed not to represent
the world but to render it visible.
Not surprisingly, the mimetic poten-
tials of A-life are nding application in
216 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN September 1995
Articial life and genetic engineering
may be among the newest technologies,
but the mimetic drive that motivates
the arts, most notably in the emerging them dates to antiquity. Although in
eld of interactive art. Since the desk- classical Greek sculpture mimesis ex-
top computer became available, a small tended only to form, I contend that the
community of artists has been explor- immobile nature of that sculpture was
ing the possibility of a novel art form in a technical constraint, not an aesthetic
which the key aesthetic element is the requirement. The Greeks stuccoed and
behavior of the work in response to painted their sculptures in a highly life-
the viewer. Older artworks of this kind, like manner. My guess is that if the
along with CD-ROM multimedia, have Greeks could have made eshy, dynam-
had a certain Pavlovian press-the-but- ic sculpture, they would have. Indeed,
ton-and-get-the-prize quality to them, Hero of Alexandria was renowned for
largely because the response had to oc- his pneumatic automata, which com-
cur within predened pathways. bined static sculptural mimesis with
Articial-life techniques oer artists humanlike, if repetitive, movement.
a quite dierent type of interactivity, By the 18th century, inventors were
one that allows systems to react in ways creating clockwork automata capable
of much more complex behavior. A me-
chanical scribe created by Pierre and
J. de Vaucansons duck; courtesy of Bettmann Archive
Henri-Louis Jacquet-Droz could dip its
pen and write lines of elegant script.
Jacques de Vaucansons famous duck
is said to have been able to ap its
wings, eat and, with a ducklike wag of
the tail, excrete foul-smelling waste.
These works were contemporary with
the rst programmable device, the Jac-
quard weaving loom, and their behav-
ior was constructed from mechanical
logic much like that which Charles Bab-
bage used for his difference engine.
Articial-intelligence research can be
that are not so explicitly dened. These seen as the high-tech anthropomorphic
works exhibit a new kind of mimesis, project of our era, as dened by Alan
in which the dynamics of biological sys- M. Turings famous test for articial in-
tems are modeled more than is their telligence. Simply put, the test says that
appearance. Numerous artworks now if you cannot tell whether what you are
employ biological-growth algorithms, talking to is not a person, then it has
simulated ecosystems or communities, human intelligence. Although the proj-
genetic algorithms, and neural networks ect of articial intelligence has run up
in the structure of the systems. against certain limitations, it has
spawned other enterprises, such as au-
M uch as digital techniques permit
machines to acquire the behavior
of natural systems, genetic engineering
tonomous agents and articial life, that
perpetuate its drives.
These cultural drives, anthropomor-
presents another set of fresh mimetic phism and mimesis, transcend disciplin-
possibilities by opening biological enti- ary boundaries and inhabit the most
ties to human manipulation. In genetic sophisticated technologies available at
engineering, it is dicult to distinguish any historical moment. But this obser-
between nature and representation, be- vation propels us inevitably to a deeper
tween raw material and nished con- question, worth pondering as we plot
struction. The OncoMouse, a bioengi- the course of technology: Why do we
neered mouse patented by Harvard Uni- want our machines to seem alive?
versity geneticists in 1988, and the many
subsequent transgenic inventions raise SIMON PENNY is associate professor
the possibility that gene splicing could of art and robotics at Carnegie Mellon
become a valid artistic eld, with awards University. In 1993 he curated Machine
for the most aesthetically pleasing trans- Culture, an international survey exhibi-
genic forms! tion of interactive art.
Copyright 1995 Scientific American, Inc.