Julianna Yau’s blog

Press release:

SEIZED
Critical Art Ensemble
Institute for Applied Autonomy

June 7 to July 19, 2008
Opening Reception: Saturday, June 7, 8–11pm
Admission is FREE

Hallwalls Contemporary Arts Center
341 Delaware Avenue, Buffalo, NY 14202

Hallwalls Contemporary Arts Center is pleased to announce the exhibition SEIZED by Critical Art Ensemble (CAE) and the Institute for Applied Autonomy (IAA). The exhibition premieres Saturday, June 7, 2008 from 8–11pm and the opening reception is free and open to the public. The exhibition will remain on view through July 18, 2008. Gallery hours are Tuesday through Friday, 11am to 6pm and Saturday, 1–4pm.

Following the four year long ordeal of CAE founding member and University at Buffalo Art Professor Steve Kurtz—accused by the Justice Department of “bio-terrorism” and later indicted on charges of mail fraud for procuring harmless bacterial cultures for use in an educational art project—SEIZED presents the artworks behind this case which has attracted worldwide attention and propelled an international arts community to rally to Kurtz’s support and on behalf of freedom of speech.

SEIZED will center itself upon the works and materials seized by federal authorities, in particular the multi-media project Marching Plague, which was commissioned by the UK-based art-science initiative, The Arts Catalyst, and produced in consultation with scientists from the Harvard-Sussex Program on Chemical and Biological Weapons Armament and Arms Limitation. The project is comprised of an installation, performance, film, and book dedicated to demystifying issues surrounding germ warfare programs and the cost of their development to global public health.

Additionally, project documentation and ephemera from the three other CAE projects confiscated by authorities will be on display. These works—Free Range Grain, Molecular Invasion, and GenTerra—utilize the framework of science and research to inspire informed dialogue about questions and concerns surrounding the new biotechnologies.

SEIZED will also exhibit the physical artifacts of the 2004 FBI investigation of Steve Kurtz. Items seized from Kurtz’s home will be documented in photographs depicting the negative spaces remaining following their seizure: missing computers, books, notes, props from art performances, lab equipment, and an unfinished manuscript. In a curious—and unintentionally performative—gesture, the gaps left by seized items are filled in by the volumes of trash left behind in Kurtz’s home by federal investigators: hundreds of empty drink bottles, pizza boxes, Hazmat suits, and other assorted refuse, all of which will be on exhibit alongside CAE artworks.

The resulting exhibition will offer a strange amalgam—part survey of CAE’s recent body of artwork, and part exploration of an attempted “bioterrorism” investigation.

http://hallwalls.org/visual_shows/2008/show_seized.html
http://www.critical-art.net
http://www.caedefensefund.org
http://www.appliedautonomy.com

Hallwalls Contemporary Arts Center
341 Delaware Avenue, Buffalo, NY 14202
716.854.1694 www.hallwalls.org

(I double-checked this one…it really is about C-10, not net neutrality!)

CBC reports that the director of Love & Savegry suspects C-10 had a hand in his film being held at the border. To be honest, I wonder whether the title would have triggered a review based on pornography concerns alone. Although I’m very much against C-10 and am concerned about what would have happened if the footage was wrecked, I find that pinning the confiscation on C-10 is a bit of a stretch.

Ang Lee joins the chorus against the potential for censorship being created by C-10.

This came through my Facebook inbox yesterday, but I’m horrendously behind on blogging and reading blogs, so it’s already hit the major media outlets. It’s good to know they came to their senses!

---

A process that has taken nearly four years may be coming to an end. On Monday, April 21, Federal Judge Richard J. Arcara ruled to dismiss the indictment against University at Buffalo Professor of Visual Studies Dr. Steven Kurtz.

In June 2004, Professor Kurtz was charged with two counts of mail fraud and two counts of wire fraud stemming from an exchange of $256 worth of harmless bacteria with Dr. Robert Ferrell, Professor of Human Genetics at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health.

Dr. Kurtz planned to use the bacteria in an educational art exhibit about biotechnology with his award-winning art and theater collective, Critical Art Ensemble.

Professor Kurtz’ lawyer, Paul Cambria, said that his client was “pleased and relieved that this ordeal may be coming to an end.”

The prosecution has the right to appeal this dismissal. How the prosecution will proceed is unknown at this time. If an appeal were undertaken the case would move to the New York Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City.

Lucia Sommer, Coordinator of the CAE Defense Fund, which raises funds for Kurtz’ legal defense, said, “We are all grateful that after reviewing this case, Judge Arcara took appropriate action.” She added that “this decision is further testament to our original statements that Dr. Kurtz is completely innocent and never should have been charged in the first place.”

BACKGROUND ON DR. STEVEN KURTZ AND CRITICAL ART ENSEMBLE

Critical Art Ensemble (which Kurtz co-founded in 1987 with Steven Barnes) has won numerous awards for its bio-art, including the prestigious 2007 Andy Warhol Foundation Wynn Kramarsky Freedom of Artistic Expression Grant, honoring more than two decades of distinguished work. The group has been commissioned to exhibit and perform in many of the world’s cultural institutions—including the London Museum of Natural History; The ICA, London; the Whitney Museum and the New Museum in NYC; the Corcoran Museum of Art in Washington, DC; Schirn Kunsthalle, Frankfurt; Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris; der Volksbüne, Berlin; ZKM, Karlsruhe; El Matadero, Madrid; Museum of Contemporary Art, Helsinki; Museo de Arte Carrilo Gil, Mexico City and many more.

For more information about the case, please visit: caedefensefund.org

The following notice of meeting has been released for C-10:

Wednesday, April 2, 2008
When the Senate rises
but not before 4 p.m.

Bill C-10, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act, including amendments in relation to foreign investment entities and nonresident trusts, and to provide for the bijural expression of the provisions of that Act.

I can’t seem to find the PDF I was sent on their website, so here it is. The link above is to the official governmental website.

Michael Geist points to an article in The Star by Peter Howell which quotes a spokesperson for Heritage Minister Josée Verner as indicating that “Canadian Heritage has not received an application for a production containing criminal content”.

This is great news, but doesn’t make people’s concerns a simple case of “legal absurdity”. The proposed wording in C-10 uses the phrase “public policy“, and does not speak specifically to issues of criminal content. Again, the concern is not the isolated inclusion of the phrase “public policy”, but its existence alongside Charles McVety’s lobbying “to deny tax credits to TV and film productions that contain graphic sex and violence or other offensive content”.

Despite the fact that the opposition motion to Bill C-10 was voted down in response to the Senate Liberals’ intent to block the Income Tax Act from being used as a censorship enabler, the Banking Committee resumes study of Bill C-10 amidst public concerns about censorship.

CARFAC Ontario has published their press release on C-10, as well as a form letter which can be used to send to members of parliament. The Toronto International Film Festival Group has also published a press release on C-10. The Facebook group Keep your censoring hands off of Canadian film and TV! No to Bill C-10! has 29,360 members as of the writing of this post.

• Sam Trosow brings some disappointing news about an unsuccessful request to amend C-10
• Lawrence from Northworthy is keeping tabs on the news development
• Geist also likens the public C-10 response to that of the new copyright legislation, and reminds us that it’s about tax credits (this post has been hidden in my sea of email since Tuesday). The main difference between C-10 and the upcoming copyright legislation is we can actually see what’s in C-10.

Lawrence at Northworthy and Sam Trosow have been busy with digging deeper into C-10 today. Lawrence looks at the history behind C-10 and the supposed consultation which happened with the film industry. Sam Trosow finds some interesting snippets from Question Period on C-10.

A few more chime in on C-10:

• Sam Trosow, who has a thorough summary of the issues and found the direct link the the CCA’s press release on C-10
• Lawrence at Northworthy, who points to the CBC news segment “Film Funding Furour” from Sunday
• John Degen, who I missed the first time around (sorry, John!)