Babyface: Performance and Installation Art Exploring the Feminine Ideal in Gendered Machines

Representations of gender in new technologies like the Siri, Pepper, and Sophia robotic assistants, as well as the commodification of features associated with gender on platforms like Instagram, inspire questions about how and whether robotic tools can have gender and what it means to people if they do. One possible response to this is through artistic creation of dance performance. This paper reports on one such project where, along the route to this inquiry, creation of machine augmentation – of both the performer and audience member – was necessary to communicate the artistic ideas grappled with therein. Thus, this article describes the presentation of Babyface, a machine-augmented, participatory contemporary dance performance. This work is a reaction to feminized tropes in popular media and modern technology, and establishes a parallel between the ways that women and machines are talked about, treated, and – in the case of machines – designed to look and behave. This paper extends prior reports on the creation of this piece and its accompanying devices to describe extensions with audience member participation, and reflect on the responses of these audience members. These fabricated elements alongside the actions of the performer and a soundscape that quotes statements made by real “female” robots create an otherwordly, sad cyborg character that causes viewers to question their assumptions about and pressures on the feminine ideal.

[1]  Arwen Mohun,et al.  Versatile Tools: Gender Analysis and the History of Technology , 1997, Technology and Culture.

[2]  Mina Johnson-Glenberg,et al.  Emboldened by Embodiment , 2013 .

[3]  Stelarc From Zombies to Cyborg Bodies: Extra Ear, Exoskeleton and Avatars , 2002 .

[4]  John Vilk,et al.  Comedians in Cafes Getting Data: Evaluating Timing and Adaptivity in Real-World Robot Comedy Performance , 2020, 2020 15th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[5]  Peggy Hackney,et al.  Making Connections: Total Body Integration Through Bartenieff Fundamentals , 1996 .

[6]  Ken Goldberg,et al.  Algorithms for Visual Tracking of Visitors Under Variable-Lighting Conditions for a Responsive Audio Art Installation , 2014 .

[7]  G. Batson Moving Consciously: Somatic Transformations Through Dance, Yoga, and Touch , 2016 .

[8]  Amy LaViers,et al.  Toward an Expressive Bipedal Robot: Variable Gait Synthesis and Validation in a Planar Model , 2018, International Journal of Social Robotics.

[9]  I. Bartenieff,et al.  Body Movement: Coping with the Environment , 1980 .

[10]  Aimee van Wynsberghe,et al.  Service robots, care ethics, and design , 2016, Ethics and Information Technology.

[11]  Isbn,et al.  Body Learning, an introduction to the Alexander Technique , 2004 .

[12]  Barbara Snook Dance and the Alexander Technique: exploring the missing link , 2012 .

[13]  Rob Saunders,et al.  Movement Matters: How a Robot Becomes Body , 2017, MOCO.

[14]  Amy LaViers,et al.  Embodied movement strategies for development of a core-located actuation walker , 2016, 2016 6th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob).

[15]  Elisabeth K. Kelan TOOLS AND TOYS : Communicating gendered positions towards technology , 2007 .

[16]  Nikolas Martelaro,et al.  What Actors can Teach Robots , 2017, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[17]  Sibel Deren Guler,et al.  Crafting Wearables , 2016, Apress.

[18]  Eva Hornecker,et al.  Learning from interactive museum installations about interaction design for public settings , 2006, OZCHI.

[19]  Madeline Gannon,et al.  Crafting Wearables: Blending Technology with Fashion , 2016 .

[20]  Sianne Ngai Our Aesthetic Categories: Zany, Cute, Interesting , 2012 .

[21]  Catie Cuan,et al.  Time to compile: A performance installation as human-robot interaction study examining self-evaluation and perceived control , 2019, Paladyn J. Behav. Robotics.

[22]  D. Haraway Chapter 4:A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late 20th Century ! , 2006 .

[23]  Kristina Höök,et al.  Designing with the Body: Somaesthetic Interaction Design , 2018, CHIRA.

[24]  A. LaViers,et al.  Toward a Bipedal Robot with Variable Gait Styles: Sagittal Forces Analysis in a Planar Simulation and a Prototype Ball-Tray Mechanism , 2019, 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).

[25]  Peggy Hackney,et al.  Making Connections , 2020 .

[26]  R. A. Søraa,et al.  Mechanical genders: how do humans gender robots? , 2017 .

[27]  M. Y. Saraiji,et al.  Arque: artificial biomimicry-lnspired tail for extending innate body functions , 2019, SIGGRAPH Emerging Technologies.

[28]  Greg Corness,et al.  Embodied Intention: Robot Spinal Initiation to Indicate Directionality , 2019, MOCO.

[29]  Yochanan Rywerant The Feldenkrais Method: Teaching by Handling , 2003 .

[30]  Kristina Höök,et al.  Soma-Based Design Theory , 2017, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[31]  Gendered innovations in science and engineering, edited by Londa Schiebinger , 2011 .

[32]  Kristina Höök,et al.  Somaesthetic Appreciation Design , 2016, CHI.

[33]  Amy LaViers,et al.  CURTAIN and Time to Compile: A Demonstration of an Experimental Testbed for Human-Robot Interaction , 2018, 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[34]  Amy LaViers,et al.  Live Dance Performance Investigating the Feminine Cyborg Metaphor with a Motion-activatedWearable Robot , 2020, 2020 15th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).