Introduction Voiceover: You are listening to Season Five of
Future Ecologies.
Mendel Skulski: Alright... check check check.
Adam Huggins: Looks good.
Mendel Skulski: Good. Would you... would you mind dimming
the lights?
Adam Huggins: Oh, you want it even darker in here?
Mendel Skulski: Yeah.
Adam Huggins: Let me see what I can do.
How's that?
Mendel Skulski: Perfect. What's in this tea by the way?
Adam Huggins: It's a blend of different plants. But it's
mostly sweet gale, which is a plant that grows in bogs.
Mendel Skulski: It's really relaxing.
Adam Huggins: Yeah, it's one of my favorites. And people do say
that it is helpful in inducing lucid dreaming.
Mendel Skulski: Lucid dreaming... to know you're
dreaming while it's happening. It's been a while since I had
one of those.
Adam Huggins: Yeah, I can't even remember the last time I lucid
dreamed. Maybe tonight is the night.
Mendel Skulski: Maybe!
Adam Huggins: Okay, so now that we've kind of set the mood here.
I wanted to tell you that way back, before we started this
podcast, and before I even knew what a podcast was, I had a
college radio show for a couple of years.
Mendel Skulski: Did you now?
Adam Huggins: I did! With a couple of friends of mine. We
were young. And we had an 11pm time slot that nobody cared
about. And we had the keys to the station CD library, which
had an excellent vinyl collection.
Mendel Skulski: Knowing you, that sounds dangerous.
Adam Huggins: Yeah.
Mendel Skulski: So I'm guessing you had like two turntables and
a microphone.
Adam Huggins: That was actually the exact setup. And the reason
that I bring it up right now is that our college radio show was
all about dreams.
Baby Radio DJ Adam: Welcome back, you're listening to see
JSF 90.1 FM 93.9 cable FM in Burnaby. And this is Electric
Sheep radio.
DJ Ryder: We'd like you to send us your dreams.
Baby Radio DJ Adam: Yeah, indeed to electricsheepradio@gmail.com
If you feel like having your dreams aired on the radio,
because we just love to hear dreams as you might have
noticed.
DJ Samantha: We also prefer if you record them yourself.
DJ Ryder: And so I guess until we see you next time.
Baby Radio DJ Adam: Goodnight.
DJ Ryder: Sweet dreams.
Mendel Skulski: Oh my god, your little baby radio voice. Little
late night DJ Adam. But other than that, nothing's really
changed, huh?
Adam Huggins: Apparently not. No, I still really love to hear
dreams. And that's what we're going to do now. Except that
tonight, our program is called Future Ecologies.
Mendel Skulski: Well, to be precise. Tonight, it's the Shape
of a Circle in the Dream of a Fish. A recurrent festival
that's explored the idea of consciousness, language and the
mind across non human species and beings. Initiated by the
Serpentine galleries in London since 2018, recorded on stage in
November 2022 at the Galleria do Biodiversidade in Porto,
Portugal, and then reduced and remixed by Future Ecologies.
Adam Huggins: Tonight, with the help of artists, scientists,
philosophers and historians, were sprinkling a little bit of
stardust on our understanding of dreams, reality, and non human
beings — from fish, to demons, and Gods
Mendel Skulski: Kicking things off, festival curators, Lucia
Pietroiusti, and Filipa Ramos.
Lucia Pietroiusti: And I have the sort of impossible task of
telling you about dreams. We experience dreams as a
transition state between realms of the physical and the
spiritual. And so dreams become a kind of translation space.
Filipa Ramos: But we refer to dreams when we speak about hope,
when we speak about repair. When we give symbolic interpretations
of dreams, we hold the world in place, in a sense. We shape a
world, its symbols, and its myths. We shape our sense of
belonging to that world.
Lucia Pietroiusti: And through the notion of the dream in this
event, we hope to -
Filipa Ramos: somehow continue in our project to move away from
a human-centric conception of this world. So what might it
look like if we tried to de-anthropocenter the notion of
a dream? Well, in the first instance, it might be that in a
multi-species complex planet, non-human dreams might not be at
all like what we expect of human ones, because they'd be
processes belonging to completely different ways of
being in the world.
Lucia Pietroiusti: So we've asked ourselves, and we'll ask
ourselves all sorts of questions — how much of a more-than-human
or-non human being sense of self are we able to intuit and
appreciate? To hopefully come out on the other side with just
a tiny bit of a slightly larger intuition, not only of how we
exist on this planet, and how we share it with more than human
beings, what our responsibility in relation to that sharing, and
also what art,
Filipa Ramos: poetry,
Lucia Pietroiusti: science
Filipa Ramos: when it dreams,
Lucia Pietroiusti: and so many other forms of expression,
Filipa Ramos: might, in fact, be here on this earth to do?
Alex Jordan: My name is Alex Jordan, and I'm a scientist. I'm
a scientist very interested in the questions that we have as
humans about how animals experience the world, their
sense of self, their sense of awareness, their perception,
perhaps their consciousness, and how we might as humans,
understand and interpret and ask questions of these animals that
we might better understand their worlds.
Generally speaking, at a scientific level, I'm interested
in the broad question of how behavior evolves. How, in the
transition from simple life to more complex forms of life,
including our own form of life, behaviors have evolved,
cognitive capacities have evolved, and traits that help
animals interact with the world and experience the world have
evolved.
Some research we've just published this year was about
sleep, and potentially dreaming in spiders. And so we've done
this work here demonstrating that jumping spiders, these
beautiful, intelligent creatures have periods of REM sleep, rapid
eye movement, sleep. This is a trait that was once thought
exists, as many traits are thought to exist only in humans.
But now we're starting to expand our perception and understanding
that the idea of dreaming for a spider for a fish for a plant
may not be that far off.
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: It's delightful to dream together in
the belly of a whale. aWhat does it feel like to be a fish or a
bird or a plant?
Rain Wu: The rivers and the glaciers, the big mammals and
the imperceptible microbes, the small algae, and the complex
trees.
Alex Jordan: When I showed you this tree, this evolutionary
tree, it's really important for me that that tree is not in a
line. There's not a ladder that humans sit on the top of, and
chimps are nearer to us, and then dolphins are nearer then —
that evolution is pushing all animals towards. This is an
absurd concept. Evolution produces solutions and animals
and organisms that fulfill whatever purpose is required and
whatever purpose they have. In my opinion, both my personal but
also scientific opinion, many fish and many of the animals and
organisms I deal with are just as intelligent and just as
sophisticated and just as subtle, in many ways, as some of
these species.
And so a lot of my work is done in the places where these
animals live. I try to take all of our approaches and questions
out into the wild. Ours is a is a practice of going to the
places where these animals are, trying to disturb them as little
as we can, filming them, then using some of these machine
learning and artificial intelligence approaches to help
us understand and decompose and maybe intuit what these animals
are feeling and experiencing — of one another and of the world
around them. Contextualizing this behavior, of having our
questions asked in the places where these animals live. And
that means we have to understand and try and appreciate where
they live. So we're not divorcing them from their
experience — from their evolutionary history. We're
trying to situate our studies in those places and recreate in
silico or in some kind of analytical framework, the
interactions they have not just with one another, but with the
world around them.
Nahum Mantra: Even the word environment, right, like the
more-than-human world has been reduced to an environment — like
just like a backdrop where the human drama unfolds.
Alex Jordan: Some of my research has has asked the question, this
classic test we have which is called the mirror test, in which
an animal is presented, like here, with a mirror and asked...
does it recognize its reflection as self or is it unable to do
that... that thing that we do? Is it unable to deal with the
concept of self? And this mirror test is a test in which you are
supposed to see yourself in a reflection, and there's a mark
on your body somewhere that you can't see, except with the
mirror. And if you touch yourself, rather than touch the
mirror, then you've understood that you exist in that
reflection — that reflection is you. It's not some other entity.
And this is wonderful. This is a perfectly valid test, provided
you care. Provided you care that there's a mark on your body.
Provided you have the vanity, let's say to... to worry that
something about your appearance has changed.
Filipa Ramos: Oh, I look different. Wait, but it's me.
Alex Jordan: Is it a problem of motivation? Or is it a problem
of intelligence? Can they not understand the context, or do
they simply not care in the same way we do?
Onome Ekeh: You know, what does wealth mean for a sparrow? Is
it, sort of, this ability to flock?
Alex Jordan: and I settled on a species called the cleaner
wrasse. The cleaner wrasse we thought was perfect, because it
does care about these marks. Its whole biology, its whole
cognitive capacity and its ecology is centered around this
idea of seeing marks on the skin and trying to remove them.
That's what it does. Because its whole existence is about finding
and removing parasites from client fish.
Lucia Pietroiusti: You can only interpret the test as revealing
something if the behavior can be considered strange or unusual in
some way. And similarly, the notion of recognizing a mark
somewhere, is also an experience of recognizing oneself with a
kind of strangeness.
Alex Jordan: But this is a really important question. What
on earth is unusual for an animal? How do you as a human
observer, me as a scientist decide what an animal should or
should not be doing? And therefore what is unusual for an
animal? This is not not a simple question. I'm not being
facetious here. This is a genuine question about our
expectations and intuition of non human animals.
Onome Ekeh: You know, you almost don't recognize what's being
said.
Alex Jordan: Hang on, this is not another individual. It's
copying everything I do. Maybe it's me. And in this phase,
humans perform unusual behaviors.
Federico Campagna: I think what's remarkable about dreams
is that while you are in a dream is really not very strange at
all. Everything is remarkably normal. It becomes strange, the
moment you exit the dream, and then you look back, and then you
realize that the two don't match up.
Alex Jordan: But for these fish, this was a very clear behavior,
that they were doing something completely outside of their
repertoire. Some of them are very easy to interpret. Upside
Down swimming — fish do not swim upside down, unless it's time to
buy yourself a new goldfish. Now, if you think about it, one
of the main barriers that we might have in using these kinds
of tests across animals is that if they're designed for humans,
how do we expect an animal without hands or fingers to be
able to pass them in the same way that a human would?
Onome Ekeh: You know, you wonder, like how all these
different things put together? That don't fit?
Alex Jordan: One way, we've started to interrogate that
question and try to get a deeper handle on what a fish is
experiencing and what kind of behaviors it's performing, and
what those behaviors might mean, is to start to attempt to
understand the behavioral language of fishes and other
animals. And as I've mentioned, we're doing that with the aid of
artificial intelligence. Because for us to look at something like
a fish and understand what the postures, movements and
interactions mean, is an incredible challenge and
potentially impossible. And so we're using an approach called
behavioral decomposition. Behavioral decomposition is a
method in which you look at every single movement, an animal
makes — every single change in its legs, its postures, whatever
it is. And you can break those behaviors down into these sort
of dimensions of kinematics, and build them into this map of
behavior.
The fish will go to the mirror, observe its reflection, observe
that it has a mark on its body, will go away from the mirror,
will scrape that mark against the gravel or a rock, and then
go back to the mirror to check. If the fish go through all three
of the phases that I told you, and then attempt to remove this
mark, they have passed the test. By the original definition of
the test, by all other standards that are applied to all other
organisms, they have passed the test. Now is this evidence that
they are self conscious — that they are self aware? Is the
performance of this behavior enough to convince you that a
fish is self aware?
Filipa Ramos: When you're obsessed with something
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: and once you start looking for something
Filipa Ramos: you see that something everywhere.
Rain Wu: The sky told stories, remembered legends and provided
clues.
Yussef Agbo-Ola: Sometimes you can be suspended in a dream and
not necessarily be connected to time, but still connected to
this idea of rhythm. Constantly in this rhythmic cycle of
nutrients... it's like you're... you're eating reality, in a way.
Rain Wu: Food is the connection from distant and exotic
landscapes, to domestic backyards — going near and far,
stretching across the Earth's surface. It connects the sun
above and the soil below, like a vertical axis of life.
Yussef Agbo-Ola: And at the same time, you're reflecting on that
digestion.
Rain Wu: Food connects our bodies with the surrounding
world. Nothing is more intimate than eating. What somebody sees
can be seen by others. What somebody hears can be heard by
others. But what somebody eats, nobdy else can eat. There's
nothing more private, more introverted, more turned inwards
on itself.
Onome Ekeh: A transformation takes place
Rain Wu: Thus the world was created. And out of Chaos, the
orderly and complex Cosmos arose.
Lucia Pietroiusti: This most intimate of absorptions is what
brings you to the Cosmos.
Rain Wu: Cosmos, the physical universe of things seen and
touched, and the spiritual entities they existed beyond.
Federico Campagna: We'll get there by steps — we will go
through three great transformations. And we will
start by setting the scene — setting the parameters of this
journey towards human and more than human dreams. The
parameters are very simple. There are two parameters for our
inquiry. There are two simple words — nothing, something.
Nothing, something.
Now, the important thing are not the words. The little pause
between them is the greatest mystery of all, for science,
theology, philosophy since forever. How is it possible that
nothing might become something? This might sound like a very
academic and useless question. But in reality, it has to do
with everything we hold dear. It has to do with the very stuff of
the world. Asking ourselves the question "how is it possible
that nothing might become something" means asking
ourselves "How did it happen? That all that surrounds us —
every single thing, reality as a whole, at some point, came into
existence." And it's been at the center of our imagination and
concerns, as I was saying, since time immemorial. We could say
literally, since the beginning, the beginning of history.
History begins with the first written records we have
discovered. Before that there is prehistory. About prehistory, we
cannot say anything, because we don't know.
And the earliest written records have to do with the problem of
how the world came into existence. These are what are
called Cosmogonies — so stories that tell about the birth of the
cosmos. And these cosmogonies are very interesting because
they address the question "how we pass from nothing to
something". The question is "Can something come out of nothing?"
And the answer of the mythological cosmogonies is no.
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: The idea of reincarnation, that souls
took on successively the bodies of multiple different species,
from humans to animals to plants, and back again. This
idea was embedded in a range of classical Greek and Roman
philosophy, poetry and magic. And as we'll see, reincarnation
raises fundamental question about where the identity of an
organic entity rests, and how it is constituted. Is it in the
movements, feelings and capabilities of the body? In the
ability to vocalize or speak? Or in the capacity to remember or
dream?
Federico Campagna: To the question, "did from nothing,
something come out," the answer is no. Nothing is an impossible
philosophical concept. It is not just unthinkable, but it is
impossible. Since things exist, at least we exist as points of
awareness in the world as the object to our awareness, since
there is existence, non existence cannot take place.
Since there is being, non-being is totally impossible. So, to
the question of the beginning, how you pass from nothing to
something, they say, "In the beginning, there was not
nothing. In the beginning that was something, but something
special." This something was ineffable — is something beyond
words... impossible to describe. You have philosophers and
theologians talking about this. Then, this something fragmented
itself into many. Simone Weil says "decreated itself".
Why am I talking about this? How is this relevant in any way to
our lives today? Well, the question of the beginning
becomes relevant to our life today if we look at it in a
mirror — be like those fish that we saw earlier. If we look at it
in a mirror, the question of the origin is the question of the
end. The question of what happens before birth is the same
as the question of what happens after death. And now we start
seeing how the question of what happens after death concerns us.
There is a certain urgency to the question "After something,
can there be nothing? After this life, can we be utterly
annihilated?" And here we see that the intuition of the
eternity of being becomes a powerful protection. Because it
says that since things did not have a beginning in nothing,
they cannot have an end in nothing. Nothing is an invalid
concept — philosophically is an impossible concept.
What we have is that the beginning had to do with the
fragmentation of boundaries, an establishment of boundaries. And
the end, similarly has to do with the reshuffling of
boundaries. It's just a matter of movements of boundaries.
There is a way in which we can understand it metaphorically.
The world being the dream, and the characters of the dream
being the inhabitants of the world, including ourselves. Like
us, the inhabitants of a dream have no recollection of their
origin, and no horizon of their end. And like us, the
inhabitants of a dream are made of the same substance, as the
mind of the sleeper. If you for a moment, consider what is the
substance of which a dream is made, you realize that is the
substance of the mind — there is a continuity. The fragments are
made of the same substance of the monolith.
And in fact, this idea that it's possible to understand the world
as a dream, and the relationship between the world and the other
worldly (so, before the beginning, after the end), is
not just a metaphor that I've made up, but is a typical way of
understanding the world. In many philosophies, theologies and
mythologies from from all over the world.
The idea is that the world that we see around ourselves is a
dream of the eternal being. It is a dream in the mind of the
eternal being. And that everything we see around
ourselves, including ourselves as individuals, and the things
and the people around us are fundamentally characters of this
dream of this eternally-sleeping mind. And to this mind, that is
dreaming up the whole of reality, it is not unfitting to
give the name of God.
Now, this realization can have consequences. Of course, in
philosophy, often you observe a hypothesis about reality, you
embrace them, and you see what happens, okay? You try them out.
There is an engineering aspect to philosophy, very much. So if
you try out this perspective, it could have, you know, a
paralyzing effect or an ecstatic effect. Ecstatic effect, typical
mystical reaction. A paralyzing effect, in the sense that you
start asking yourself, "Doesn't this mean, then, that we are
passive elements inside the dream?" If we are the characters
being dreamt up by a great divine mind, to use the
theological metaphor, doesn't this mean that we cannot do
anything inside this dream to modify it? It's dreamt up by a
mind greater than our own. If you remain equal with the
metaphor of the dream, you realize that you can ask this
question to your own dreams. Inside your own dream, what is
the distribution of agency? Is it you? That is dreaming up the
dream and directing it and unfolding it? Or should you
rather say that in the dream, the, the one with the least
agency is you, while in fact, it's the characters of the dream
that unfold the story of which they are the protagonist. The
dream dreams itself through its characters, typically. And by
the same token, inside this world dream this dream world, it
is us as the characters that have the possibility of
unfolding the dream narration and the responsibility of doing
it the best we can, as well as we can.
Onome Ekeh: So I thought I'd try it out.
Alex Jordan: Dreams and imagination and abstraction can
function to place you in scenarios that you didn't
experience. And that could be considered in the scientific
terminology, adaptive. It allows your body and your mind to
explore scenarios, and maybe prepare you for them, even if
you didn't experience them.
Federico Campagna: So dreamers that are aware of their act of
creation of the world, being part of a fiction, they
understand that they can redeem the world only through narrative
means.
Nahum Mantra: You know, because without the heart, there is no
mind. There's no blood that pumps into the brain.
Hatis Noit: Yeah, every time I feel somehow lost, I try to
connect to the memory of the nature there — the wild energy
of the land.
Federico Campagna: We started with the first great
transformation, birth — the beginning. The second great
transformation, death — the end. And here we have the third
transformation. And the third transformation is a
transformation beyond the frontiers of the human.
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: The language of demon is a bit
tricky for us because it's used by Christians to refer
specifically to evil demons that have a particular place in the
cosmos and in the story of creation. Whereas, in the kind
of broader Greek and Roman usage, it's a slightly
stretchier term, and it tends to mean a kind of an intermediate
spirits, something between Gods and humans.
Onome Ekeh: If she's to go into the forest realm of spirits and
ghosts, she needs to have night vision.
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: Other fragments of his work reveal
that he identified himself as a restless demon. The Greek word
is daimon, a kind of inbetweener spirit, and one who's been
exiled from the gods — perhaps a punishment for some unspecified
crime. In this snippet of text, Empedocles recalls multiple
previous births, moving between genders and species apparently
without effort. He becomes most eloquent when remembering the
past bodily experience of being a little wordless fish leaping
out of the sea.
Nahum Mantra: When I retreat as far into myself as possible, I
become aware only of the shadow cast by my faint currents. The
water knows no natural boundary, and occupies all niches.
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: Did souls have a basic identity as human
or animal? Were there limits to where souls could go? Plato
thought that human souls could get inside animals. But
Porphyry, a philosopher in the Platonist tradition, thought
human souls could only enter human bodies. Otherwise,
Porphyry worries, a mother who'd returned into the body of a mule
might perhaps end up carrying her own son on her back. Was the
destination body for reincarnation a deliberate
choice of the soul, as related by Plato's Er. Or was it random?
In which bodies breathe in souls as they're blown about in the
air — And that's something apparently taught by followers
of Pythagoras and Orpheus.
Lucia Pietroiusti: And so the question that I have for you
over and over and over again, and it's not the first time that
I've asked you it, is what could be a possible metaphysics of the
more than human?
Federico Campagna: Metaphysics is a Greek term that has to do
with what is beyond the physics. It was originally assigned to
the, the organization of Aristotle's works. He wrote a
work on the Physics and the work after that was called the
Metaphysics, so the one after the work on the physics. So it
was just a cataloging entry.
But it has to do with more than cataloguing. It has to do with
the difference between what we see around ourselves, the
physics, what we can experience in a particular way. And our
questioning about what there is beyond. Beyond can mean many
different things. Beyond can mean in the realm of the
invisible, or in the realm of the infinitely small, or in the
realm of the immaterial, or in the realm of the possibilities
that are not actualized, and so on and so forth. Or of the
impalpable, ineffable structures that hold up reality. Now, to a
large extent, the things that... the structures that hold up
reality are not so much inscribed within things, but
they are inscribed within our mind. So within the way in which
we perceive things. And in that case, we realize that the way in
which we... set our interpretation of the
perceptions that we have from the world goes to construct
different worlds. So, it is world building in that sense. We
could use another words — a Greek word "Cosmopoetics".
Cosmopoetics is literally the same as worldbuilding. But maybe
it's a little bit clearer, because Cosmopoetics means...
Cosmos, literally order. So the setting of a particular order.
And this setting is Poetics from the Greek popoieîn, "to make" —
but also the same word that means "poetry".
Artists, cultural producers, because they intervene
particularly on the way in which we see things, they are
opticians. You know, they are eye surgeons to a large extent.
Through their poetic work, they construct worlds, and they help
us to construct different worlds because they intervene at that
level. They are not physical engineers in that sense, but
they are metaphysical engineers. To the extent to which our
shifting of perspective constructs different worlds.
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: Christians thought that human souls were
restless but also fundamentally individual, singular, and
monogamous in their relationship with bodies. That said, human
bodies could themselves be magicked into horses or
possessed by demons, so they were also porous and unstable.
The most threatening creatures in the atmosphere were demons,
who could operate inside human souls and bodies and minds,
animating their dreams with obscene thoughts and producing
powerful waking fantasies. Demons own thin bodies can take
on apparently more solid disguises as wild animals or
beautiful women, but they were fundamentally vulnerable too —
evanescing at exorcism into a puff of smoke. We've also seen
how some Greeks and Romans had variously imagined demons as
close to or even identical with human souls, and also as souls
as much less bound to singular bodies. Some fortunate or
privileged humans might even be able to recall a faint memory of
an earlier incarnation, whether as a human, an animal, or even a
plant. Whether such memories and dreams of a past self were
punitive or ecstatic, depends rather on what you think it
might be like to live as a bird or a shrub.
Nahum Mantra: There, I was exiled from myself. But nothing
lasts forever.
Onome Ekeh: I've been trying to recreate that story, over and
over.
Alex Jordan: There's this idea that dreaming is feeding
nonsense into the system, such that nonsense can be
discriminated from sense. And this is, in fact, at a practical
level, one of the methods we have to use in many of these
technological approaches. We have to feed noise into the
system to differentiate it from signal.
Lucia Pietroiusti: And now of course, a machine is complex as
the world itself is the world.
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: Of course, it's hard to tell from
these little tiny fragments of archaic poetry by people like
Empedocles and Aeneas, how they related to these past selves,
and indeed whether that animal incarnations dreamed in the same
way of their human incarnations. Looking more broadly, we can see
that there is a great amount of disagreement among poets and
natural philosophers in antiquity, about which animals
dreamed, what they dreamed about, all done on the basis of
empirical observation and inference.
Alex Jordan: And it is our hope that ultimately, by looking at
these animals in their natural environment, by understanding
their experiences, by understanding their context, by
understanding their behavioral outputs, we can then bring them
into the conversation — to tell us what they want, what their
aesthetic preferences are, what their desires are. But also what
their language means, and perhaps if we're lucky, what
their subjective experience of the world may really be.
Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe: If you look more broadly at the kind of
spread of literary and visual production, you can see that
there is some understanding that the world is interconnected and
that human lives might contain echoes of a kind of previous
vegetal animalistic existence. So it seems to me that there are
lots of different explanations for where dreams come from in
antiquity. And some of them are very naturalistic and sort of
pragmatic and to do with bodily movements. And others are much
more related to the sublime, be it the Divine or the Demonic —
and it's particularly there that you find notions that the dream
might be an uncovering of something by some third agency.
There might be some interest in revealing to humans... what else
they've been.
Mendel Skulski: This episode of Future Ecologies features the
words and voices of Lucia Pietroiusti, Filipa Ramos, Alex
Jordan, Sophie Lunn-Rockliffe, Rain Wu, Nahum Mantra, Onome
Ekeh, Federico Campagna, Yussef Agbo-Ola, and Hatis Noit
Adam Huggins: All recorded in November of 2022 as part of The
Shape of a Circle in the Dream of a Fish,
Mendel Skulski: The remix of which you heard here was
produced by me, Mendel Skulski, and my co host, Adam Huggins,
Adam Huggins: with music by Yussef Agbo-Ola, Hatis Noit,
Any-Angled Light, and Thumbug.
Mendel Skulski: The Shape of a Circle in the Mind of a Fish, is
a recurrent festival, curated by Lucia Pietroiusti and Filipa
Ramos, initiated by the Serpentine Galleries in London
since 2018.
Adam Huggins: And held last year in partnership with the Galeria
Municipal do Porto.
Mendel Skulski: Special thanks to Kostas Stasinopoulos, as well
as Adam's Electric Sheep Radio co-hosts, Ryder Thomas White and
Samantha Ruth who you heard briefly at the top.
Adam Huggins: You can hear more from us
Mendel Skulski: and reach out across the dream and say hello
Adam Huggins: at futureecologies.net
Mendel Skulski: Or wherever you find your podcasts.
Adam Huggins: Until next time.
Mendel Skulski: Dream easy.