Simone Brauner. You describe Reza Negarestani's idea of petroleum as "a demonic, planetary intelligence using humanity as a vector to reach the surface and burn." If humanity is the vector, what does that make the artist?
The artists I admire the most and I am in particular thinking of Pierre Huyghe here - operate a little like wizards. But the magic they produce does not change the real necessarily - rather the perception of it. I have come away from a Huyghe work or installation profoundly changed and moved both intellectually and emotionally.
For me, try as I might I cannot escape this subject of power and transformation embedded in gasoline. Whilst I walk on the island of Karpathos in Greece - where SPIRITS emerged - I am surrounded by old abandoned wheat terraces which emptied out as both hyper mobility and hyper US led grain production emerged from petroleum in the early 20th century. One passes through these landscapes and languages and gets to the sea shore where these strange ghosts reside - many hundreds of lost plastic shoes - some really old, from the 60’s maybe, or 70’s.
The older shoes are amusing as they try to pass themselves off as other materials - rattan, leather, fabric. It was only later that plastic embraced its core qualities to be itself - injection moulded into any shape and colour - a kaleidoscope of the 20th Century.
In the end - getting back to Reza - petroleum does not just burn now, it also is infernal as it becomes smaller and smaller in the tumbling waves. There is a rising tide of awareness of the microplastic which attacks its maker on the micro level - as CO2 attacks on the macro. In SPIRITS and in effect through this potential poetry of technology one calls these different registers at once. As it happens the sound for the last Autumnal section uses a technology called granular synthesis, which chimes with a tiny, deadly ecological fragment.

john gerrard, SPIRITS, Pacific #3.
Simone Brauner. Through Gaussian splatting, the spatial appearance of the found shoe continues to exist as data and light, while the material shoe is left behind. As the shoe becomes a spirit, does it lose its history, its aura, through digitization?
To begin - the gaussian splat - derived from neural-network research and a radiance-field lineage - is entirely built from our photographs of the real found shoe. The machine reconstructs and subsequently renders this new data thing live in the browser. The object is computed on the fly by the engine, forming as the viewer's device draws it - it exists only as it streams into the screen, which is why the finger, completing the circuit, becomes the central actor.
Then it is this cloud of points, not a solid - a thing composed of thousands of soft luminous specks rather than a fixed object. The form itself is a swarm, which suits a spirit better than a sculpture might. The shoe as cloud of light.
Extending this I imagine the shoe as spirit before I reached it. It was made by no one hand and thrown in some unknown manner into the sea, where it drifted for years or for decades before it washed up anonymous on a beach. Whatever history it had was already lost by the time I found it. I do not know whose foot it held, on what shore, in what life of labour or leisure or flight. That loss, that anonymity, is its history. It is a ghost of a person I will never meet and a story I cannot know.
The digitisation does not strip that aura away. What the gaussian splat does is give the ghost a second body and to distribute it - one made of data and light rather than petroleum - and let it go on existing in the way its real material already insists on existing. The plastic shoe does not rot. It persists, zombie like in the ocean for decades and more as both beached things and also microplastics, haunting the water and the body. The splat is an image of that condition: the object that will no longer pass away, continuing now as light on a screen, as data in a server, as the related objects continue as poison in the sea. Two afterlives of the same imperishable things.
Walter Benjamin feared that mechanical reproduction would wither the aura of the original. But SPIRITS is not a reproduction of a shoe. There is no aura-bearing original artwork standing behind it in a museum. It is the shoe's spirit, in the precise weird sense - the part that outlives the body and cannot rest. And a ghost, I think, carries more aura than a body, not less. That is why the works are called SPIRITS. The digitisation is not a loss of the sacred. It is the moment the object becomes visible as what it already was: something that refuses to die, lifted into the light so that we might finally see it, understand it (perhaps) and say goodbye.