Tega Brain’s innovative work exists at the intersection of art, engineering, and environmental systems, challenging traditional boundaries between disciplines. In this conversation, she reflects on her journey from environmental engineering to becoming a renowned interdisciplinary artist and educator. Her projects, like the Coin Operated Wetland and Solar Protocol, reimagine the values embedded in system design while exploring how technology interacts with ecosystems. Through her thought-provoking installations and collaborations, Brain critiques dominant perspectives, offering new ways to approach pressing environmental and societal challenges. This interview delves into her creative process, the evolution of her practice, and the critical role art plays in reshaping how we engage with technology and the environment.
How did your work begin? You touch on arts, engineering, data, digital worlds, and the environment. How did these disciplines come together? Was it always a holistic vision, or did it develop over time?
I’ve always been interested in both science and art. When I was in university in Australia, it was difficult to combine those interests. You had to choose: science and engineering or the arts. I chose engineering, studying environmental engineering and working in that field for a few years. I focused on water design—stormwater systems, water quality assessments, and using “soft infrastructures” like wetlands to manage water in urban areas.
That work was fascinating because it involves designing interfaces between human systems and the environment. However, there were limitations in commercial engineering. Economic factors often dictated outcomes, and I found myself working on large housing developments in undeveloped areas. As an idealistic young person, I felt I was contributing to unsustainable projects that met only the bare minimum environmental regulations.
This led me to question environmental challenges as not just technical issues, but also social, cultural, and political ones. I began reading across disciplines and eventually pursued an MFA to explore these issues through art, looking at engineering from a different perspective. I started creating systems like water treatment designs with alternative politics—for example, systems that prioritize ecosystem and human well-being equally.
These experiments evolved in galleries and public spaces, and my practice grew from there. Around the same time, open-source software like Processing and P5.js became widely available in the arts, making it possible to use technical skills for art-making, critique, and experimentation. Working with code became a big part of my practice.
Was transitioning from engineering to the arts smooth, or did it happen gradually?
It was a very different way of working. I had to unlearn a lot. Engineering education focuses on solving problems and improving human health and well-being, but the arts and humanities question those approaches. What do we mean by “health”? Is it just individual well-being, or does it include ensuring future generations thrive because the environment is preserved?
My first ambitious installation, Coin Operated Wetland, combined a laundromat with a wetland to emphasize mutual success between human systems and ecosystems. From an engineering perspective, the project would be seen as a failure because it didn’t meet compliance standards. But as an artwork, it challenged the metrics we use to define success, pushing me to think critically about the values embedded in system design.
That was your first large installation, right? You revisited it later—what prompted that?
The Smithsonian Museum invited me to present it in a show about technology and the future. It was an opportunity to redesign the system and showcase it in a new context.
How did the newer version differ from the original?
The updated version was larger and more ambitious. Working with the Smithsonian introduced challenges, particularly in using water in a museum setting. The project also became part of a larger exhibition, emphasizing the relationship between technology and ecosystems.
Your work spans science, engineering, technology, and digital mediums like coding. Do you see one as foundational, or does it vary by project?
Engineering often serves as a starting point, both because of my background and its influence on our lives. Engineering decisions shape everything, from our phones to the media we consume. My work encourages a critical, curious perspective on this computational dominance, showing that technologies are built on values and decisions that can—and should—be questioned.
You’ve collaborated with Sam Levine for years. Can you discuss that partnership?
Sam and I have worked together for about eight years. One of our first projects was a smell-based dating service where participants sent in worn T-shirts for others to smell and select matches. Hundreds of people participated, and some even started relationships.
We complement each other well—he brings web design expertise, and I contribute an engineering and interdisciplinary perspective. Together, we’ve tackled topics like climate and cultural responses to environmental crises.
Have you collaborated with scientists on your projects?
We often consult scientists or experts, though formal collaborations are rare. For example, we consulted smell scientists for the dating project and carbon trading experts for Offset. However, because some of our work is subversive, scientists can be hesitant to associate their names with it.
Bridging the arts and engineering must come with challenges. How do you reconcile these approaches?
It’s challenging. In my role as a professor of digital media at NYU’s engineering school, I often engage in interdisciplinary projects. The arts provoke questions and explore alternatives, while engineering focuses on practical solutions. My projects balance both: they provoke thought while ensuring the technology functions.
Can you elaborate on your project Solar Protocol?
Solar Protocol is a web platform hosted on solar-powered servers worldwide. The server in the most sunlight delivers the site, demonstrating systems that respond to environmental energy availability. It’s not a scalable internet solution but suggests alternative design approaches aligned with planetary limits.
I found your paper The Environment is Not a System particularly thought-provoking. Could you explain its core ideas?
The paper critiques viewing the environment as a system—a perspective rooted in cybernetics and ecological modeling. While valuable for understanding interactions and feedback loops, it can create a false sense of control. I propose alternative frameworks, like thinking of environments as assemblages, which embrace unpredictability and ambiguity.
Could artistic inquiry drive a shift in perception?
Definitely. Art can question dominant perspectives and explore alternative ways of seeing. Scholars like Anna Tsing inspire me by offering non-human-centered perspectives, which the arts and humanities are uniquely equipped to navigate.
Do you feel conscious of critiquing the technologies you also engage with?
Yes, I often describe my work as “eccentric engineering” because it reconfigures systems in unconventional ways. By implementing these systems, I explore the values embedded in their design and provoke conversations about functionality.
Leave a Reply