(And I do know that every individual may have a unique experience, but
that's not what I am discussing here. I can only speak from my
Intellectual immersion is one thing.
Bodily/physical immersion is another.
Emotive immersion is also another.
And so is visual immersion.
And I could go on.
A distinction needs to be made. We have different senses. No point in
melting them into one big lump.
There are different types of immersions, you could say and as I have
mentioned earlier in other postings in a different thread, the online text
is far more immersive than anything I have "seen", including things I have
produced. If I do see something terribly engaging, it is not the work
itself that engages, it is the idea that it proposes/represents. What I
read is more engaging than what I see. The ideas the works propose are
often more immersive than the works themselves. The discussions about those
works can be far more immersive than the works themselves.
Sometimes, I read about a work which gets me all interested, only to find
that the review was so much better. Sometimes, the review lends to the work
a certain amount of importance which the work and the artist had not
intended. That's when it becomes absurd. And I have seen many artists take
advantage of that added bonus for PR purposes and to further their career.
And this applies to more than online work of course.
I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed the basic line of argument going on
in many discussions. We are always discussing the potential of a certain
work, how it could be applied further in a different format, in a different
What is common in many discussions about online work is that there is
almost always a complete absence of the aesthetic judgment. The works are
often judged by what they say, what they may mean in a future time, what
they mean in terms of the process, what it's technical aspects were/are.
Although we are dealing with a new media, it is still, in the context of
practice, a process by which there is a product, a product with aesthetic
values. It is also a medium which in many ways combines different
traditional art disciplines. In 3d, there is sculture. In the tdsfb
program, you could say there is an installation which has a 3d
Then there is the fact that we also hear these works. Where is the audial
immersion? Must I wear headphones, have surround sound? Must I have
equipment to enjoy?
Hence the problem also of catering to a diversely have/have not
hardware/software audience and the accidental audience, the walk-in, the
And in the visually immersive experience, where is the discussion of what
the eye candy does or fails to do to your mind?
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and