Re: [-empyre-] immersion
Hi Jun-Ann -
thanks for expressing the exact thoughts that I've been too busy to
Jun-Ann Lam wrote:
> (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
> accidental surfer.
> And in the visually immersive experience, where is the discussion of what
> the eye candy does or fails to do to your mind?
> empyre mailing list
>From January - March 2002 I am at:
Visual Arts Department
University of California/San Diego
9500 Gilman Drive
La Jolla, CA 92093-0327
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and