[-empyre-] gender3D ..was 3D in Gallery Space - books

["Melinda Rackham" <melinda@unsw.edu.au>]

thanx for reference to that paper steve.. its an interretsing investigation
and yes we need more of it..
im just finishing my phd thesis on networked vrml (a month to go!), which is
more focused on why we deal in realist represenattions in 3d space.. on the
nature of the vrml language itself, on embodiemnet and on the secret lives
of avatars, and one of my conclusions is that we are at an early stahe of
adoption and adaption with this media .. so we cling to the familiar.  form
my perspective its pretty simple..we arent having failures we are having
interresting learning experiences, littel dead ends that dont work casue the
approaches arent inventive enough yet.. 3d as an art form and a specific
technology  isnt  mature enough to branch out much, to take the leaps and
bounds it needs too...

however one of the issues that th epaper really sparked for me is that of
gender imbalance in this art form. not one work by a woman was mentioned...
maybe thats because a lot of women have tended to deal with more theroetical
issues like corporeality or play with more visceral  imagery, or  be less
concerend with navagational strategies, or architectural or database
functionalities.. ,  but then that isnt always true either .. some only play
with data bases and architecture..  eg soem works which have been around for
a long time include eva wohlgemuth, victoria vesna, mary flanagan, program5
girls , margarette. jahrmann, linda  vigdor, lynn hershman, nicole steinger,
a lot  of whom have been shown in web 3d before..maybe this imbalance is
another facet to the issues of why  3d  work is undervalued, stiffled, not
considered arty enough..etc.

i know that there is a "heavy under-representation of women" who make 3d web
art, as opposed to women who make other sorts of netart or art in general..
as well 80% of the guests in this forum are male ,  around the same figures
for women in the lab 3d show.. and form my observation the number is even
lower for women  who participate on any 3d related mailing list. yet i see
quiet a few who are working in the higher tech end of 3d , (but with almost
zero accessability compared to networked art..) like in CAVES.. wonder why
that is..?  maybe cause its becsue thay been round longer and thre are more
women in academic networks with acces to them....?

melinda



----- Original Message -----
From: "steve guynup" <exposedfield@yahoo.com>
To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 12:15 AM
Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Re: 3D in Gallery Space - books


> This issue of experience is a real one. But we aren't
> the first to face this problem. Game Theory, Film
> Studies, Sculpture, heck even Paintings have issues
> regarding reproduction in a book.
>
> The question becomes one of "Is the best level/amount
> of knowledge possible being shared and dicussed.
>
> In eight years I've never seen a paper (let alone a
> book) that discussed and compared multiple web3D works
> from various artists/developers. There has been only a
> few lists of works (do "link" pages count?), several
> individual statements on individual works or at best
> collections of individual statements (often by people
> who have never built anything).
>
> Go to a bookstore or shop online, compare what's been
> published in other media (from painting to web design)
> to books on VR. You'll see trend. VR books have few
> pictures, many opinions and rarely if ever talk about
> design in 3D space.
>
> As for what I want - more docs like this:
http://www.archimuse.com/mw2003/papers/guynup/guynup.html
>
> > [personally I love those errant pixels,
> so do I, my "untitled memories" piece makes good use
> of pixel dust...
>
> peace
> Steve
>
> --- Lloyd Sharp <lsharp@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > >
> > ><snip> books now out are basically about the theory
> > of
> > >the online experience, but not on the work </snip>
> > >
> > >yep, I entered this list with a rant on this.
> > Though
> > >I'm apologetic about the tone, this really is
> > >something that we on this list ought to do more of.
> >
> > I'm interested in how this could be done...
> >
> > Is there a useful way to talk about and look at
> > these works in a
> > publication with all the inherent limitations of
> > that experience .
> >
> > What would these books that focus on the work rather
> > than the theory
> > tell us about the works?
> >
> > It may be that these texts|books have problems
> > conveying what is
> > unique and exciting about the 'realtime' experience
> > and therefore
> > default focus to art fame instead. The ones around
> > currently are very
> > unsatisfying...
> >
> > Its also interesting that it seems there is not a
> > lot of talk in
> > current theory about the failure of technology and
> > how that can be as
> > exciting as the successful use of it.
> > [personally I love those errant pixels, the little
> > tears in 3D space
> > and inversed normals]
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
> =====
> ________________________________________________
>
>     The reality of the building does not
>     consist in the four walls and roof but
>     in the space within to be lived.
>
>     - Laotzu
>
>
>       well, Laotzu said it but I did it.
>
>     - Frank Lloyd Wright, after learning
>       his philosophy behind the Unity Temple
>       had been expressed 5,000 years earlier.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>