Re: (Re: [-empyre-] Holbein thread)

<tom@nullpointer.co.uk> · Tue, 7 Oct 2003 21:12:19 +0100

Hi all,

Not too well versed in semiotic theory anymore myself (college seems a long
time ago:)
But I am interested in the ideas you are presenting and I was wondering if
you are
talking about videogames in general or if there are more specific examples
that you can
refer to as immersive semiotic agents/systems. I'm getting awfully tempted
to dig up some
baudrillard here but i'm not quite sure how post-structuralist thinking is
regarded or applied
to contemporary practice (In a strange way it seems kind of dated)

Best

Tom
http://www.nullpointer.co.uk

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <troy@iconica.org>
To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 1:47 AM
Subject: RE: (Re: [-empyre-] Holbein thread)

Hello,

Right. Many recent games use sophisticated simulations of worlds that embody
relationships and situations to the player / subject / viewer. When engaged
in the simulation / game the player becomes part of the game. In terms of
the symbolic / real (discursive / material) the simulation is a sign system
and the player becomes a sign in that system ? the game world is quite
literally
addressing the player as an agent in the simulation. At the same time, the
artifice of the simulation immerses the player so that they perceive it
as real. This is typically through the use of depth cues, spatialised sound,
immediacy of feedback, realistic behaviour / physics, lighting, and so on.
Psychologically, the player is in that space ? it becomes their reality.

In this way, I would argue that electronic space can be the symbolic made
real. The symbolic has real affect, and is represented as a real space
through
simulation. Of course, this relies on the assertion that 'we want to
believe'
? that mediated experiences have been assimilated as natural and 'real'
in the first place.

So, electronic space blurs the symbolic and the real by representing a
highly
abstract space (the logic and relations of the computer) in a realistic
simulation (the immersive / interactive experience). Which is one of the
things that makes them so special.

Troy.

>
>
>hi again,
>
>ta for the baltrusaitis reference - it's a classic text on anamorphosis.
>another classic text is of course jacques lacan's chapter on 'anamorphosis'
>in 'the four fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis'.
>
>according to lacan, holbein's picture demonstrates the 'annihilation' of
>the
>subject. his is a tricky argument to synopsize, but i'll try: lacan's
schema
>of the subjectifying relation is very closely based around alberti's
>perspective construction. his 'double dihedron' of vision schematizes the
>way that the subject functions within the order of language and
>representation. step outside this relation - i.e. step away from the
correct
>point of view - and you enter the domain of the 'real', you cease to be
a
>subject as such. this, in a nutshell, is what holbein's picture
demonstrates
>- so says lacan.
>
>within lacan's argument, then, the border between the discursive and the
>material is recast as the border between the symbolic and the real - and
>it
>is not subject to blurring. you're either a subject under the gaze (i.e.
>a
>subject in/of discourse), or you're nothing at all. i think this is a bit
>harsh, and i think holbein thinks so too, which is why i find his picture
>so
>interesting. i wouldn't go so far as to say it 'devours' the situated
>subject - it simply points out that it's really tricky to 'situate'
subjects
>in the first place.
>
>from the phenomenological point of view, which is basically (as far as
i
>understand it) what holbein's picture demonstrates, subjectivity is a kind
>of an 'unsituated' concern by definition, an unstable mix of the material
>AND the discursive.... which is also what we find lucidly demonstrated
in
>a
>lot of recent videogames. which is why i find them so fascinating.
>
>later
>e
>
>
>on 3/10/03 8:11 AM, -empyre-owner at empyre-owner@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>wrote:
>
>> vince.dziekan@artdes.monash.edu.au
>> Friday, 3 October
>> HI.
>> Sorry, don't want to jump in or preempt Eugenie's response, but I'd
>> recommend you check out:
>>
>> Author:Baltrusaitis, Jurgis, 1903-
>> Title:Anamorphic art / by Jurgis Baltrusaitis ; translated by W. J.
>> Strachan.
>> Publisher:Cambridge [Eng.] : Chadwyck-Healey, 1977.
>>
>> The idea of Renaissance, Cartesian Perspectivism containing this
>> 'alternative' within it is an interesting position to think about (the
>> application of perspective as a technique can be considered equally
"right"
>> whether using it to form or inversely to deform. Somewhere along the
way,
>> one of those positions has become "right" and the other deemed "wrong").
>> Looking at this in this way, does this sort of soften the borders between
>> the "discursive" and the "material", as indicated in an initial
observation:
>>
>>
>> I¹ve just read troy¹s first post and it looks  interestingly  as though
>>> we¹re approaching the issue of anamorphism from two distinct angles

>the
>>> discursive (troy) and the material (myself).
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> Cheers.
>> Vince
>> (ps. I'm a colleague of Troy's  in the dept of Multimedia & Digital Arts
>at
>> Monash --- so thought I'd better put in my two cents worth...)
>>
>>
>>
>> Alan Sondheim wrote:
>>
>> Can you say more about Holbein's scheme? It's almost as if his painting
>> devours architecture and the situated body. Did he do other such work?
>Why
>> was this brilliance abandoned, if it was? Could his other work contain
>> secret geometries? (I realize not, but want to speculate.)
>>
>> It reminds me, what you're saying, of the multiply perceived painting
of
>> Kuo Hsi -
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, eugenie wrote:
>>
>>
>> hi all,
>>
>> big thank you to christina, melinda, michael and jim for inviting me
to
>> participate in this month¹s discussion.
>>
>> I¹ve just read troy¹s first post and it looks  interestingly  as though
>> we¹re approaching the issue of anamorphism from two distinct angles 
the
>> discursive (troy) and the material (myself). my interest in anamorphosis
>is
>> historically based  I arrived in the digital realm by the somewhat
>> roundabout route of c18th landscape aesthetics  so I¹m going to begin
>by
>> giving a bit of historical background.
>>
>> anamorphosis, for me, is a way of approaching the issue of Oembodied
>> vision¹. the argument is simple and probably highly self evident to most
>of
>> you posting to this list  vision and thought issue from an active body
>> rather than a disembodied eye  but it¹s also one that western philosophy
>> has traditionally had a great deal of trouble accepting.
>>
>> Hans Holbein¹s Ambassadors (1533) is a well-known example of an
anamorphic
>> picture and an excellent demonstration of the way that so called
Orational
>> perception¹ has always involved more than just the perspectival eye/I.
> The
>> vanishing point and Ocorrect¹ viewing position in Holbein¹s picture are
>> clearly indicated by the precise rendering of the various perspectival
>> objects in the image. Looking from this position, the anamorphic skull
>in
>> the foreground appears as nothing more than a meaningless shape. In order
>to
>> see it properly, the viewer has to approach the painting and look
obliquely,
>> from a position on the right, about halfway up the frame.
>>
>> Viewing Holbein¹s picture was a sort of play in two acts. Holbein was
quite
>> specific about the manner in which the picture should be hung: in a room
>> with two doors, each one corresponding to one of the picture¹s two
viewing
>> positions. In the first act, the viewer enters the room and sees the
picture
>> from the Ocorrect¹ point of view. Captivated by the realism of the
painted
>> scene, the viewer is also perplexed by the indecipherable object at the
>> bottom of the picture. Leaving by the second door, the disconcerted
viewer
>> casts a brief backward glance at the painting, and it is at this point
>that
>> the strange object resolves itself into an image.
>>
>> Traditional theories of representation have paid a lot of attention to
>the
>> way the viewer is constructed as/at the Ocorrect¹ point of view  i.e.
>as a
>> distanced, disembodied, monocular eye. they have had much less to say
about
>> the transient state(s) between points of view  what I¹m calling the
>> Oanamorphic moment¹. Holbein¹s picture calls attention to those moments
>in
>> the event of seeing where the viewer exceeds the Cartesianesque
>> configuration of the disembodied eye. It foregrounds the subject in its
>> environmental sense: a mobile, embodied agent that acts in the real world
>of
>> objects. As a concept of transformation, then, anamorphosis allows us
to
>> understand subjectivity as a Odynamic¹ condition, a matter of a
constantly
>> changing body schema rather than a fixed body image. Holbein¹s little
>> theatre of representation, in other words, has a lot to tell us about
the
>> way we interface with virtual environments in the present dayS and this
>is
>> where it links up to my current interest in videogames, and affect, and
>the
>> way that we traditionally understand the history of virtuality.
>>
>> wow, I¹ve run on and on. I¹ll leave it there for now.
>>
>> bests
>> eugenie
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/
>> http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt
>> Trace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm
>> finger sondheim@panix.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>_______________________________________________
>empyre forum
>empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>http://www.subtle.net/empyre

>>> Troy Innocent : troy@iconica.org : iconica.org

_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre