Re: [-empyre-] sense of place in digital space....

[kusch <kusch@sil.at>]

On Thursday, September 18, 2003, at 11:01  AM, Jeff Sonstein wrote:

> On Thursday, September 18, 2003, Martin wrote from k-pluriel.org:
>
> > in our performances,  in which often  "only"  the live performers are
> > in direct contact with the interactive technology, I could say that 
> > the
> > notion of place does not play such an important role
>
> hmmmmmm
> not sure I can buy this...
> the social scientist in me
> rebels at this contention <grin/>
>
> could you speak to this issue some more?
>
> if they can "see" the tech in action
> and they can experience "the other" in some way
> then I would probably contend that
> participants
> whether "in direct contact with the interactive technology"
> or not
> *will* form a mental-mapping of the experience
> which includes notions of both place/space
> and of relative "proximity" of the other(s)


aha, this is a good point, I agree that in the moment we are integrating
interactive parameters and technology into the work, that a mental 
mapping
can/will take place and digital space "appears" and is present -
(regarding to the viewer´s information and knowledge and the usage of 
the tools)
but I was trying to explain: that the notion or let us say the sense of 
place does not play an important role,
for us in the construction of our last performance works.
In my previous statements I consider very much the idea  of  the "sense 
of place" as a terminology which plays quite an important role when you 
are the "manipulator" directly engaged....

 in the process and in the course of the performance digital space - 
and digital processes become physical and present, to which extent the 
viewer´s mental mapping forms a sense of place is something which I can 
not answer, because being the artist who proposes the work, and creates 
a contextual sensation, my capacity to judge what the spectator 
receives or perceives is beyond my knowledge...

 Being in my own daily practice, for the last 14 years permanent ly 
engaged with all these "ghosts in the machine " with all these digital 
tools, digital space and place are on my personal level of daily 
empirical experience a permanent fact....hmmm therefore my reality is 
feeling and sensing ...let us say  I am tuned to digital space and 
sense it continously...;-)


In one of our presentations the producer  in Paris was watching the 
performance schème  for 4 evenings in a row - une grande dame from 
danse and performance absolutely not familiar to digital terms and 
terminology,
she realised after the 4th evening that
a) the projected images have been 3 dimensional representations from 
her own performance space
b)  the video images and sounds have been generated in real time, every 
evening different
c) that the "funny small items " which the performers have been wearing 
all the time, have been sensors (what is this)....
what I want to say by this, is that the presence of the "other" did not 
play in that case an important role, the layer of perception was the 
"sensational" live-experience, all elements at once.

best
martin

> but perhaps I am misunderstanding
> what you are saying...
>
> jeffs
>
> --
> Jeff Sonstein, Assistant Professor
> Department of Information Technology
> Rochester Institute of Technology
> ==============================================
> IT Dept Webspace:                       http://www.it.rit.edu/~jxs/
> Experimental Server:                       http://streamer.rit.edu/
> Personal Weblog: http://streamer.rit.edu/weblogs/dotRant/
> Public Key:                    http://ariadne.iz.net/~jeffs/jeffs.asc
>
> "Power Corrupts.
>  PowerPoint Corrupts Absolutely."
>           -  Edward Tufte  -
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
--

mkusch@k-pluriel.org
www.konditionpluriel.org