Re: [-empyre-] thank you situated artists

["Adam Nash" <adam@yamanakanash.net>]

Hi Henry (apologies to the games contributors for interrupting),

Thanks for your input, and as a live performer since the age of 13, I totally agree with your appraisal 
of the effect of a physically present audience on a performance. However, Melinda was quoting my 
original post (quoted in full below as I think you maybe haven't read it and links to the empyre 
archive seem to have disappeared in the redesign) in which I discussed the irony of an audience 
being physically present when the performers are not. Scorched Happiness is a live performance for 
multi-user 3d cyberspace, but for the "2004" exhibition it was presented via projector at ACMI. I am 
in fact slavishly devoted to cathectic involvement with an audience. As for solipsism? That's me all 
over. Following is my original post with subject "Landmarks, there are none":

 Jumping right in... 

 My work 'Scorched Happiness' is concerned with place and space, but takes place in virtual space. 
 Ironically, with this exhibition it is presented as a physically sited piece, which offers a host of 
 challenges. One becomes concerned with projectors, seats,  printing and computers, instead of the 
 emotional geography of multi-user cyberspace as a non-physical territory in which to explore the 
 pyschological environment of the immigrant, as expressed by Kristeva in her "Toccata and Fugue for 
 the Foreigner", an environment that is itself the result of the clash of the physical ("country") and the 
 virtual ("culture"). 

 My greatest fear in presenting Scorched Happiness via projectors to an audience with whom I am 
 physically sharing a room is that their final impression will be "would be better on a computer 
 screen", which would be ironic because it is designed for individual net-connected computer screen 
 consumption. The performers are logged-in "live" but not physically present in the space with the 
 audience, so what is the point of the audience being physically present at all? It is an inconvenient 
 but interesting irony! 

 Regards, 
 Adam 

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 20:29:25 -0700, Henry Warwick wrote
> The Voices in my Head tell me that on 6/16/04 6:30 PM, Melinda 
> Rackham at melinda@subtle.net wrote:
> 
> > And perhaps there is no answer to Adam Nash's opening question " so what is
> > the point of the audience being physically present at all?
> 
> In terms of performance, the physical presence of an audience changes
> everything.
> 
> Proof:
> 
> go into a large room. Get on a stage and sing.
> 
> Fill that room with people. Get on a stage and sing.
> 
> Different, innit? Scary, no?
> 
> Suddenly have several hundred eyes trained on you? Ears directed,
>  the head and shoulder movement displaying attention - investing in you...
> 
> I think denying the power of the cathectic involvement of an 
> audience with a performer is a kind of artistic narcissicism that 
> has a basic solipsistic outlook (something for which I hold little 
> patience).
> 
> I'd go on, but I have the flu and need to get my fever addled brain 
> back to bed.
> 
> HW
> 
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre


--