Re: [-empyre-] networked_performance 2

["Michelle Riel" <michelle_riel@csumb.edu>]

As Helen confirms, Glimmer, like many other works on the blog, is representative of a transformation of the audience / spectator (the seeing / listening observer ) to an active, physically engaged participant in the artistic process. The structure
of the work casts the audience as _performers_ in the work. In such cases the artist is creating a framework, or an 'open work', within which the audience is needed to perform to realize the work. Without the audience as performers there is no work,
only the possibility. 

As we have noted in our initial post, we see the historical antecedents of this current work in the art practice that emerged in the mid 20th century, in particular the 'open work' and the practice of 'art as life' which emerged from Cage and Kaprow
and teh Happenings and Fluxus movements of the 50's and  60's.

This leads us to the relation between the open work and open source as formative practice and its relation to performance/performativity.

 
soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au> writes:
>Hello Komninos:
>
>>From what Michelle and I have seen on the blog, the answer is yes.
>Increasingly the "audience" is becoming a participant(s) in the work.  Take
>the musical work "Glimmer"  by Jason Freeman, for instance.   Freeman
>engages the concert audience as musical collaborators in the shaping of the
>performance. Each audience member is given a light stick, which he can turn
>on and off during the performance as a way of instructing the musicians. The
>information is picked up by computer software (which analyses a video of the
>audience's use of the light sticks) and the instructions conveyed to the
>musicians. 
>
>The New York Times review of this piece includes the following description
>of the result: "As people flicked their lights in swirling, jabbing and
>jittery patterns, the musicians played riffs, chords, sustained tones,
>honks, squiggles and whatnot?The problem was, the light show was infinitely
>more interesting than the music. Still, the audience seemed elated by the
>experience."   
>
>And this, I believe is the point -- not a predetermined composition
>perfectly played for a listening audience, but an experience for those
>participating, which in this case, as the reviewer acknowledged, delighted
>the participants.
>
>-- Helen
>
>   
>
>
>on 7/3/05 1:48 AM, Komninos Zervos at k.zervos@griffith.edu.au wrote:
>
>> 
>> what about audience?
>> is the auditor(audient) now more of a participant in the performance than
>> before?
>> 
>> komninos
>> 
>> komninos zervos
>> 
>> http://www.gu.edu.au/ppages/k_zervos
>> http://users.bigpond.net.au/mangolegs
>> http://spokenword.blog-city.com
>> "Our Workplace Rights are NOT for sale."
>> 

..........................
michelle riel, mfa
asst. prof. new media & dept. chair
teledramatic arts & technology, bldg. 27
california state university monterey bay
100 campus center
seaside, ca 93955, usa
v: 831.582.4665