Re: [-empyre-] revisiting "cycling cathexis"

["luke" <lduncalfe@eml.cc>]

| 3.  A clear structure allows other things to come into play such as, for
| example, putting the interactor or the audience into a double-bind, i.e.,
| the choices are not neutral, but serve to implicate the audience/interactor
| in a situation. (e.g., I am compelled to do something but the choices are
| all problematic.)
|
| That 3rd point is not "UNinteractive" as you call it.
|
| I would argue that my 3rd point defines interactivity itself,  a power
| relation.... where cathexis is disrupted and unsettled.

it depends on where one positions their point of definition for the term. for
me, interactivity is synonymous with the word 'dialogue' when describing art,
which encompasses vertices of conflict but leaves room for more. i choose the
term 'clickable' over 'interactive' for art dependent on the button metaphor.

breathing wall is an interesting case in point, because it uses clickable
interfaces as well as the de-visual interfaced mechanism of audio feedback, in
this work being breath. one can control breathing, but ultimately also one
needs to breath and the slippage between this element of control is what to me
brings the interactivity its meaning.

luke



http://www.pipedreams.net.nz/
http://www.window.auckland.ac.nz/