[-empyre-] virtual embodiment - some thoughts on resonances of the virtual in 2014

[Susan Kozel]

Good to be reminded to slow down and perhaps breathe: I have a few responses queued up but will start with two.

When I read Sue's words around 'ersatz' movement and the price of movement freedom in virtual systems I felt that sort of lurch you get when someone seems to be circling a topic with a similar orientation. She wrote:

> -  I am wary that the 'freedom' to move and engage physically will undoubtably come at a price. Is it possible people could giving up more of their privacy as they put their 'movement signature' out there in the view of giants like Facebook etc.? I wonder if/how our distinctive movement patterns and rhythms might be collected, collated, forged and what might be done with them? its alarming to think of movement data being acquired, but almost worse to think of being rendered into some ersatz version, bad copies of ourselves.

For 2-3 years I have been exploring affect using Augmented Reality browsers. The project (called AffeXity) began as a collaboration with screen dance artist Jeannette Ginslov where we explored improvising from a place of affect, video capture, editing and use of AR in a way that would reveal affective ebbs and flows in city spaces.  My approach to embodiment has shifted over the years from a preoccupation with the sense and kinaesthesia to a focus on affect and the somatic. 

For some time I have had the warning expressed by urban geographers Nigel Thrift and Ash Amin "We ignore the manipulation of affect in our cities at our peril." This week's revelation that researchers used FaceBook to manipulate the emotions of 689,000 users is a shockingly literal example of this, opening the question of whether ersatz or not. I have now become a little obsessed by encryption and what this might mean on an affective and bodily level as we continue to expand and transform our movement by networked, sensed and virtual technologies. Affect, I believe, is already encrypted. 

And responding to Johannes question about Telematic Dreaming in 1993 (21 years ago, I can hardly believe it). Paul originally  created this piece in 1991 (I think that is right) but in 1993 the curator of the exhibition (Dutch artist Jeanne van Heeswijk) wanted to have a performer in the installation on a daily basis rather than simply leaving the link open for people to hop on the bed and wave to each other. She had an inkling that sustained presence would produce deeper interation. She was right, but we never even used the word interaction in those days. I had just met Paul and written an early article for DTJ discussing his work, he thought I understood the piece and offered me a paid gig for the summer. I had movement freedom but had to work within the constraints of the visuals, costume and sound. It was like a studio for me, over 6 weeks. 

Johannes asks "Are choreographer/dancers better dreamers?". At first this made me laugh but it is actually true in a way. Thinking about it now I had to identify the seed of a movement improvisation with each person or people on the other bed (these were not dancers, they were visitors to the gallery exhibition) and I had to draw it out. This almost always involved slowing the movement down and producing a degree of trust so the person would feel comfortable to explore. It was a highly gendered space. I did feel a little trapped in the girly softness of it, but I knew this made it feel unthreatening and sexual in a simplistic cybersex way. The performer who replaced me once I left after 6 weeks was a gay hispanic man. I still regret not experiencing the installation while he inhabited it. I have heard it felt completely different.