J
a n e z S t r
e h o v e c
Today we are witnessing a great transformation in the contemporary arts, perhaps as significant and profound as the transformation from the pre-modern art to the modern art. The diversification and plurality of art forms at the end of the millennium has undoubtedly presented a problem for philosophies of art, cultural studies, and aesthetics. When most of the recent works of art are placed in a social context we find that the vast majority are no longer works in the mode of stable (material) artifacts; they come to us in the form of concepts, web projects, computer-mediated situations, and virtual articulations. The works of art coming into the foreground today are often cyberworks of art which appear at the intersection of art-as-we-know-it, techno-science, state-of-the-art technology, new media, computer mediated communications, design, new politics, cyberpop and techno-religions.
How can we come to a better understanding of these works of art and the radical turns (shifts of paradigms) which brought them into being, and still come to an understanding of the individual and the trend-setting linking, "clickual" sensitivity at the end of the millennium? How can we come closer to these projects, whose extreme forms and articulations profound impact our understanding of traditional works of art and more poignantly, the institution of art today? It seems that these art projects could be best understood as a kind of dry run for new ways of sensation, perception, and sensitivity. Above all, these projects should be seen as a new means of communication in the world. A communication guided by techno sensitivity.
It is becoming increasingly difficult to find a common denominator for works of art that are set beyond the art-as-we-know-it (viz. beyond the book, beyond the flat paintings, beyond the stage...), as projects turn toward extended concepts of creativity within artistic institutions that take into account such issues as politics, lifestyles, net activism, alternative modes of communication, new media, techno-religions, techno-sciences, and even alternative forms of sociability. We can approach the particularities of these projects only by recognizing the main features of the world that they thrive in, and by analyzing the crucial shifts which have dictated their aesthetics.
The would-be-works of art discussed in this essay are primarily works of cyberart for which placement in the paradigm of technoculture is distinctive. The field of cyberarts, which emerged from the fields of Computer Graphics, Animation and Music, Interactive Installations, Holography, Virtual Reality Environments, Techno Performance and Theatre of Machines, Web Art and Digital Literatures, owes its very existence to the recent advances of technical and media features; they are a part of a broader complex of technoculture which rely on the "techno" as a key principle. What is the meaning of this unusual denotation? "Techno" is not only a form of trendy music, which developed from Acid House and Detroit Techno at the end of the 80s. Instead, it is a term used in this essay to indicate a new paradigm in the world under the sign of the artificial. Specifically, the techno describes a massive shift from the natural to the artificial which is gaining advantage over what we have, up until now, accepted as our natural, given reality. The techno principle involves the following fundamental concepts: augmented reality, in the sense of a given, "real" reality, and artificial realities coexisting in an interdependent complex relationship, the world as a "pluriversum" of the given world and artificial worlds, an interaction between Apollonian and Dionysian, the coexistence of the principles of order and ecstasy, mix as an ontological principle in the forming of synth realities (DJ as protoartist and protodesigner), second-order artificial (an artificial state between living and non-living), life-as-it-could-be on non-organic hardware, technology as culture, technology as politics, technology as religion, augmented concepts of the person (multiple-egos, avatars), a transition from mechanic to bio, techno-science as a creative, artistic science, scientists as the creators, the techno-artist, his/her work a totally scientific work of art and a total work of science, augmented and accelerated, techno-formed sensitivity (enabled with the synth-senses formed by means of smart technologies), cybernetics, namely second-order cybernetics, establishing founding principles for the world of the artificial..
What are some of the main features of works of art created within the "techno" paradigm that, when comparing them to traditional works of art, allow them to be categorized as would-be-works of art which capture our attention and cause us to make a number of changes concerning perception and sensitivity. First of all, let us state some of the key concepts that have been introduced to us- concepts which determine the aesthetics of cyberarts: interactivity, tactility, immersion, total-data-work of art (Ger. Gesamtdatenwerk), participatory nature of digital media, non-trivial reception, "ludic" (i.e.game-like) nature of interactive environments, and time-based nature of digital works of art. We should emphasize that cyberarts are, by their nature, time-based and the time mentioned here is real time in a technical sense. Because within the paradigm of techno, time also has a distinctive spatial nature, such time is actually time-space, which leads us to the question of whether space, correlative with real time, can also be in some sense real, and therefore technical space. We answer in the affirmative to this question, namely in the context within which we shall add to the already mentioned main concepts of cyberarts- those concepts which actually provoked this paper:
non-trivial and risky reception
advantage of communication value over cult and exhibition value of cyberworks of art
temporal perspective: real time as a technical time-space
spatial perspective: real closeness
The reception of traditional works of art has become one of the most common activities in the Euro-American world. It reminds us of crowds hurrying toward attractive historical venues in big cities, toward theme parks and sports events- there are people crowding together in museums, galleries, theaters, and concert halls. The book also serves as a constant companion of the innumerable passengers we meet on city buses, trains, or planes. The common feature of such encounters of the mass public with traditional works of art is that these consumers of art and literature (viewers, audiences, readers) have no major difficulties in "consuming" that which is familiar to them. It could be said that they got used to traditional art and literature. They "bring home" what is expected from the museums, theaters, and concert halls, where the attitude toward these works of art carries on, more or less, without conflict. The public has learned to parry even the most shocking excesses- they are used to it after constant assaults by avant-garde or neoavant-garde. Readers we meet on a train or on a plane would soon give up reading a more pretentious article in a newspaper or magazine, but they would stick to reading a short novel until their drive or flight is over. The public often has trouble understanding a more sophisticated article of non-fiction. They have difficulties in getting through a challenging article, but they get along great with fiction.
We shall use this example to point out a very different approach taken in the reception of works of cyberarts. These works of art usually demand a more sophisticated or even risky reception. A successful reader of a classic novel or a visitor of a traditional exhibition of visual arts might be disappointed or possibly even drawn back from an interactive VR installation or web literary environment. A traditional art audience often finds surfing through a more demanding project of web art to be an exhausting affair. In contrast to most traditional works of art, works of cyberarts contain a certain amount of risk, sophistication and pretentiousness. It is essential to know that to receive/approach a work of cyberarts efforts must be made on the part of the audience. Specifically, on must be up to date with certain advances in technosciences and have a certain knowledge of art theory- getting through the instructions for the use of new media technologies applied in an art project can often be an exhausting affair. One must be ready for an intellectual engagement, which demands excellent motor-nervous skills, speed, and mental agility. Concerning computer games and cybertext, Espen J. Aarseth claims that: "The cybertext reader, on the other hand, is not safe, and therefore, it can be argued, she is not a reader. The cybertext puts its would-be-reader at risk: the risk of rejection."(1) The emphasis here is on rejection, which may even cause the user to feel frustrated or embarrassed. We could say that a traditional work of art tends to be much more user-friendly than the cyberarts. In general, cyberarts do not appeal to trivial users, but instead, to those who are prepared for the risky reception and are able to overcome the insecurity of choosing between diverse possibilities without a simple "easy way" through a project. The risky reception is stimulated with the very non-trivial nature of cyber work of art, i.e. with its design in the mode of the complex, non-trivial machine, that means that the output is not a simple consequence of the input but depends on its social interactions and contingent behavior.
An important aspect of the cyberarts, which today by all means fall under the computer mediated communications paradigm, are their communication functions. In the essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin compares two fundamentally different kinds of art: traditional art, based on ritual, and modern art, based on politics. He argues that each have a corresponding type of value: cult value is fundamental for traditional art as exhibition value is for modern art. The very existence of a piece of art was most significant factor for the works of art in the traditional art paradigm (although they were hidden, placed behind an altar, serving as agents between the profane and the sacred). In contrast, exhibition value is most important for the modern works of art- to be put under the lights, to be shown. Today, it is evident that this comparison must be corrected by adding a third category and a corresponding artistic practice.
The value of a work of cyberarts is not derived from cult or the exhibition, but communication. Cyberarts are becoming the carriers of more and more dialogic, two-way, even multi-way cybernetic communication. Due to the cybernetic nature of these works of art, the circulation of information in the form of links and feedback loops, is essential. The communication processes generated, for instance, from rudimentary e-mail communications form the essence of interactive web art installations, based on telepresence and of MUDs (when characters activate artistic scripts). The orientation toward the communication aspect of cyberarts brings up the issue of communication in an artistic sense. To what extent is this art form liberated from traditional communication designs which are developed within the context of media and (trans)political communication? Can works of cyberart be, as one of the results of intimate technology, the basis for an alternative form of communication- an interaction between machine and human? Are there any modes of experiences developing within these arts which are more user-friendly to the general public - our "neighbors" in the on-line communication? Are we capable of assisting the novice, also in the form of a virtual agent, bot or clon, in this form of communication, or do we enforce only the laws of the most experienced and the fittest? When mentioning the communication value of cyberarts, we should stress that its importance is growing through the increasing quality of message exchange. Online communications are becoming more and more individualized, to ensure that interactivity is not only a device of technical fascination but a device which contributes to richer perception, skills on the basis of game and knowledge.
The next problem of cyberworks of art is time. What is the nature of time in cyberspace? Is it the time defined as Aion or Chronos, discussed in the context of Deleuze's work Logic of Sense; is it the technical time introduced by Vilem Flusser's theory; is it apocalyptic time like an uncertain dormer, supported with expectations, through which a messiah can enter at anytime; or is it the real time characteristic of decision-making and function procedures which occur during the on-line processes?
Illustrative examples for understanding time in works of cyberart, which are distinctly time-based, are the projects of digital literatures which demand an active reader, directed toward reading as a supplement to the original "textscapes" and the creative voids within. Navigation through words-images and words-bodies in "textscapes" takes place in a complex time. It seems that at the moment of linking (or turning the screens) "nows" start to load. These "nows" are torn out of temporal continuum and form a certain between, which is suspended for reading within a "textscape". This is the between, which is characteristic of the apocalyptic moment. One waits for the arrival of the unknown, the other wants it. It seems that we are dealing with uncertain time following something no longer and preceding something not yet. This is a time of expectation, a time for nourishing the deepest dreams and mythic visions. Everything is left open The link simulates a narrow door through which the messianic "word" may enter. . The situation of "nows" loaded vertically, and therefore spatially, from a point in linear time could be viewed in this scheme:
With "nows", loaded vertically, time is stopped, causing words and images to be suspended, and vie for space with a competitive distribution of different times. Cyberarts are essentially connected to and dependent on machines, which were invented as "dams" to keep time from flowing away. State-of-the-art machines could actually be seen as ingenious devices for saving time. Video-recorders, samplers, and PCs are all memory machines that enable us capture visual, audio, and textual recordings from different periods of time. All of these recordings are at our disposal (like Heidegger's "standing reserve"). In real time, these periods of time can be recalled and used in a technical sense. In other words, real time does not flow away from us of its own will like time in the natural world. Time, within a machine, is made possible by its own technical manipulation (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, intensification) of times, and their various contents, centered around a vertical axis. Real time is artificial and in many ways anti-natural. It owes its very existence to technical memories. Jean-Franois Lyotard claimes: "The importance of the technologies constructed around electronics and data processing resides in the fact that they make the programming and control of memorizing, i.e. the synthesis of different times in one time, less dependent on the conditions of life on earth." (2) The stress is laid on technical times independence of the conditions on earth- which points to an area of artificial which is also possible outside our planet.
Real time as technical time is not an exclusive short time, like a fleeting moment, perceivable only by machines. It is expansive and complex. It is the time of all times (Lyotards concept of "the synthesis of different times within one time", and it can be broken up into pieces to serve as an excellent material for the arts, which have been exploring the complexities of time for ages. The real time creative process allows the artist to employ different times or some sort of saturation of times as a painter might choose from colors on his palette. Therefore, we are never find ourselves without enough time to choose from as some might expect. It is also true that times within the physical processes of a machine are not necessarily bound to existence; they can act as "times liberated from the day's leaden weight", defined only by their own intrinsic qualities.
Can we draw a similar parallel to the issue of space? Specifically, can we speak of a saturation of technical space within a technical-based complexity of cyberworks of art? Can we imagine a space of all spaces; the synthesis of various spaces within one space- implying a radical saturation and, similar to technical time, an unnaturalness. What would be the impact of this level of saturation on a viewer-user? What are the units of saturation causing the effect of complete immersion into the medium? What are the main features of the space between the user and the cyberwork of arts?
A traditional work of art can be best understood as a window, or as a departure point for the observer to step into the complex background of a work of art. To understand this constellation we must consider the work of art, as discussed in Nicolai Hartmann's Aesthetics (1953) which is inspired by phenomenological aesthetics (3). The founder of this orientation, which got its stimulations from Husserl's concepts of phenomenology and Kant's and Neokantian aesthetics alike, is Moritz Geiger with his essays Beitrge zur Phnomenologie des sthetischen Genusses (1913) and Zugnge zur sthetik (1928) although we shouldn't forget the name of Waldemar Conrad who published his article The aesthetic object already in 1908. Among the more important followers of this tradition one should mention, besides Hartmann, Roman Ingarden and Merleau-Ponty, while close to this direction are also Martin Heidegger, Eugen Fink and Jean Paul Sartre.
What do we talk about when we talk about phenomenological aesthetics? According to Moritz Geiger's claims from his book The Significance of the Art is a main task of (phenomenological) aesthetics devoted to exploring aesthetic objects from their phenomenal aspect; they should be analyzed as phenomena by bracketing the issues of real existence (both, of the object and of the empirical ego). Geiger wrote even on "the purification of reality into a sphere of unreality" (4) and suggested that the common structures (for instance the essence of the sonnet as such or of the symphony as such) and not particular objects are the main concerns of aesthetic approach to the arts. Talking today about the web (with regard to the web art) the main scope of phenomenological approach could be devoted to exploring a very nature of web media - the webness.
Among key achievements of phenomenological aesthetics we should call to one's attention its criticism of naive empiricism, psychologism and naturalism (for example as exclusion of interests of empirical self in aesthetic standpoint), discerning between (literary) work of art as a schematic artefact and its concretisations (this Ingarden's standpoint in fact became actual with hyperfiction that gave the reader a much greater competence as when encountering traditional texts in a printed, codex book), and the shaping of the original theory of ontological status of a work of art as a heteronomous formation, divided into layers, which participates in two areas of being, namely real and unreal.
Phenomenological aesthetics has namely destabilized the traditional concepts of reality: given, natural, material reality is not everything, but along with it co-exist also would-be-realities, unreal actualities and unrealities, that also what Giles Deleuse in the Logic of the sense and by referring to the Alexius Meinong, who was also close to the phenomenology, named as impossible objects, that have a particular nature of existence, "they are of extra being"(5). And when we nowadays encounter net.artworks we can find out an augmented concept of reality which encompasses even e-reality and @-reality.
Typical example of phenomenological approach to the main features of a work of art is the aesthetics of afore-mentioned German philosopher Nicolai Hartmann. He introduced a radical distinction between the everyday activities in the sense of realisation (stirring the lead weight of the real) and between the artistic approach, of which derealisation is typical. Especially important is Hartmann's theory of many-layered structure of the work of art, having real foreground and unreal background with a number of layers which go from more concrete towards to most abstract layers, towards the idea of the work. He found out six layers of background (in Rembrandt's self-portraits to be exact). The number of layers contributes to richness and endurance of a work of art, while the beauty of the work lies in their relations.
Can we come closer to the particularities of new media cyberworks of art on the basis of Hartmann's approach, for instance cybernetic installations of Jeffrey Shaw and Monika Fleishmann or web based digital literary objects like Mark Amerikas Grammatron? Yes we can, yet a closer look reveals a number of fundamental changes. The complex unreal background has now narrowed solely to the abstract layer of the idea of artwork (cyberarts works are now a part of concept art), real foreground has also narrowed (containing only hardware components), while the area of extensive intermediate area is new, namely a sphere of intermediate layers, mediating between real and unreal and which is not only accessible by imagination, but is also influencing the user physically with special effects. Hartmann's layers have now moved closer to the observer and are no longer as abstract as traditional arts, on the contrary, they include the stimuli of tactile, visual and kinetic origin.
The model for this new constellation is a hologram as an optical memory unit, that - metaphorically speaking grows towards the observer, filling the space between the wall and the eye. We witness here an impression of closeness that ''grows towards the user'', intensively filing the space between the installation (or the PC screen) and the eye. Similarly as we can talk about the real time as an action time in on-line communications, we can for understanding of cybernetic works of art introduce the term real space as a technical space, moulded with special effects as hologram closeness. Such space is shaped according to various geometries (Euclidian and Posteuclidian), that enable the occurrence of objects with more than three dimensions. Typical is the shaping of a ''technical view'' aside of them, which demands eye's deterritorialized view, which now takes the position on the mobile axis between the nondiscerned front and back, up and down, left and right and tries to see also the ''dark side'' of that object. The thing Giles Deleuze established alongside Bacon's painting, deterritorialization of the eye namely, which accompanies the liberation from the representational function of (post)modern art, comes to full value with the perception of web literary objects, that can even function as unreadable objects. Fredric Jameson also in his Postmodernism essay pointed to the effects of new depthlessness, that destabilizes viewers' optics, jerk the rug out from under their feet along the next example dealing with the L:A: architecture special effects: "...a surface which seems to be unsupported by any volume, or whose putative volume (rectangular, trapezoidal?) is ocularly quite undecidable. This great sheet of windows, with its gravity-defying two-dimensionality, momentarily transfers the solid ground on which we climb into the contents of stereopticon..."(6) New media are therefore productively stimulating perception, they invest a technical view that enters everyday life more and more; for example looking through the eye of a smart bomb and weather satellite (cam) eye. Especially the kinetic web literary objects demand viewer/reader taking virtually impossible position; his view must fall in the depth of the screen and approach from the back side of the screen (dark side of the moon position) to the fleeing words.
One of the fundamental cyberarts aestetic concepts, namely total immersion, can be explained on the following schematic structure of a multi layered work designed according to Hartmann's theory of a multi layered work of art:
Arrow's direction illustrates the direction of the perception. Viewer/user penetrates from the concrete layer of the work's idea over intermediate layers of special effects towards the abstract layer of the idea of work, which means digital layers must be transparent; they are carried over hardware components and must enable the path to the idea the concept of the work. Unlike the traditional work of art, with cyberwork of art we are witnesses to a greater influence of direct sensory stimuli (transition from simulation to stimulation), because digital layers involve visual, audio and tactile effects, typical of digital total-data-work of art. The more complexly formed and densely spread these layers which contribute to the saturation of real space are, the more convincing are viewer's/ user's sensations of immersion into the cyberwork of art.
The saturation, created by the so-called real closeness of the holographic simulated field in front of our eyes, causes the user to experience total immersion. Due to the nonexistence of the distance between the organs of sight and the objects seen, we witness an immersion into the layers of special effects, which are no longer objects in the traditional sense of the word. The object or objects are no longer placed in front of our line of sight but, instead, intermediate digital layers (designed by hi-tech effects) "stick" themselves to the sight itself. These virtual "would-be-objects" being generated by the new media technologies, stick to the viewer-user of a "visual system". Therefore, the very active sense in this situation is touch, too. This leads to a number of consequences in defining the nature of a cyberwork of arts: its units are touchable (this holds true for both images and words - words of immersive digital literary objects, i.e. touchable words, designed with different velocities).
The velocity of the cyberart image which assault the view is an essential quality of immersion as a temporal activity. Immersion is fundamentally different from contemplation which functions under the timelessness of static seeing. Entering the process of immersion, the user moves slowly or quickly, setting changeable goals on a journey through a 3-d landscape. Cyberworks of art have a complexly structured, multi-layered foreground, which allows immersion into various layers (and back). However, herein lies the risky nature of such works of art. It is not a given that the user will find all of the layers of the foreground or that the journey through the holographic closeness will be successful. As often happens, the viewer-user is about to arrive at some sort of "vanishing point" causing a state of vertigo.
There is one more effect of the saturation of technical space and the aesthetics of closeness to be discussed - the loss of illusion, discussed in Jean Baudrillard's essay, Objects, Images and the Possibilities of Aesthetic Illusion (7). Baudrillard argues that the effects of the issue which we called real closeness generates an "obscene rapprochement" of the artistic object and the user. A hi-tech and hi-fi art object often leaves little to the imagination. It has a perfect saturation, a surplus of elements, and special effects which crowd the space between the object and the user. We are witnessing works of art which allow the image and the image-word (in digital literary objects put on the web), to close in on the user and say "more than should be said".
The cyberarts discussed in this essay are defined as would-be-works of art due to their intrinsic nature, which is defined by such technical features as real time existence and real closeness, non-representation (a break with the tradition of mimezis), interactivity, total immersion, communication value, risky reception and ludic nature (closeness to the features of games). This expression (would-be-works of art) was coined to point out the specificity of this new creative movement as an art praxis which abandons the codes of traditional arts (the arts-as-we-know-them based on the tradition of stable artifacts and approached by reception in the mode of remote contemplation) and directs us toward a new paradigm of communication and sensitivity (techno formed aisthesis). The essential prerequisites for this new paradigm are knowledge (particularly of the technosciences and of intimate technologies), technical skills in computer mediated communications, a sense of game, a readiness for risky reception, an awareness of global interconnectedness (abandoning hierarchical ways of thinking), and a strong sense of cyberethics based on a respect and responsibility for the person approached by on-line communications, and protecting the novice participants in on-line communication.
References
1) E.J.Aarseth, Cybertext, Perspectives on Ergodic Literature, (Baltimore: The John Hopkins Univ. Press, 1997), p.4
2) J.-F. Lyotard, The Inhumain, Reflections on Time, (Stanfort, Ca.: Stanfort University Press, 1991), p.62
3) N. Hartmann, sthetik, (Walter de Gruyter & Co: Berlin, 1953)
4) M. Geiger, The Significance of Art, A Phenomenological Approach to Aesthetics, Ed. and Translated by Klaus Berger (Washington D.C.: CARP and University Press of America, 1986), p.205
5). G. Deleuze, The Logic of Sense, Ed. by C.V. Boundas (N.Y.: Columbia University Press, 1990), p.35
6) F. Jameson, Postmodernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, in: T. Docherty, Postmodernism, A Reader (N.Y.: Columbia University Press, 1993), p.70/71
7) J. Baudrillard, Art and Artefact, edited by N. Zurbrigg (London: SAGE Publications, 1997)
(This essay is based on authors paper presented at Phenomenology and the Web conference that took place at San Diego National University on February 25 and 26, 2000.)
