"Live simultaneous performance" as we all know has been the foil for each emerging technology since Marconi’s wireless in 1901. Marconi as well as Edison, the Lumieres et al, situated their technological advances/inventions/explorations with the over-arching context of "communication". A three way telephone conversation, or a so-called conference call enables individuals to communicate simultaneously from locations around the globe, (or for that matter from space). Precisely due to the lack of a visual component, the communication relies solely on language-based performance for the transmission of content. All of the nuance, emotional color etc. must be conveyed through the speakers performance of text, or we would all agree the "conversation" goes nowhere. In telematic or web based performance, the introduction of visual images, or the possibility of web-casting a sort of documented performance seems to negate the possibility of "meaningful" communication. It does, in a sense regress the performers ability to, using the body, articulate any issues that are able to rise to the level of the technology that enables the performance. The idea of the body displaced in time and space though "performing" in a present, virtual space is not enough (in my opinion) to support the rhetoric and hyperbole that drives much of the web-based activity we are speaking of. The experience that Johannes and Robert have described regarding the tracking of brain waves during performance etc. is most interesting as are the descriptions of most telematic performances, however, between the conceptual descriptions of such activities and their reification, a kind of assimilation occurs that renders the conceptual framework moot. Sita said, "It seems to me that digital artists have become caught up in the depersonalisation element that is the marketable side of digital culture." Yes and isn’t that a kind of resignation to the same dominant culture that brings us "Big Brother" and "Survivor", appropriating our own media experiments? The medium is no longer the message. If as Scott says, "I know that many of these groups are as tired as everyone else of having to use the same tiny lexicon over and over", I would urge our community to begin to invent a new lexicon or to begin to radically challenge the one that currently exists. Scott deLahunta wrote: > Hello -- > > Many thanks Johannes for filling us in on the interesting details about the > workshop at Hellerau and to Doug for opening up some critical questions > related to "live simultaneous/ telematic web-based and interactive > performance projects". I am here in Arizona working on the documentation of > the Cellbytes project. In addition to the general announcement site that > stimulated Doug's posting -- there are now a set of several linked pages > that provide SOME reflection and analysis and quite a bit of description > related to the process of the project. You can go either through the main > site http://isa.vprc.asu.edu/cellbytes/ or directly to the documentation > pages http://isa.vprc.asu.edu/cellbytes/scott/ -- > > Hopefully this site will provide some response to Doug's request to know > more about how this sort of work is being approached and a bit about why. I > find that in the context of such an intense two week project that is > largely a practical exploration (and most of that in problem solving form) > that critical positioning evolves slowly and may need the distance of some > time to find a coherent form. I have written a bit on the site about this, > but not much. Of course, I am avoiding one of his questions regarding why > do these sorts of projects continue to employ the techno-rhetoric, > especially in the press releases, that they do. I have different responses > to this -- one of them being that the art of rhetoric and of advertising > are the same -- to persuade someone to take a look, to pay attention. This > art is also context dependent -- so I don't have a problem with most > performance work using emerging technologies to advertise themselves as > 'future' or 'cyber' something. Some are just better poets with it than > others. I know that many of these groups are as tired as everyone else of > having to use the same tiny lexicon over and over. > > Something to add to this --- a quote from Johannes' posting [25 July Re: > HELLERAU WORKSHOP 2.0] captures a flavor of this sort of experimentation > and research that seems essential to me -- having his 'spectral analysis' > done (you might want to read the post) revealed an unusal pattern. Johannes > writes: > > "On the left side (serial processing: the logical,rational and speech > side), I sometimes show strange patterns, flatlands, so called > "Todstell-reflexe" (simulated dead reflex), you know, like when an animal > feels it is trapped and pretends to be dead. I don't know what it means." > > I feel the same way looking in on some of the work that has been done here > during CellBytes (and there has been a lot) -- I don't know what it means > yet. We will certainly see faster networks with the possibility of full > motion video streaming (such as what we are using here), but I don't know > if we will ever witness a critical mass of dance performers and > choreographers making multi-site simultaneous performance work in the > future -- maybe we will. Maybe we won't. > > Comments on the cellbytes documentation site are welcome. > > best, > > Scott > ---------------------------------------------------==| > ---------------------------------------------------==| > Scott deLahunta and Susan Rethorst > Writing Research Associates, NL > Sarphatipark 26-3, 1072 PB Amsterdam, NL > mobile: +44 (0)797 741 2060 > tel: +31 (0)20 662 1736 / fax: +31 (0)20 470 1558 > email: sdela@ahk.nl > > w1: Writing Research Associates > http://huizen.dds.nl/~sdela/wra > w2: Dance and Technology Zone > http://www.art.net/~dtz > > ---------------------------------------------------==| > ---------------------------------------------------==|
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/28/01 CST