The Interactive Counter-Revolution: A User’s Guide
By
Robin McGinley
1. Introduction
"Infrastructure advances, coupled with growing
consumer demand, are fostering a revolution in the emerging interactive
television market, with more than 81 million Internet-capable TVs expected to
be installed worldwide by 2004, according to a new report from market
researcher International Data Corp." [1]
Type the word "interactive" into any reputable
search engine, and you’re likely to find information relating to either a
"revolution" in broadcast television, or entertainment and services
pertaining to either web-based or computer-driven protocols.
The
word "interactive" has been splattered everywhere by the world’s
media in recent years, to describe (almost exclusively) technological
experiences that involve the use of a narrow band of media whose two primary
user interfaces are the cathode-ray display, and the computer mouse or other
form of (remote) control unit
.
The
human hand is an artefact that represents millions of years worth of evolution
(as does the rest of the human organism); the computer mouse was first released
by Apple in 1972. This User’s Guide postulates that the user of the future will
be in possession of all the organic attributes currently afforded by the
evolutionary process, and will thus seek interactive technological experiences that
will involve the interface of the whole human system with a technologically
mediated environment.
The
user of the future will not be reduced to a pair of eyes and a right-hand index
finger, with or without the peripheral couch. The current hyper-specialisation
of the word "interactive" as the exclusive province of computer, web
or broadcast media is at the very least misleading.
It is
this kind of specialisation that is likely to impede any reasonable growth in
the development of interactive systems encompassing the holistic possibilities
available through the combination of our integrated five senses. Current
mainstream development seems to be content to let at least three of those
senses atrophy, through the use of the standardised PC interface.
Once
again, it is the task of the experimental arts to act as one of the global
research and development and test departments, to evolve and evaluate
possibilities in this area. However, it seems that several current attempts to
create interactive technological experiences, are interactive simply because
they assimilate the use of a range of mainstream tools and processes into
artistic practice. Beyond which there is very little in terms of actual
interface development, or advancement of a given audience’s experiential
perceptions.
It is
no longer cutting-edge to see a laptop or PC on a stage or in an art gallery.
Our all-pervasive and accelerating involvement with information technology, has
meant that these tools are as ubiquitous as many a post-industrial labour
saving device such as the motor car or the electric toaster.
This
User’s Guide will attempt to delineate a possible future for whatever the many
opposing factions of techno-prophets might mean by the phrase "interactive
revolution". It will also describe the development of an artistic practice
that seeks to integrate many of the underdeveloped possibilities for the human
organism to interact within technologically mediated situations and
environments. In the end, we will probably re-discover that the development of
exciting and involving interactive experiences resides within the human
imagination, rather than in the tools themselves.
2. Getting Started
"The
revolution will not be televised" [2]
"Every
society faces not merely a succession of probable
futures, but an array of possible
futures, and a conflict over preferable
futures. The management of change is the effort to convert certain possibles
into probables, in pursuit of agreed-on preferables. Determining the probable
calls for a science of futurism. Delineating the possible calls for an art of
futurism. Defining the preferable calls for a politics of futurism."[3]
In
this section we will examine a number of propositions and possible readings of
the historical archives, in an attempt to formulate a conceptual position from
which we may visualise (or indeed auralise) a workable model for what we may
see as a possible future for "interactive art"
Our
ideal model would be an art that while relying on technology for many of its
manifestations is in no way techno-fetishistic. That is, it does not seek to
idolise or in any way over-romanticise a small variety of high-end labour
saving devices or consumer products.
Our ideal model would involve the comprehensive pursuit of holistic interactivity between the sentient human system and its technological counterpart in exchange. It would not favour certain of the least interesting interfacial possibilities, simply because of the arbitrary bias of the current state of the personal computer.
It
would be presumptuous, and unrealistic to propose that a fully realised model
would be within the scope of a rather modest user’s guide such as this. The
best that can be hoped is that this document will delineate a number of
signposts in a landscape for future exploration. The discussions in this
section will simply offer a context for the description of the creative work in
progress that will follow it.
This
user’s guide may, however, be seen as a reaction against every blue screen of
death currently on display in art galleries across the world, where a piece of
interactive, or other form of computer-generated art was supposed to be. It is
a reaction against every concert of real-time or similarly interactive
experimental electronic music that is similarly at the mercy of unstable
operating systems, whatever their issue.
If the
mainstream "interactive revolution" is content to make do with such
conditions than let it; it does not necessarily have to include the rest of us.
As
experimental artists, it is incumbent upon us to create our own possible
visions of the future, not to be trapped inside somebody else’s.
2.1 The Revolution Will Not Be
Televised
81 Million homes worldwide will probably not have interactive TV installed by 2004, as CNN might once have had us believe. The "interactive revolution" so oft associated with rise of interactive TV is slightly misleading. This is because no matter how adept we get at interfacing the internet and the TV, thus offering advanced possibilities of navigating between possible content streams, broadcast television is still a one-to-many paradigm when it comes to information or experience exchange.
2.2 Experimental Art
History and its Place in the Interactive Future.
"Its
background in art consists of participational art forms from the late sixties
like for example Happenings and reactive kinetic environments. Theoretical
works like Umberto Eco’s Opera aperta
(1962) contributed to the interpretation of the part played by the spectator .
. . this view was developed further especially by Wolfgang Kemp in the middle
of the eighties. His book Der Betrachter
ist im Bild (The Viewer is Inside the Picture), in which he describes the
method of receptional aesthetics (Rezeption . . . esthetik), seems to
anticipate the perception principle we are experiencing today in virtual
reality. But this line of tradition is not unbroken." [4]
"Painting
To See The Skies: Drill two holes into a canvas. Hang it where you can see the
sky." [5]
The definitive
history of what we might term interactive art is probably yet to be written,
and will most likely be redundant the moment it comes off the printing press.
The same might also be said of the definitive future, if such a thing could be
said to exist.
A
possible history that draws a lineage from certain theoretical standpoints
explored by a number of species of the experimental arts throughout the final
quarter of the 20th century is useful, only inasmuch as it
highlights the participatory aspects that characterised several examples of
this kind of art.
Examples
drawn from the well-documented histories of Conceptual Art, Happenings,
post-Cagean experimental music or Kinetic Art, are characterised by the
different approaches to a situation where the art requires the intervention of
the audience or a performer, or some other kind of human agency to complete it,
to make the art experience manifest. Almost any example of work of this kind
would serve our purpose in this regard, and this user’s guide invites the
reader to find suitable examples that, like the Ono piece above, demonstrate
this aspect participatory art practice. There are literally hundreds to choose
from.
Work like the Ono example also challenges previously held traditions of where the art experience resides and is constituted. The art experience in this, and many of the other examples is manifested in the collaboration (or interaction), between the elements and situations that allow the art to take place. One of these constituent parts is, of course, the actions and resultant perceptual experiences and shifts within the audience, performer, executor, or whatever nomenclature we wish to use in relation to the participant.
None
of this, of course, needs to be news to us, and libraries of critical theory
have been written in the ensuing four decades analysing and contemplating this
and other artistic systems of expression. An early example of this is Eco’s The Open Work mentioned above in which
he states that:
"Seen
in these terms and against the background of historical influences and cultural
interplay that links art to widely diversified aspects of the contemporary
worldview, the situation of art has now becomes situation in the process of
development. Far from being fully accounted for and catalogued, it deploys and
poses problems in several dimensions. In short it is an "open"
situation, in movement. A work in
progress."[6]
Where all of these sentiments might once again be news is if they are seriously, and rigorously applied to the potential fully-integrated experiential situations we are able to create when we work with the possible interfaces of modern technology. It goes without saying that these interfaces are in no way limited to the mouse, joystick, touch-screen, control pad, or anything that can be experienced through the situation of an audience being visually stimulated by a screen (no matter how big.)
2.3 Artistic "Keep Off
The Grass"
The
gallery attendant probably has no place in the gallery of the future. That is,
probably in no future gallery this user’s guide would wish to encourage. If one
were to count up every instance of a "Please Don’t Touch" sign or
anything similar in galleries either now or at any other time in our so-called
enlightened post-war period, the figure would definitely run into several
hundred thousand, probably more.
Granted
that certain species of traditional or contemporary artistic practices require
the creation of distance between the artefact and the audience, any
multi-faceted attempt at interactivity must surely transgress this artistic
final frontier, and non-physical contact should not be taken as a necessary
overhang from earlier praxis of audience etiquette.
Physical
proximity of the audience to the artistic experience is a key factor in the creation
of fully sensual interactive artistic exchanges. It is "Please Don’t
Touch" or any related systemisation or control of audience behaviour
(either in gallery or performance space) that has affected the development of
full interaction.
Even
the "interactive revolution" in television mentioned earlier keeps us
at arms length from the action (or at least the distance between the sofa and
the TV). The situation is similar for any art form that involves the mediation
of the experience through a screen, wherever it is placed. The audience is
safely insulated from the artistic experience, which takes place in the virtual
space behind the screen, beyond the scope of multi-dimensional physical
experience. Once again, an audience member is reduced to a pair of eyes,
executing a limited number of simple control gestures (depending on interface),
with perhaps an auxiliary pair of ears on the side of the head.
For the full sensuality of interactive experience to be
achieved to maximum effect, as many barriers to the main event must be removed
as possible, leaving the audience or participant free to truly take part in the
creation and moment-to-moment evolution of their involvement.
If we
take on board from the previous section that the site of artistic manifestation
may have moved beyond the physical art object or temporal process. Perhaps even
beyond our traditional conception of such, than we no longer require a
policeman to tell us to stay away from it, thus protecting the artworks
integrity or perceived value. The true integrity and value such work is within
and around us on many different levels, and is subject to temporal changes and
fluctuations.
A
user’s guide is one point on an experiential curve that involves a user in intimate
proximity with a technical device. It is thus, an appropriate metaphor for the
incomplete nature of an interactive artefact. It is only a set of instructions
and possibilities; it is not the definitive experience.
The
only way to retrieve your bread from the toaster is to stick your hand in it.
2.4 Virtual Reality vs.
Real Reality
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in
it, doesn't go away." [7]
"Virtual reality is the use of technology to
generate the sensory experiences of people, under human control. Virtual
reality is the first thing since the physical world that fits into the same
niche, between people, of being what you might call an ‘objective’
reality" [8]
Many
mainstream and contemporary artistic interactive products seem to favour
virtual experience over actual physical experience, whether it be the latest
home entertainment computer game, or any ‘high-art’ installation that creates
surrogate worlds through which an audience may navigate. There is no doubting
the computer’s ability to assist, through recent accelerated development in
areas such as graphical interfaces, in the creation of visually- stimulating,
highly advanced ‘virtual’ environments.
We are
once again, confronted with questions related to the concept of physical
proximity, because as many virtual environments are currently experienced
through a screen, they throw up barriers to actual physical experiences. They
may also operate through audio-visual hand-eye co-ordination techniques, or
simplified gestural repertoires. On the other hand, however, most people’s
experience of consensual physical reality is characterised as a
multi-dimensional sensory experience, uninhibited by such considerations as
aspect ratios. Not only does this kind of reality not go away when you stop
believing in it, but it also rarely performs illegal operations and has to be
re-booted.
Our
society’s fascination with screen-based virtual environments probably says much
about state of contemporary thought, and these issues have been dealt with at
length elsewhere. A thorough discussion is definitely beyond the scope of this
user’s guide.
It
will suffice to say here that if we return to our ideal artistic model
mentioned previously, we can also add to it the concept that any possible
resultant artistic reality would be constituted as physically fully sensual in
nature. It would also manifested at as close to maximum experiential proximity
as possible.
Virtual
Reality is fine, and high-level VR research has much potential for the creation
of new multi-sensory experience, and it is an area in which we are likely to
see significant advances in our current century. Hopefully, when the time
comes, and we are able to fully replace objective reality as we know it,
through the application of technology, with it goes every last trace of beige
boxes on desktops.
3. Three-Point Plan of Operational Practice
So far
in this user’s guide we have considered a number of factors contingent on the
operation of an ideal artistic practice for the creation of an interactive art
form. The outline of this practice can be briefly stated thus:
1.
The artistic practice,
although reliant on technology, will not be characterised by the use of
technology as an end itself. Any technology used will be seen as tool to
facilitate concept. Furthermore, its physical presence will perceptually be
sublimated so as not to intrude upon the resultant objective ‘artistic
reality’.
2.
The artistic practice will
create processes and results characterised by fully integrated, multi-dimensional,
non-deterministic interactivity. This will include the creation of transparent
interfaces, and will not rely solely on interfacial norms.
3.
The artistic practice will
operate as close to maximum experiential proximity as physically possible. This
modus operandi will be unimpeded by unimaginative traditional interfaces, and
artistic "keep off the grass".
4.
Two
Examples of Practical Operation
It is
theoretical considerations such as these that are the inspirations and guiding
principles that drive the work of Interactive Agents, the independent
production company and R&D think tank. This final section will illustrate
these techniques in practice by briefly outlining two recent examples of
interactive sound installations by the company.
Sound
is an element of artistic installation practice that has enjoyed much interest
and development in recent years. The use of sound in these installations has a
double function, not only does it lead our perception away from more
consciously developed visual conditioning. Furthermore, the sound sources
themselves are taken from the geo-physical operations of out planet, thus
having a direct relationship, and connection to what we commonly refer to as
"reality".
4.1 The Earth’s Original 4.5 Billion Year Old Electronic Music Composition (2002)
At any
one moment there are several electrical storms in progress around the planet.
This installation takes, as it’s starting point, and explores, the interception
of impulsive electro-magnetic signals generated by lightning. A considerable
proportion of radio atmospherics is due to the direct and indirect effects of
electrical storms on the upper layers of the atmosphere.
Through
a network of inputs and outputs, utilising both antique valve-based short wave
radio equipment, and a multi-triggered gallery environment, the installation
allows us the opportunity to hear the Earth’s own natural electro-acoustic
composition, which is as old as the planet itself, and is continuously
unfolding around us.
The input channels of the system, which are derived from a combination of real-time reception of short-wave atmospheric emissions and digital recordings of various types of Sferics (short for VLF (Very Low Frequency) atmospherics), and natural thunder, are fed via a network of triggers into the audio system. Some of the digital recordings have been treated with DSP effects to further transform the natural material. The triggers, which are located within the steel space frame, operate each input channel, enabling the channel for set periods of time before fading out.
The installation thus creates a time-sampling matrix giving a large number of temporal variations, and like the natural composition itself, is unlikely ever to repeat itself. This work also allows the audience an unusual proxy control over the manifestation of an elemental force of nature.
4.2 The Bio-Kinetic Sonusphere Interrogator (2003)
The Sonusphere is defined as the region around the Earth that contains all sound whether man-made, natural or mediated by telecommunications. This theoretical construct offers a means of conceptualising sonic activity at a global level.
Acoustic sound is ultimately bounded by the upper layers
of the atmosphere where decreasing density presents an increasing impedance to
propagation. However, the reach of mediated sound is theoretically boundless,
with the Earth representing a beacon of electromagnetic activity (although
insignificant at a galactic level).
The installation takes the form of a human-powered low frequency signal generator that derives low frequency signals from human impact against a controlled mass of air. A pulse rate integrator processes the pseudo-random pulse stream from the generator and this creates a control signal whose amplitude is proportional to the activity occurring on the trigger device. The control signal is fed to a multiple threshold detector, which will progressively activate the output of a number of electromagnetic receivers that are set to a combination of different frequencies and atmospheric bands. The outputs of the receivers are mixed together and fed through a sound distribution rig, which disperses the sound around the installation toward the instigators of the activity.
5.
Conclusion
Reading the user’s guide is seldom a replacement for actual
physical operation. The user is therefore encouraged to seek out practical
manifestations, like those described above, as soon as possible. Theory must be
allowed to live a life of its own in practice.
This user’s guide was designed to offer the potential
user a short introduction to procedures of artistic practices currently in
development. With careful consideration, and a few well-advised precautions, it
should offer a lifetime of interactive artistic enjoyment.
References:
[1] T.
Uimonen, Study: Interactive revolution will be televised, CNN.com, 2000,
www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/10/06/web.tv.revolution.idg/
[2] G.
Scott-Heron, The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
[3] A.
Toffler quoted in J.Brockman and E. Rosenfield, Real Time, Picador, 1973, p.297
[4] S.
Dinkla, The History of the Interface in InteractiveArt,
2002,www.maryflanagan.com/courses/2002/web/HistoryofInterface.html
[5] Y.
Ono, Grapefruit, Bakhåll, 2001, p.46
[6] U.
Eco, The Open Work, Harvard University Press, 1989, p. 23
[7]
Philip .K. Dick, How to Build A Universe That Doesn’t Fall Apart Two Days
Later, 978,www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/3970/pkd/htbautdfatdl.html
[8] J. Lanier interviewed in D.J. Brown and R.M. Novick, Voices from the Edge, The Crossing Press, 1995, p.86