Research Critique: Interview with Second Front

11pm, 28th October. I was deciding if I should take a really quick shower before the interview starts or not. 11:01pm, with much itch to shower, I decided not to. And, I am so glad I did not. The interview with Second Front was so rich with passion and energy and just having that spirit to share, the members were unique in their own ways. It ended up with me wanting to hear more from them but the interview had to end and that was that.

The members started off sharing about their avatars and immediately, it amazed me. I mean, it wasn’t anything spectacular. The avatars were essentially alter egos of themselves, what they were free to identify themselves in Second Life. But, it was how they chose to represent themselves that intrigued me. Almost everyone introduced their avatars as something better and more positive rather than something unflattering. Liz was an agent, jeremy was a blue skinned alien Patrick was a cross between Steven Tyler and Andy Warhol. It all seemed to suggest that this virtual “third space” was like a safe haven for many and was offered the most freedom which ultimately sort of bring about a euphoric mood to the members when they are on Second Life.

On what it was like to perform in Second Life

Bibbe mentioned that imagination was the only limiter and what you wanted to be and do, could be accomplished with very low costs as compared to a live performance in a theatre. And this is so true. I think that, as artists, one of the facts that we have to admit is that we are arguably constrained by the big word – FUNDS. of course many do pull through this ordeal and emerge very well established but having being able to do as many things as close to what you had intended to for your art piece, means a lot to the artists.

On “virtual leakage”

When you have unlimited access (to the third space), it will set me lose – Bibbe. She goes on to say that “there is a certain dynamism between emotion and thought wherever you are when you are embodied in pixels”. What Bibbe mentioned was so interesting. I felt that she managed to encapsulate my impression of the third space so well. It felt so relatable. (And by the way, I just wanna say, she’s so cool!) This takes me to my next point on being in the virtual world.

Why does the pieces end up in abomination?

Since the third space (or if you like, Second Life) was free for all to do anything. Naturally, many people would have multiple interpretations as to what this space could be use for. Already when I first logged into Second Life, I see things like Halloween place, Gory places, Sexually suggestive places and all kinds of things that somewhat are socially agreeable by society as something as undesirable if you were to partake in real life. And this leads me to think that Second Life is a space for people to seek a harem of their inner desires. Jeremy mentioned that initially, it wasn’t clear what Second Life was for. And many immediately took this for another regular shoot ’em up site, like an RPG game. And this was one of the reasons to why Second Front decided to perform Grand Theft Avatar as a shooting (robbery) heist.

In conclusion, there were many points mentioned and it would take forever to continue on about it. But my 2 biggest takeaway was –

It brings out the bad in people don’t believe in and if you are likely to be obsessed in the virtual world, you would be in the real world as well – Bibbe
We feel things when we are in this spaces and there are (certainly) stakes – Patrick

I guess what I am trying to say is that the existence of the third space may not see detrimental effects. In that, while there could be instances where one may lose consciousness of the real world, really, there is a world of possibilities where you could explore new ideas and break existing laws to create new ones. I mean why would there be the word “possible” if there isn’t any to begin with? I think that this, not only Second Life, allows for the creation of new begins in society and this will develop as cultural norms shift over time. Cheers!

Research Critique – Second Front

When I first saw Second Front‘s art pieces, I was immediately reminded of the similarities to two popular games, SIMS and Grand Theft Auto. They all had this openness and free world with physics that defy reality.

Second Front is a group of individual who made a series of art performances on an online platform called Second Life. (I know, it’s confusing right?) In any case, what made their works unique was the collaboration between different individuals from different places coming together in a Third Space – super participation.

How is this anything special?

Firstly, being able to venture the free and open “world” allows one to try out many things that cannot be done in real life, because of the law of gravity and laws that govern us as good citizens. In Second Life, one can fly or kill without and ethical attribute. This, can both be good and bad.

You will then come to realised that this could be more good than bad. Good because you could satisfy a curiosity on what would happen is you did what could not be done in the real world, suffice to say, this satisfaction would lower the chances of someone committing offences.

However, at the extremes, this would mean the over-indulgence of the third space and marrying of the virtual world with reality. It could go both ways. One may so live in the online space so much so it feels so real or you could exercise the possibilities from the online space in the real world.

How does this apply to what we are doing in Internet Art and Culture?

I think this has everything to do with what are learning. We are in living in a society where everything is advancing so rapidly and see online platforms being a part of one’s life. Second Front confronts the nature of the open real world in Second Life. Of course their performances such as robbing a bank wasn’t just a random recording but somewhat pre-planned. From the artistic presentation to the events that occur throughout the heist definitely had to be planned out. This allows for viewers to be presented a real-world-fantasy.

If it is better improvised we will
probably do that. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. With
prerecorded performances, we can fine tune and edit out things we don’t
want the audience to see. But with improvised performances, the work
takes on a life of its own fueled by the creative energy of our players
which really shows through. Also, many times, it’s the surprises and
unintended actions that make the work really come alive!

-ALISE IBORG, A LEAP INTO THE VOID: INTERVIEW WITH SECOND FRONT, by Domenico Quaranta

In all, I think that more of such platform should be implemented to allow for more understanding of the values and occurrences in the real-world.

P.S. No matter how many times i read or look at their works, I still can’t get their names and the platform they are on right. Second Front, Second Life, so confusing haha!

“The World’s First Collaborative Sentence” – How long is it exactly?

How long is it exactly?

By now, it would have been done with several trips around the earth. The world’s longest collaborative sentence is a very intriguing internet artwork by Douglas Davis in 1994. A year after I entered this world.
What this artwork is, is probably the conceptualisation of Super Participation using a digital/online platform. In my opinion, the onset of exponential growth of the World Wide Web was portrayed through this art piece. And it defines it really really well.

It shows us a definitive way of how people will behave behind a screen It tells us how we as users, as humans, would adapt to this non-existent yet ever changing environment. It is a window to the 21st Century. Which, is pretty epic if you think about it.

I didn’t think of this when I first saw this piece initially. My initial impression was that this was gibberish, that this is just nonsensical. Like, there isn’t any meaning to the sentences. However, when I revisited the site a few more times, it dawned on me the underlying message of The World’s First Collaborative Sentence. It didn’t matter how long the sentence was. What mattered was what were the sentences.

Undoubtedly, Davis must have faced some difficulties along the way and here are some hints as to what they were.

“it was probably build in java or php and they need to update the server.”
– Francesco of New York

The next one is a long one so brace for it.

“Their work involved not only updating servers and running legacy browsers on vintage computer systems, but also considering theoretical and ethical aspects of the conservation, conducting interviews with the original programmer to document what the lost software did, writing the new code for the work, addressing a host of thorny technical issues and documenting the results.”
– Restoring ‘The World’s First Collaborative Sentence’, Michael Connor

From what we see, the issues faced, with modern technology involved, was already so complicated. One could only imagine how much was put into this work by Davis. I shall not delve into the whole technicalities of his work. Rather, I want to discuss about how this paved the way for future big-scaled collaborative works across the world, that would otherwise not be able to be in existence if not for the WWW. More importantly, it also tells us how distance didn’t matter. Communication and the urge or wanting/willingness to communicate does.

The fact that his work was being preserved and restored by Whitney Museum and people still being involved and how we cherish such things tells us something very interesting about human to human interaction and how the medium we use to communicate with one another, shapes or affects the final outcome or impression made upon the other individual. I use to not believe that the third space was something existential in this physical world but now. Now, I think it does. But mind me, it is but a subset of the conscientious personification of the alter ego that exists within us, very much like how our personalities exists but are not visible or something you can touch. It is just expressed.

Thoroughly enjoyed this piece.

Links and references:

http://rhizome.org/editorial/2013/jun/12/restoring-douglas-davis-collaborative-sentence/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304800460_Analysing_’Super-Participation’_in_Online_Third_Spaces

http://ifilnova.pt/file/uploads/3412f3599cf326087355d5c02149cfea.pdf

Bold3RRR – A time manipulator?

I’ve always had a negative interpretation of glitches. To me this indicated that something was faulty. It never occurred to me how glitches can be artistic or appreciated artistically until i came to ADM and got exposed to the different work of art by artists around the world. Bold3RRR presented an opportunity for me to appreciate glitches even more. This probably gave rise to what is known as dirty new media.

“…that embeddedness has the word bed in there, we are in bed w/ them also, so they’re embedded in ways that are complex. they are not sterile, they’re imperfect, they are not clean, b/c they exist in the world, which is also imperfect”

– Jon Cates, “Glitch Expectations: A Conversation with JonCates

This work explores the use of “multicam” experience where the viewer is treated to multiple windows of what goes on realtime. This provides us a unique experience as we are able to see more than one thing happening at a given time as compared to how we would with our own ears since we only have one set of eyes and ears and we definitely cannot teleport or be at two places at once. There was also a therapeutic beat/music when the different sounds were all playing at the same time as if it was a symphony.

This is very similar to the idea of mise-en-scene as Jon Cates presents this idea very well and as I would interpret from what I saw, was somewhat preplanned in the content that he intends to present but what actually happens during the course of the live feed, are some uncontrolled circumstances which made this a unique piece. He places the contents in areas where he probably think would work and all these contributed to what he intends to present, almost like a play.

Amongst the many differences with live art, one thing remains the same. This is, context. I realise that the live feeds all provide the viewer with some sort of context (whether literal or not) in order for them to make sense of what they see. And I think that this is extremely important to bear in mind when we create our own works. This then presents us with the idea of time manipulation.

What this is, is actually the concept of harnessing time but only that it is not happening in a physical state. It is what humans would perceive it to and thus I feel live feeds or dirty new media for what it is, is but a representation of how others view time.

What do you think?

~Adobe Connecting you always~

What I have experienced with Adobe Connect with the class was a first and the most fun class because firstly it is convenient and secondly, everyone was just so much more interactive and responsive.

I am intrigued by the fact that we were able to communicate real-time with my classmates very much like two person separated by a window; you could see the very immediate reply or feedback by the other person just like how they would do so too neither is able to physically get a hold of each other.

This, is virtual reality. And the fun of it is the constant and known fact that you are never ever gonna be able to be physically involved with a second person unless we make a breakthrough with time-space travel.

#chuwylives

Is there really a Hole in Space?

A Hole in Space. Is it really?

This work proved to be a major piece that will go down in history as what is now known as, Teleconferencing of the most layman word one can think of, Video Chat/Skype. For 3 days, in two different cities, Los Angeles and New York, two hours. It was not mediated, completely up to the users to interact with what they see and hear. Galloway and Rabinowitz, the artists behind A Hole in Space wanted to create an electronic, composite-image space in which… people could come together to collaborate. (Galloway, Rabinowitz)

This art piece was very intriguing because of the opportunities to brings about to so many people. Closer, convenience, creativity you name it. “The absence of the threat of physical harm makes people braver”. But yet, when virtually “touched”, we still have the same feeling of being harassed. As an art form, of such scale, I am impressed. Because it allows one to be fully immersive in a space that is otherwise non-existent but yet exists.

A Hole in Space paved the way for an unplanned and candid expression of collective narrative. This was what made it so unique and interesting. Because it is something that cannot be replicated in any way. It is what it is. The beauty of a third space; a deconstructed view of the perceivable world.

“We look not only at their qualities and aesthetics, but how people interact when they are disembodied and their image is their (ambassador).” – Welcome to ‘Electronic Cafe International’: A Nice Place for Hot Coffee, Iced Tea, & Virtual Space” (1992)

This quote especially reminds me an the artwork made by local photographer, John Clang. His series, Being Together, also utilised the same concept as how A Hole in Space was executed. This whole concept of virtual vs reality is always an awkward interaction between one or more users behind screens. Like what I mentioned in my previous post, nothing much has changed except for technology. We haven’t yet progressed as much compared to when A Hole in Space was seeded.

I must argue that, we haven’t fully harnessed and grasp this whole phenomenon of time-space interaction. I feel that humans have always tried to achieve realism in a third space but to no avail. To me, this constant battle to turn virtual reality into something physical, is but an understanding of the gateway to the time dimension. As much as I respect the values and merits that the third space brings to aid in day-to-day human interactions (work or personal related), we don’t know much about time. I’m not sure. Perhaps I have a greater expectation and dream about a third dimension. It was always about harvesting the tangible from the intangible. What it now still is, is a barrier and a gateway to what future interactive communication may bring.