The Intervention Point: John Cage, Variations V

John Cage, Variations V, http://nobleeducator.com/wp-content/uploads/Variations_V.jpg

“Variations V” was an audio-visual performance. Billy Klüver set up a sound system of photocells, reacting to the movements of the dancers. When the dancers cut the light beams with their movements, and the sounds were controlled. And on the background of the stage, film footage by Stan Vanderbeek and television images by Nam Jum Paik were projected.

John Cage created the system of interactivity that combined the movements with sounds, and visual images through movements(messages). In his essay “Cybernetics in History”, Norbert Wiener explained “entropy” . As communicating and interpreting information through messages, there would be “degrading of the organized” and “destroying the meaningful”. 

I think the entropy made a new interactive experience in this performance. The point where the information was destroyed was the gap where the audiences could intervene in the artworks and make their own experience. I think there were two ways of intervention in his performance; One was between the elements of the performance,  dance, sounds, and visual images. Another was between the whole performance and audiences.

“ In control and communication we are always fighting nature’s tendency to degrade the organized and to destroy the meaningful; the tendency, as Gibbs has shown us, for entropy to increase”

“Messages are themselves a form of pattern and organization. Indeed, it is possible to treat sets of messages as having an entropy like sets of states of the external world. ”

-“Cybernetics in History”, Norbert Wiener

John Cage, Variations V, 1965, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqXM-EU1ncw

John Cage’s performance created an interactive experience. The performance demanded audiences to organize their own experience with the elements of the performance. The meaning of the performance depended on audiences, as Roy Ascott mentioned in his essay “Behaviourist Art and the Cybernetics Vision”

“While the general context of the art-experience is set by the artist, its evolution in any specific sense is unpredictable and dependent on the total involvement of the spectator.”

“He will continue, instead, to provide a matrix for ideas and feelings from which the participants in his work may construct for themselves new experiences and unfamiliar patterns of behavior.”

-“Behaviourist Art and the Cybernetics Vision”, Roy Ascott

Imagine the art of the future, mutimedia

Even before analyzing the word or the history of “multimedia”, I have pre-conception. Whenever I saw the multimedia or interactive art exhibited in Seoul, there were always some problems. The works supposed to move were stopped because of the safety problem or sometimes even the artists just left them because they couldn’t fix it during the exhibition. And if the works were moving, the movements were too tough, simple and indelicate so it didn’t make any impression. In my experience, the words ‘interactive, technology, multimedia (art)” mean dull, broken down often, and stopped. So after reading this essay, I realized that I got totally different experience and approaches where the multimedia started.

In this essay, the author focused on Richard Wagner‘s  “Total Artwork”. He tried to make a comprehensive integration of the arts, totalizing effect of music drama. And John Cage was mentioned as the key performance artist to influence the next generation artists such as Allan Kaprow, Dick Higgins and Nam June Paik.

Richard Wagner, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Wagner

The most important scientist among the artists was Billy Klüver who “conceived the notion of equal collaboration between artist and engineer.” He made a lot of artworks with artists and founded E.A.T (Experiments in Art and Technology) to connect artists and engineers to create new works.

Billy Klüver, http://dada.compart-bremen.de/item/agent/369

I thought that the notion of “interactivity, integration, multimedia” could expand to the way more than two elements/media/people can connect and communicate with each other. It’s not only about the mechanical art using technology, but also about the relationships between artists and audiences, artists and scientists in a non-hierarchical structure. 

After reading the essay, I thought about “the Death of the Author” written by Roland Barthes. In his essay, he argues that writing and author are unrelated and the interpretation of the writing is only up to viewer.  After blurring the boundaries between artists and audiences, and artworks and viewers, what will remain? Maybe we don’t need the words “artist”, and “audience” because there’s no border anymore. We can call just “user” or “maker” of the system. Let’s imagine the future of the art, could it be “prosumer“?

The death of the author, https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-theory-barthes-4/