In my dissertation I have focused on the notion that the
techno-poetic mechanism (my virtual reality work with Gideon May -
The World Generator / the Engine of Desire) enables the poetic
construction of spatial configurations of differing signs. Morris
states: "Something is a sign only because it is interpreted as a sign
of something by some interpreter... Semiotics, then, is not concerned
with the study of a particular kind of objects, but with ordinary
object insofar (and only insofar) as they partake in Semiosis."
(Morris, 1938) Peirce defines Semiosis:
By Semiosis I mean an action, an influence, which is, or involves, a
co-operation of three subjects, such as a sign, its object and its
interpretant, this tri-relative influence not being in anyway
resolvable into actions between pairs. (Peirce, 1931, p.484)
I will often return to Peirce's definition of the sign, because it is
sufficiently open and all of the media-elements in the system can be
considered as signs in terms of this definition:
A sign [or representation] stands for something to the idea which it
produces, or modifies. Or, it is a vehicle conveying into the mind
something from without. That for which it stands is called its
object; that which it conveys, its meaning; and the idea to which it
gives rise, its interpretant. (Peirce, 1931, p.171)
The techno-poetic mechanism that I have authored for my dissertation
is a conveyor mechanism that enables the spatial configuration and
reconfiguration of signs, as well as the interpenetration of signs.
These signs can potentially function by "conveying into the mind
something from without." Each individual media-element "stands for
something to the idea which it produces, or modifies." I use the term
recombinant sign to refer to the operative nature of signs within the
techno-poetic mechanism. The mechanism enables one to explore
Semiosis both interactively and experientially. In particular, signs
function to qualify or "modify" other signs in differing generated
media-contexts that arise through use of the device.
PEIRCE, C. 1931. Collected Papers, Volume I-VIII. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
> >Re: George's comments on the way Bill Seaman writes about his work
>....
>
> >I understand George's point, and it's true Bill's writing style at
>times
>> makes, shall we say, only brief forays to the shores of clarity.
>>
> >But personally, I think Bill is working on stuff that is so far out
>in front
>> of most digital/computer/VR work that it is difficult to find any language
>> that adequately characterizes it. He is attempting to use computers and
>> other technology as a vehicle of research to -- as he says elsewhere --
>> "define an art practice where the subject of that practice is the creation
>> of meaning", and I wish I could see more of it than I have been able to.
>> And the key notion left out of George's summary is the unique forms of
>> interaction demanded from the viewer / user of his work, which makes
>> tangible the viewer's participation in the emergence of meaning in the VR
>> environment, and where this participation is quite explicitly a reflective
> >process.
>
> I agree that it sounds like Bill is doing neat stuff. That is, once
>I plowed through all the rhetoric and figured out what he was doing, I did.
>
> I strongly disagree that it is difficult to find any language that
>characterize what Bill is doing. I characterized what he is doing in
>ordinary langage.
>
> The only way to find out what his creations are like to experience
>is to experience them. It is a mistake to try to communicate that in
>language.
>
> I see no evidence that what he is engaged in has anything to do
>with defining an art practice where the subject of that practice is the
>creation of meaning.
>
> Creating visual images that appear as isomorphic with other possible
>spaces (distinct from normal space) and so allow the viewer to see what
>these spaces are like is a neat idea, but it is not the creation of
>meaning.
>
> It also is not clear to me that this is what he is really
>accomplishing, since we will experience the spatial character of his images
>as eculidean no matter what else they seem like (it seems like gravity in
>this space is less than normal, or that small eforts make for big changes,
>etc., for example)
>
> He is working on a way to make visual art, and the ontological
>status of the art "object" in this case is an interesting question. But how
>we answer that question is independent from the value of experiencing what
>he creates.
>
>Re:
>
>> And the key notion left out of George's summary is the unique forms of
>> interaction demanded from the viewer / user of his work, which makes
>> tangible the viewer's participation in the emergence of meaning in the VR
>> environment, and where this participation is quite explicitly a reflective
>> process.
>>
> That it is a reflective process does not thereby endow it with any
>special valuel. I say this because lately peope seem to thing that merely
>saying something is reflective automatically ensures its worth. No, it
>depends on what come out of the process that determines its worth.
>
> But I did not leave this out. I used ther term "interactive." in my
>translation of Bill's text. I assume the readers on this list are familiar
>with what "interactive" means in computer-talk. So I did not elaborate. In
>things I write for other audiences I explain what interactive means when I
>am discussing this sort of stuff. Even leaving this explanation out, that
>post of mine was way too long.
>
> its not meaning that emerges in the VR environment (in this case).
>Its the content of an experience of other the illusion of other possible
>spaces (if it works). That's someting about which meaningful things can be
>said. In its own right, its an experience of the illusion of a possible
>space, not a meaning.
>
> - George
>===================================================================
> WEB SITE: http://pks.bu.edu/awbim
> POST MESSAGE: Send a message to artwithbraininmind-l@pks.bu.edu
> (UN)SUBSCRIBE: Send message to majordomo@pks.bu.edu with
>'subscribe artwithbraininmind-l' in body to subscribe, or
>'unsubscribe artwithbraininmind-l' in body to unsubscribe
===================================================================
WEB SITE: http://pks.bu.edu/awbim
POST MESSAGE: Send a message to artwithbraininmind-l@pks.bu.edu
(UN)SUBSCRIBE: Send message to majordomo@pks.bu.edu with
'subscribe artwithbraininmind-l' in body to subscribe, or
'unsubscribe artwithbraininmind-l' in body to unsubscribe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 07 2008 - 04:03:30 EDT