Plan of action: pulling my research and ideas together

In response to my chat with Ellie, I have decided to hold off doing anymore research for a week, unless I find inspirational material in which case I will certainly save it, but I'm not going to source stuff out, as I think I need to take some time to go through the materialI have already generated and start deciding where to go from here. I will write up all my most favoured ideas in one document, and start to analyze which one(or two) will be best to proceed with, and set myself some boundries regarding what new developed research I will need to generate, and what decisions I will need to start making to develop my idea and make it more informed and mature. One way of doing this will be by writing up what each piece of research has taught me and what I have taken from it, something I normally do at the end of a project to show I have not just stuck stuff in without reading it properly. It will have the benefit for me in this case, if I do it now, of letting me re-fresh everything in my mind, and clarify where my keenest interests and knowledge would be best chanelled in terms of my varied and instinctive, research reactive, whim-y ideas.

Control/Freedom- a symbyotic relationship?

This morning we had a class debate over author control and the empowerment of the media, and what a huge issue this is in interactive theory. My perspective, although it is an obviously big issue in interactive theory, is that it seems to invoke only one way of thinking about control- that it is bad. This might not be the case, but judging from all the material I've seen so far, that idea seems to seep through. That bothers me, becuase I think sometimes control can be a good thing. It's all about balance.

[ At this point my post was saved, and I incorporate the point I was going to make below in my section- 'Talk with Ellie Rees' ]


Guest Speaker: Ellie Rees - influential points from lecture

'Context is what makes art, art, and non-art, non-art'
'Context is everthing'
'Fine art depends on the artists intentions'
'Ellie Rees likes to control the way her work is presented because to change it's context changes it's meaning'


Talk with Ellie Rees
I've just been talking to Ellie Rees about her perspective on the project, and discovered it was quite refreshing to re-cap over everything theoretical I've been learning with someone who doesn't know much about it. My motivation for having a chat with her came mainly from something she said in class, about wanting to have control over the way her work was seen, and it being for the reason that if it was seen in a different way, it will change the meaning(to a point at least). I found this an intelligent perspective on the issue of control.

As I said earlier, it seems that alot of what I'm reading and hearing is geared towards an argument on whether freedom exists in new media or whether all is controlled because of it's set boundaries. I still personally think that all forms of old or new media has a degree of freedom, in the sense that the user/reader/viewer/lurker has control over their own thoughts and emotional response to the piece. Art, film, installation ect can always try and provoke certain responses, but the user always has the end say on how they react emotionally. To get back to the point, most of what I'm reading and hearing seems to stem from an idea that being controlled is a bad thing, but I don't buy into that. I think that boundaries exist for a reason, and what Ellie Rees said about her work exemplifies my point. She creates art pieces that have meaning, and she NEEDS some control over the way people view them, in order for the pieces to be true to themselves, much in the same way that the audience needs some control over their own perspectives and emotional reactions. When she tries to control the context of her pieces, she is trying to create a truer, better experience for her audience. With interactive media, I think the same can be said, to take for example a website, control exists in the from of boundaries and the author decision on where the buttons to be pressed will be, and freedom exists in the users ability to decide what order to view the pages. Yes, this freedom is a limited one, but it is for the purpose that what they are reading belongs not to them, but to the author. In a way the idea of freedom/control in new media both contradicts AND supports Barthes ideas on the death of the author. It supports it because the user is becoming the prosumer/protagonist and therefore the text/object belongs to them as an individual, but also contradicts it because it has boundaries that are set by the author/creator that allow the author/creator to still be able to claim some part of the object/text as 'theirs'.

To clarify my opinion on the control/freedom issue, I would say that yes, there is a big issue there, and yes, both arguments are valid, but I don't see it as an issue that needs any sort of resolution, and I don't side with either perspective. I think that in order for interactive media to be the most effective that it can be, 'control' needs to be a shared privilege between both the author and the audience. When either side gets too much control, it can be detrimental to either the audiences 'right(?)' to freedom, and the authors 'right(?)' to lay claim to their work.

To bring my argument out a little bit away from the world of interactive media, I would like to consider shock art. It is created by an artist who tries to provoke certain reactions in the audience. Is this really taking away the audiences freedom of emotional/mental interaction, or is it a necessary 'evil' in order to let the meaning of the pieces apparent? To a degree, people EXPECT an art work to have a meaning, part of the challenge of looking at some pieces is to identify it, and read what the author is saying, does this mean that that the shock artist is invading their thoughts by invoking a certain reaction? No. The reaction is part of the work. The artist can have an idea of the reaction they want to provoke, but free will is part of the human spirit, and their will always be individuals that react in an unexpected way, and while this is true, it cannot be said that the shock artist has total control. I think that different 'pieces', and 'medias' should all be judged on their own merits, as each type has a difference balance of power between author and user control, and this can be integral and often beneficial to both. So to me the keyword in this issue is BALANCE. It is true that in certain situations the author can impose such rigid control and manipulate mediums to try and mentally engage the user to thinking the way that they do, and that this can result in a bad thing (e.g, Hitler and propaganda in the war), but it is unfair to say that just because some individuals misuse media, that ALL media has hidden control. Context and meaning should always be taken into account, but generally speaking, I think that BALANCE OF CONTROL BETWEEN THE AUTHOR AND AUDIENCE will always come through as a positive thing.

So, to get back to my discussion with Ellie Rees, she heard what I was saying, and asked me about my ideas for the project, and basically helped me by letting me discuss my thoughts on control and clarify them in my mind, and suggested that I look at using installation to teach people that don't know much about interactive theory or interactive media about these issues, and about my own thoughts. I thought this was pretty similar to my existing idea of having an installation that explores freedom and control, and think that would be a good underpinning 'aim' for the piece. I also talked about my idea of having a screen based puzzle piece that needs mental attention to figure out how to proceed, and she pointed out I would need to make a motivation for the user apparent, something I have already noted by that idea to consider at a later point if I pursue it. Also she got me thinking that I will need to decide how 'challenging' I want the piece to be.

Basically Ellie Rees got me thinking that I have lots of idea already, and a lot of research, and that to progress I need to start making decisions so I can develop in certain areas, which I will start to do as planned at the end of the week. (Oh, she also reminded me the video artist I wanted to research earlier in the project but could not remember the name of is called Tony Oursler)

I am now very aware that the idea of control, and my thoughts of balance between author and user is a big issue for me when thinking about interactive media, and I think that I can definitely come up with alot more ideas related to this theme before I settle on one to develop.

"A New Era In Internet Shopping"....but do we really want it?

I read an article in the Metro this morning, about a virtual shopping mall, theMall.tv, that will be online in the UK next year. Skeptical, but intrigued, I looked up their website, and was dismayed to find just what I suspected....a lovely 3D space, with pretty primitive forward/left/right navigation, and shop fronts that seem to just lead to online stores. Really, what's the point? From the perspective of a busy person who can't get to the shops, and hates being caught in a crowd- 'hurrah!', but we do have this already in the form of internet shoping, with sites that let us compare product prices, see what clothes look like on avatar reps of ourselves, and let's face it, it just takes a few clicks. So why enter a virtual mall where we are bound to spend a lot longer navigating the virtual world, for essentially limited choice of dressed up links that take us to online retailers that we already have? And if you do like going to a mall, this will take away the experience of bumping into friends and having lunch while you shop, getting excercise, strolling past shop windows, feeling out the merchandise, ect. To be fair, all I saw was the promo vid, and experiencing it may prove it to be better than expected. I can see the novelty value, and the idea of being able to stroll into virtual shops with a little avatar and seeing virtual products to order, with other little virtual customers around you in a second life style environment could be very appealing to some, but sadly this is not how TheMall.tv seems to work. Still, to be fair, they do have some good points listed for it, but I guess it depends on your perspective. Personally, I'd rather steer clear...so, a new era in shopping, or not?.......what do you think? Please post a comment and tell me!

I filled in a feedback form on the site to ask a few questions, and will post their response when I get it. This is what I asked:

"What restraints will this mall have...will the doors serve as links to virtual 'stores', with 3d merchandise? Or will they be links to websites for that retailer?
Do, do the retailers pay to be here?
Why do you think this will be more beneficial than just googling a store or product and following a hyperlink? Surely it is just a more elaborate way of online shopping that will end up being more time consuming?
Are any 'mall sounds', like music/chatter/promotions heard?
What benefits do you think your product has in relation to replace person to person interaction in a real mall, and person to computer interaction in the home?"

note2self:links

to look at after class, in response to interests derived from the texts-

http://videogames.suite101.com/article.cfm/why_video_games_matter

http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/009442.php

http://ase.tufts.edu/gallery/shows/newmediawall.html

http://www.hf.uib.no/hi/espen/

http://www.electronicbookreview.com/thread/firstperson/cornucopia

http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/393/part3/paradiso.html

Self critique of progress so far....

I have just been evaluating my progress so far in this project, and it has come to my attention that something I should be doing is demonstrating my ability to work on multiple projects. I am doing the working on multiple projects bit, but just not demonstrating so, and I will do this by blogging about other areas of my professional development, aside from just this project.

THE DISSERTATION

I am generating some research for this, but probably not enough as I should be. I have decided to focus on creating an essay plan for it over the christmas holidays, and so will make sure that I do alot of rsearch over this period. o prepare for that I will talk to a tutor in class about my ideas before breaking up next week.

CLIENT PROPOSAL

This has not yet been formally introduced but I have approached one company, whom I used to do graphic design work for, to see if they would be interested in me re designing their site, which they are unhappy with, but have not yet received an answer. I will wait to see exactly what the brief entails before making any definitive decisions.

OTHER WORK

Client:
I am about to take on some work for a man putting together a business proposal for sponsorship for his child's sporting activities, this will involve photoshop work.

Student Network Work:

I am continuing to work for Sussex Learning Network / Student Network Sussex and have just submitted a magazine advert which will be printed in XYZ magazine sometime soon. I am also about to start working on web updates for our site, which was visually designed by me and another girl, but has been in the care of another web development student for the past few months, so I could concentrate on uni work. I will now be helping with regular updates. I have also been asked by SLN to act as official photographer for the foundation degree sympoisum in Lewes in the Spring. I have also recently done work for sister company Aim Higher Sussex, in the form of a student rep at a skills fair, and going to Stenyning Gammer School to give a talk about my experience on the FdA course. From January, I will be working with the event management team at SNS to help generate promo material for the student learning event we are holding in March. That work will begin once the venue has been determined. I have also been creating the visual template for our monthly newsletter over the past month.
Our site has lot's os useful info for students mainly in lower level courses, but is worth look anyway. We also have a student forum if your interested in getting involved.

http://www.studentnetworksussex.org.uk/


Creative Catapult:

I have applied for the Creative Catapult workshops, but have not heard back yet.

DScape:

I attended Portfolio Clinic

ITV:

I did a days work experience for ITV last month which is featured here.

Personal Projects:

Sometime by the end of the year I want to re design my own site and change it from Flash to HTML/CSS.

MY SITE


Job Hunting:

I have been working on my CV and keeping an eye out for potential companies to apply to for work next year. I am going to start e-mailing and asking what they would except to see in potential candidates, so that I can prepare myself to start applying for work in May/June.

The Girlfriend Experience- unique idea or badly formed concept?

I have just looked into The Girlfriend Experiment,and realised that it was in fact something Emma DID discuss with us last year, although the name did not ring any bells when I heard it. The project is basically a game that uses real people as avatars, and you can log on a control them, although you need to gain their trust first. The project raised a couple of points for me.

To start with, I have thoughts about the way they look. The avatars are presented in their undergarments, all very basic and with arms limply at their sides, as expressionless as possible. It is a classic look of an avatar that is being customized, and has not yet been instructed how to look. This to me raised the question: 'Why?' Surely the point of computer avatars modelled on the human form is, for alot of people, to appear as human as possible. So why, then, are these actually human avatars playing down their humanity? Obviously it is to make them appear as characters in a game, but surely letting them stand more naturally, with more human expressions, would be more in keeping with the point that the avatars they are trying to look like are trying to appear as - humans. OR, maybe this is a parody of the fact, maybe the game is making a parody of computer avatars trying to be human, by making humans try to be avatars? Would not then, it be more in keeping of this idea to get the humans do to as instructed without having their trust gained first as avatars do. Avatars have no free will. Being 'tools', they are a conduit of the free will of the game creator and the free will of the game player. The avatar has no existing 'will' to speak of, becuase it does not exist beyond it's visual representation. So why then do the human avatars here get a degree of free will? It is because they are not, and cannot ever be, just tools. They will always be humans, they can act as avatars, but will never be that simplistic in nature. In the 'game' they will not do any wrongdoing, they will tell the player to leave, and the idea of gaining their trust suggests to me that this might be an experiment, the purpose of which being to get the player to start relating to computer avatars in a new way, and to bring a human set of ethics to games. We would not ask this human avatar to kill, so why should we a computer one? Because the computer universe is not real...because computer universes allow us to dispense of our agression in a way that does not harm our reality....are two reasons I hear you say, but who is to judge what reality is? Surely ANY unhappy act can be seen as a harmfull blow to our universe, cyber or otherwise...bad thoughts breed bad actions. I am digressing from the point here slightly, so to backtrack, the girlfriend experience uses human avatars and presents them as close to the same as a computer avatar is presented, perhaps for many reasons that can be pondered and argued against. Another point raised for me, beyond the presentation, is the purpose. I have touched on the idea that it could be an experiment challenging the the relationships humans form with computer avavtars, but what if it is instead challenging human to human relationships (human interaction). This could be why the element of trust and the building up of a relationship is such an important factor in it's gameplay.

Unfortunately this game only works wed-fridays, so I have not played, so perhaps experiencing it will make its purpose more evident than just reading about it and looking at images from it. Either way, I can see why it was suggested to me to look at, it is similar to Knightmare in the way that it works, i.e, having a human avatar with whom trust is an important factor. It differs however becuase there are no puzzles to solve or end goal to work towards. I really like the idea of using a human character in a computer game now, but perhaps one with narrative and obstacles, and will be looking into performance art if I decide to take this idea further.

To end, if anyone has played this game or has any differing perpsectives of it, please feel free to post a comment for me to consider/argue against/agree with/debate.

Tutorial with Micheal.....

I spoke to Michael about my project so far and the research that I have been doing, as well as a couple of the themes and ideas I have been exploring. Before noting his comments, I’ll just give a brief overview here of what that was, because I did not go into my research in full, or explain all of my ideas as detailed better in this blog.

I spoke about the following research areas:

- psychical interaction
- control/manipulation
- mental interaction
- interaction between people
- Knightmare tv show
- Non linear storylines / parallel universes

And discussed the following ideas:

- interaction between people (controlling the person as a character in a game)
- installation using montage to provoke memory related experiences
- installation using montage materials arranged in two ways, one to give free will over interaction, one to manipulate and control, to show that free will is better than control in terms of producing more beneficial experiences
- touch screen application using clues in page to mentally engage the user in figuring out how to stimulate the page and proceed to the next.


RESPONSE:

Michael fed back some of my ideas to me in a way I had not considered/been aware of. I am thinking a lot about using installations to experiment on people and prove a point. He says that I sound like I have an opinion on issues such as free will and control in interaction, and could perhaps be exploring differing opinions or thinking about ways of communicating that to prove my point, however, I do not really have a set opinion….I have read a lot of texts and can see a lot of peoples different points of view. If I HAD to choose, I would say that it can be dangerous to use the media to manipulate public opinion, but I wouldn’t say it’s always wrong. His comment made me wonder….am I falling into the trap I have been reading about, of mistaking other people’s ideas as my own? Am I just voicing what I’ve been reading into my ideas rather than judging different sides and drawing my own conclusions? I don’t think this is true, it is still early and my research is quite wide ranging, but I think these are points I should come back to and consider when formulating my main idea to develop. I certainly will come back to the idea of using installation to prove a point or explore a point. One that comes to mind is that ‘interaction between people is good’, which is another comment Michael took my words to mean, though it was not my intent, but perhaps, it could be a theme to pursue, and use installation to prove. Other comments included suggestions to research ‘The girlfriend experience’, the argument that maybe it is not actually possible to completely remove freedom of thought, the artist Lorenzo Hemerr (who created an installation where light would beat at the same rhythm as the hearts of the people watching), and Deleuze’s ideas of repetition. One area I forgot to mention was my research into the fourth wall, and the idea of breaking it, which is something I am going to consider in more detail.