Feed Lack Loop
Micheál O'Connell's 'Feed Lack Loop' had been a surreal experience to say the least. Whether to call it performance, installation piece I don't know. But what surely fits a description is 'experimental'. Upon entering Lighthouse there was a huge projector I noticed the familiar face of Dave (if I remember his name correctly), the clown Micheál used in some of his other works. There is indeed something intriguing about clowns, but that's another story all together. The event would take place both at Lighthouse and in the virtual world of Second Life supported by Ars Virtua Gallery. The projector would show the event in Second Life while a camera in Lighthouse would show in Second Life what was happening in First Life (or am I wrong, my head hurts already). The result is a strange loop. The avatar in the virtual world, designed to look far from attractive -unlike ones everyday encounters in the MMOG- was controlled by Micheál, while Dan from Grey Area assisted in communication with the other avatars/viewers. When the performance started, even though a bit distracted by the crows talking, an eventual hypnotizing repetition took place. The clown was miming the movement of the avatar in Second Life. I was lost in thought and confusion. The avatar wasn't real. It was controlled, and the clown was in part being controlled either by the avatar or Micheál who appeared every now and again to position the clown in a different place.
What I found very successful in this mundane act of looping was that the avatar, a lifeless, unreal, algorithm seemed to be more confident than the clown himself. This caused a malfunction as to what is real and what is not. The clown performing in front of a live audience, unrestricted and naked in comparison to the avatar, acted as a child; introvert and disoriented he would mimic the avatar as if it was the most important thing in his life.
The question arising from the performance as Micheál also informed on his statement was whether interactivity leads to empowerment or control. My conclusion out of the performance is that interactivity is an illusory form of power. We accept happily to restrict our motion, speech, movement to the limitations of our avatar. We restrict our appearance to the styles and tastes of the limited people creating outfits within Second Life. And all that to feel "empowered". The clown was sometimes moved behind the projector, and one could only see his shadow. Again, perhaps a juxtaposition, of the man ending up a shadow of himself. The avatar dominant in the front while the shadow behind imitates his movements and sounds.
The talk at the end of the show was quite insightful. It gave the audience the chance to think of the work in the artists point of view as well.
Furthermore the title of the performance being Feed Lack rather than Feedback perhaps suggests that the clown could not input any information back to the system. As if trapped in this endless loop of repetition but not being able to change the stream the other way around.
Some other interesting questions arising were how much we are influenced by our avatars looks and behavior. I have friends -ok, I admit I once was part of this as well- who would not talk about anything else apart from World of Warcraft. Imagine sitting round a table having a coffee beneath the warm sun and speaking of urns, spells, assassination, talent points, backstab, subtlety, mages and warlords. It is an interesting subject to look into. Watching a documentary on Second Life on the BBC, a particular woman married with four children was saying how she spent 14 hours a day on Second Life, ignoring her family, with her virtual boyfriend. When she wasn't living her dreams in virtual worlds she spent them complaining about her fights with her virtual boyfriend to her family. Weird? Yes. Empowerment? No. But I'm moving away from the subject again.
I feel that the performance was nothing less but food for thoughts, and a reflection to the infatuation of our world with the term 'interactivity'. As O'Connell said during his talk, artists who use technology to create, sometimes get so lost in it that they forget what it was all about.
The issues raised in this performance cannot be described or portrayed in a monologue post. I think they are themes and subjects that need to be discussed, and only through conversation will the participants reach a conclusion or at least a higher understanding of them. After all, as the theme implies a monologue would only lead back to the beginning, causing a strange loop.
What I found very successful in this mundane act of looping was that the avatar, a lifeless, unreal, algorithm seemed to be more confident than the clown himself. This caused a malfunction as to what is real and what is not. The clown performing in front of a live audience, unrestricted and naked in comparison to the avatar, acted as a child; introvert and disoriented he would mimic the avatar as if it was the most important thing in his life.
The question arising from the performance as Micheál also informed on his statement was whether interactivity leads to empowerment or control. My conclusion out of the performance is that interactivity is an illusory form of power. We accept happily to restrict our motion, speech, movement to the limitations of our avatar. We restrict our appearance to the styles and tastes of the limited people creating outfits within Second Life. And all that to feel "empowered". The clown was sometimes moved behind the projector, and one could only see his shadow. Again, perhaps a juxtaposition, of the man ending up a shadow of himself. The avatar dominant in the front while the shadow behind imitates his movements and sounds.
The talk at the end of the show was quite insightful. It gave the audience the chance to think of the work in the artists point of view as well.
Furthermore the title of the performance being Feed Lack rather than Feedback perhaps suggests that the clown could not input any information back to the system. As if trapped in this endless loop of repetition but not being able to change the stream the other way around.
Some other interesting questions arising were how much we are influenced by our avatars looks and behavior. I have friends -ok, I admit I once was part of this as well- who would not talk about anything else apart from World of Warcraft. Imagine sitting round a table having a coffee beneath the warm sun and speaking of urns, spells, assassination, talent points, backstab, subtlety, mages and warlords. It is an interesting subject to look into. Watching a documentary on Second Life on the BBC, a particular woman married with four children was saying how she spent 14 hours a day on Second Life, ignoring her family, with her virtual boyfriend. When she wasn't living her dreams in virtual worlds she spent them complaining about her fights with her virtual boyfriend to her family. Weird? Yes. Empowerment? No. But I'm moving away from the subject again.
I feel that the performance was nothing less but food for thoughts, and a reflection to the infatuation of our world with the term 'interactivity'. As O'Connell said during his talk, artists who use technology to create, sometimes get so lost in it that they forget what it was all about.
The issues raised in this performance cannot be described or portrayed in a monologue post. I think they are themes and subjects that need to be discussed, and only through conversation will the participants reach a conclusion or at least a higher understanding of them. After all, as the theme implies a monologue would only lead back to the beginning, causing a strange loop.
Useful to me thanks. In somewhat narcissistic mood I’m reading what you’ve written about Feed Lack Loop only. But noticing the name of Frank Zappa on entry below I’m drawn to go on.
ReplyDeletePersonally I was a little overwhelmed by the degree to which people sat round the screen and performer and treated it so easily as a stage on Thursday. There were two other pieces of work there at Lighthouse. I imagined people milling around it all. There’s a desire to be ‘passive’ potentially. In retrospect the Second Life ‘gallery’ had more of the desired effect. It’s all digital there so the contrast between light-box screen and ‘reality’ was not so mesmerising, hypnotising, glamorous. The rabbits there were less easily stunned into submission.
It seems that in real life, our primordial nature of gathering around the fire is still in our dna strands. People may find it easier to break the norms in virtual worlds as they do not receive strange looks when they're dressed as bunnies. It is also noticeable how people are sometimes captivated by loops even though they've seen the same thing a minute ago. Is it because we're programmed to act in loops ourselves or is it just a matter of following the herd?
ReplyDeleteMmm loops are definately at the core of our neural physiology. E.g. neural oscillators (for movement) and random boolean networks falling into loop attractors.
ReplyDeleteA friend and I are proposing an audio piece based on RBNs for the Sonic Arts Network Expo in the summer. I'll let you know if it comes off.
Excellent stuff Mike. I will definitely be there. I find myself more and more interested in sound and visual manipulation. Your scientific insight leaves me both baffled and intrigued. Any suggestions for further reading to reduce my ignorance?
ReplyDelete