Re: Cyber Gardening

Kevin Goldsmith (unitcirc@netcom.com)
Wed, 23 Aug 1995 16:55:43 -0700 (PDT)

> Independence is I think good, but it has so many connotations with the
> artist freeing them selves from the constraints of external forces
> such as funding etc.. I think what Im looking at is a kind of omnipresent
> posiverity. Where by the artist sets up some fundamental rules for the
> VRworld/artwork and then movers throw it maintaining them sutaly.
> Wile still allowing the VRworld/artwork to go its own way. I should
> emphasises here
> that when I say VRworld/artwork I mean not just what the world on its own
> is doing but all so what the world Viewers/interacters are exsperounceing
> of the world and what they are doing to the world.
>
In this way you could talk about a virtual world as a sort of
installation where the viewers also take part in it's creation and
continuing development. This is not unlike some landscape installations
I have heard of and is very much in-line with your gardening concept.

> Yes that's it. I think its the idea of architecture and gardening rather
> than painter/sculptor that I was trying to make with my fast postings.
>
This makes a lot of sense. The artists we were discussing
earlier, escher and dali painted things that were impossible to sculpt.
I still thing that they present useful models of the possibilities of
this new medium. If Dali or Escher were getting started now, I would bet
that they would be working in 3D Graphics.

> other media. I my sound foolish with all this but I think if a VRartist
> wont to produces works of art which fully explore VR, then you have to redefine
> what it is that you are doing as an artistic parties. I do not wont to be seen
> as a painter who uses VR but as a VRartist who takes puts elements of painting
> in to his work.Or gardening, Architecture, sculptor, mathematics, and so on.
>
Even if your are producing work in a new medium, you can't toss
away all of art history. Things like composition, color and such are
very important to know regardless of the medium. (Granted the image I
tossed onto the vworlds home page is particularly garrish).

> >Now I think there are three majors problems for VR creations:
> >
> >- first of all is of course is the heavy technology involved in it: which
> >could very disturbing for the artist creativity
>
This is one of the reasons I started the list, because we can
imagine and design things that aren't possible yet. I was tired of being
on tech lists were people were continually told that things weren't
possible. It really destroyed creative conversation.

>
> >- the second problem is the speed: would people take time to appreciate, or
> >would a VR visit would become a high speed zapping around (like a crazy
> >websurfing!)
>
> I think speed of play can decontrolled so it simply becomes another element of
> VR plot production.
>
I've seen a couple different takes on this. A lot of current VR
artworks "guide" their users through the piece. Personally, I haven't
enjoyed this much. If I am in a space, I want to feel free to explore it
in my own time and in my own fashion. This why I also don't particularly
like being "on a wire" (being constrained in movement) in a virtual
environment. It seems overly narrow in a virtual world.

> >- the third problem is more insidious: a large part of art is to show some
> >things and to hide others: the people out of screen in a movie, the border
> >of a picture and so on: the virtual world (with the multiple points of
> >view) give the impression to be able to show everything; this could very
> >castrating for the imagination of the visitors...
>
> I do not think that is right sorry
> it is this very removal of the hidden which is the great gift of VR
> and will mean a radical rethink in creating ART. But it is not true
> that you can not hide things and events in a VR world, you can.
>
> The question is then HOW? and When?
>
Good points.

Kevin

P.S. sorry I've been quiet, Siggraph made my life hell. Just catching up.