ESSAY - Netwrok digital art:Marie Sester's Access

Introduction

http://www.accessproject.net/
Name: Access
Artist: Marie Sester
Time: 2003
Place has been shown:

• Z33 - House for Contemporary ArtHasselt, BelgiumNovember 8 - 25, 2011
• San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) San Francisco, California, USA October 30, 2010 - April 17, 2011
• GLOW Eindhoven, NetherlandsNovember 6-19, 2009
• And more

According to Sester in his Access project website, “ACCESS is a public art installation that applies web, computer, sound and lighting technologies, in which web users track individuals in public spaces with a unique robotic spotlight and acoustic beam system.” (Marie Sester, http://www.accessproject.net/concept, 20/10/2013 )

Web users can track some strangers who passed under the system through internet. Once the target is chosen, there is a robotic spotlight following him no matter where he goes. Howerever, the tracked one does not know who tracked him and why he is tracked target. Also the tracked person hears a sound over acoustic beam system whereas he does not know he is the only one who hears the sound among public. The sound, like audios of “Move forwards,” ”turn around” stems from web users but they do not know that. ACCESS, which was created by Marie Sester in 2003, travelled around the world as a short period of event in each city including Netherlands, USA, Belgium, etc. While the system traveled one city to the other, Sester did not announce the location where they were going to hold the event in advance until they start the next event. 

The interesting part of the work here is there seems to be interaction among them as they both give responses whereas to some extent they do not have. Sester said, "In effect, both the tracker and the tracked are in a paradoxical communication loop." (Marie Sester, http://www.accessproject.net/concept, 20/10/2013) At the beginning, a web user randomly chooses a target. When a person is tracked, he would choose either try to escape or stay under the spotlight as his response. Web users could also receive his response through the video on the website. If the tracked one ran, the tracker, namely the spotlight, also followed him which can be seen as a kind of response to the tracked person. From this perspective, ACCESS can form a communication loop for trackers and the tracked individuals. However, the tracked person did not know the existence of the web users and the action of tracking is not done by web user but the control tool. Therefore, in context, this communication loop seems to be valid because of the lack of dialogue among both trackers and tracked individuals.

We can see many features from ACCESS that match network digital art. Firstly, the work provides a uniform instruction for audience to experience. Web users only can control the spotlight through the website and internet, and the tracked ones can only be the one among public on the designated area. It makes sure audience could have feelings from a same way. The system has the same effect and same method, but gives a room for audience to think about the issue that the artist raises.

Besides, audience participation was also considered in the work. In this work, audiences have two rules to act. They can be either tracker or tracked persons. Trackers have the right to choose the target to be tracked, while tracked person as a passive character to be followed by a spotlight. During the process, audience could get the feeling of the position that they situated. For example, tracked people can have feeling of being under surveillance, while trackers may enjoy watching whole process through the videos.

ACCESS also includes randomization in the process. On the one hand, web users randomly choose a stranger appearing on the designated public area as well as those web users are also non-selected people from internet. On the other hand, like DaDa, network digital art also cover chance to express their art. Audience can think comprehensively and differently beyond the outlook of the work of art. The randomization of ACCESS gives audience a wide range space to explore the thought aroused from the activity. For instance, spotlight on people could be a kind of stage effect that let people perform or attract others. People participating in ACCESS are free to do and think by the feature of randomization.

Moreover, the other feature of the work is the concept rather than the art object. This system includes lots of modern technologies like spotlight and sound system, video and internet, etc which only play rules of function in this project but not in the aesthetic perspective. Meanwhile, the artist Sester intentionally make the work similar to surveillance systems. It is obvious that he want us to focus on the concept of surveillance. "In an age”, according to D'Alleva, “where surveillance technologies are increasingly part of everyday life, ACCESS worked to denaturalize them and make them obvious."( D'Alleva, 2006) Sester indeed focuses on the concept a lot on ACCESS and hopes that audience can think of the impact of surveillance and other issue of the society through the participation of the work.

As in ACCESS, the concepts are concentrated more than the art object. In the following paragraph, concepts are shown. According to Seseter, "The content of ACCESS calls for awareness of the implications of surveillance, detection, celebrity, and their impact on society." (Marie Sester, http://www.accessproject.net/concept.html) Sester implied a big issue of surveillance and other relevant topic into the work. In ACCESS, tracked people represent the one who is observed on the public places by different systems such as security surveillance system that records everyone on the public, while trackers represent the one who observe those specific objects on the public space without any permission of them. So in terms of surveillance, we can have different experience and thoughts on the work, such as the influence of surveillance to our life. For ACCESS, people may be involuntarily watched under the spotlight or feeling stressed when staying in the spotlight. In reality, it plays the same effect. Take celebrities as example, those paparazzi who keep tracking celebrities, always post many celebrities' news which in fact bring many trouble to celebrity, like they become very sensitive to surrounding environment and even make them cannot have their normal life.

Besides, surveillance also implies another topic relevant to our privacy. Once people became tracked targets, everything about them including their location, what they behave, what they wear that that day etc. will be all exposed to the public without their permission. Nowadays, there are many security surveillance systems in public areas such supermarkets, shopping mall, lifts, schools, MTR. It suggests that surveillance has gradually entered to people's life as well as our privacy. What we all do individually or privately are all recorded by some strangers no matter where we go.

ACCESS also creates networks in some ways, "....Sester's intention with this work is partly to explore and raise awareness of the politics and implications of surveillance systems through connecting the actions of an anonymous group of web users to a public unaware they are being seen....". (Christa S, Laurent M, Dorothée K, 2008) Although we see there are not much communication in between among them, web users and strangers among the public did participate in this activity.  Also, when web users are using this systems, they are aware of that place of people, so somehow ACCESS also help to make connection with web users and people in remote areas. When applying to surveillance, we actually see the same effect there.

Like what Lovejoy said before, "The interaction in this work was both controlled and voluntary, as some people attempted to evade the light while others basked in the public attention it brought them." (Margot L, Christiane P, Viktorija V, Vtoria V, 2011) There are many possibilities reacting to being kept under surveillance. From Sester’s website, he also mentioned that "the structure of ACCESS is intentionally ambiguous, revealing the obsession/fascination for control, visibility, and vigilance: scary or fun." (Marie Sester, http://www.accessproject.net/concept.html, 23/11/2013) Those unknown surveillance can be a unknown scary making you feel worried about what those surveillance do with you or uncomfortable to be watched, while some may even enjoy being focused. So there is an ambiguous concept here that Sester did not want to clarify or he wanted audience to explore from his work. This interaction in the work depends on how people think towards surveillance.

Under surveillance, the tracked people cannot escape from the eyes of web users that mean they cannot get out of the spot light no matter how fast they run, no matter where they go. Trackers may have fun with this as they seem to be able to make those tracked people under control.  However, actually the final controller is not web users, but the designers. I think to some extent, things are under control in his program and calculation with same format of the system.For those tracked people, they can recognize through the spotlight that they are focused. At the same time, they would also question about what the spotlight was going to do then -- would it make scary or fun? It turns out to be a unpredictable of surprise or

To conclude, surveillance can be dangerous or safe to people, especially nowadays we have so many surveillance technologies around us, even some government also use such tool to observe citizens’ behaviors. It could be somehow good for saving crimes, whereas abuses of it may influence people’s right of owning freedom. Therefore, To conclude, surveillance can be dangerous or safe to people, especially nowadays we have so many surveillance technologies around us, even some government also use such tool to observe citizens’ behaviors. It could be somehow good for saving crimes, but on the other hand, buses of it may influence people’s right of owning freedom. Therefore, as Lyon said, "we could not generally said something about surveillance as it depends on the situation and extent that it achieves." We can say that we could not completely ban or accept the existence of surveillance but instead to understand the real meaning behind each situation, in order to well use them.

Interesting Question:

In terms of the disconnection among the identification of people either tracking or being tracked, is this still a net art?

Reference:

-Anne D'Alleva, How To Write Art History, Laurence King Publishing, 2006, 44.

-Christa Sommerer, Laurent Mignonneau, Dorothée King .Interface cultures: artistic aspects of interaction, Transcript-Verlag (September 5, 2008), 232

-Margot Lovejoy, Christiane Paul, Viktorija Vesna Bulajić, Victoria Vesna , Context Providers: Conditions of Meaning in Media Arts,21, 43

-David Lyon, The Electronic Eye: The Rise of Surveillance Society, U of Minnesota Press, 1994. 270

Mark Tribe Art in an age of digital distribution

1.  Dada + New Media art both describe as "reaction". What did they react to?
    " Dada was in part a reaction to the industrialization of warfare and the mechanical reproduction of texts and images, New Media art can be seen as a response to the information technology revolution and the digitization of cultural forms"
They both reacted to changes of the world.

2. What are some similarities of new media art to Dada, Pop, Video Art?

• Dada: Reproduction and make different from traditional art form
• Pop: Focus more on ideas than on objects
• Video Art:
  same "accessible artistic tool that enabled them to explore the changing relationship between technology and culture" 

3. When was Net art first included in a major exhibition: Documenta X (Kassel, Germany)?

    From 1994 until 1997

4. Is new media art focused in one country. Why or why not?
    No. Because new media art has something tho do with Internet which connects many different countries. In other words, the idea of new media art focuses on world as a whole.

5. Why were many artists drawn to new media art from other disciplines?
   As it is far different from the traditional art form. It includes the concept of globalization, and especially it use internet to develop.

Net Art : Mark Napier's 'Shredder'

This is not only a digital art, but also a net art which need network to connect and thus working with it. On the other hand, it suits many characteristics of digital art.

First, digital art has formal instructions. Like Dada or conceptual art, digital art has a role to follow and produce art work. In this website, it always require people to enter a website to finish the other part of it. It seems to that 'Shredder' have something regular to the websites.  

Then it comes the second element which is the emphasis on the concept rather than the art object. Obviously we can not through our eyes to see what the artist is gonna to present. They are just some messy characters and images. There is something to do with the concept which the artist want to provide audiences' different experience of visiting websites which normally include many information given by some association.

The third element is about the participation of the event and audience. The website needs audience to choose an address of the website to enter in the blank to show something. Therefore, it need audience get involved in the art. On the other hand, audience are somehow experiencing the ideas of the artist. So there could be something to do with the interaction.

Digital art also includes an interest in random events or chance. When we enter an address of a website, as I mentioned before, there are some messy characters appearing in the website. Those can be also regarded as a kind of random event. We can see there is no rule to regularly arrange these images and characters. 

Last but not least, digital art borrows existed things to create as well. For this website, it uses the websites that we are very familiar with to recreate a concept. 

To conclude, Although the surface is not as nice as the other art, it pump up a new idea that we have never met before. In other words, it is a special and new kind of art which deserve we look and appreciate it.

PROs and CONs of playing video games for individuals and societies

Nowadays, video games have been commonly spread throughout the world and the industry of video games have been growing faster. Some people think video games are a great invention as they help the economy and enrich people's life, while some don't think video games are good things because it brings people illusion and many disadvantages to individuals and societies. However, there are actually many controversies to these issues of influence of video games. In this following passage, pros and cons of playing video games will be both explored.

To begin with, the first pro of playing video games is to learn something. Video games provide many situation which even do not exist in reality for players, so players can experience what they have experience before or get pleasure like great views in games. In the film that we watched in class, American army used shooting games to attract young men to join the army. In some ways, the army is stimulating what they are doing in normal working in the shooting game. On the other hand, people who want to join the army also have the chance to somehow train their ability of shooting or other technique of soldiers through the video games.

One of cons of playing video games is the moral issue. Video games are just a kind of virtual stuffs. Therefore, people put lots of possibilities on the games including their desires, discrimination, attitude for making fun. Like the example given by the film, some shooting games offer players shooting their partners or some characters may be created as representation of a class such as East Asian. It somehow implant players a wrong concept that killing people whatever they want or discrimination of different class. There are many conditions appearing in video games which depends on different backgrounds of creators. Therefore, it has a potential that it may mislead player while they are playing games.

In my point of views, I think that there is no right or wrong answer on video games. Video games can be a kind of art form to involve people's ideas. On the other hand, viewers can learn and achieve the creator's ideas during the games. Therefore, video games can be an effective art form of expressing people's ideas just like what films, poems do. However, nowadays people use video games to earn money rather than making arts. That makes video games become nothing but only commercial products. People even make even it wrong in morality. In my opinion, as many students said, government should do something to improve those condition.

Elbe talks about videogames: Mary flanagan's DOMESTIC

Can Video games be art? Some people may think that the appearance of video games is entertainment, and that is it so it is nothing to do with art; while some may think that art is unlimited with the medium, why it can not be a video game? However, I do think video games have their potentials to be art as long as they have it soul differing from other normal games or they bring some new ideas. There are actually four important video games now. DOMESTIC, which was created by Mary flanagan, impressed me the most. According to the description written on the Mary flanagan's website, I recognized that Domestic is a real art work.

First, it does contain contents. It is about a event that happened in the artist's childhood. The artist took us as first person to experience her memory. In this game, we walk ourselves with various but seems messy views. However, we still clearly see the words written on stairs and walls, the setting of domestic,etc. Moreover, when we walked with those picture and words, we gradually provoke some picture of that situation in our mind. Therefore, such method can include something like films to lead us to receive artist's messages. She used the way of 'storytelling' as the web site describing, with picture and animation to arouse our feeling and emotion. Such experience is similar to what we get from normal art work.

By extending the ideas, Mary also raised some question about it to provoke our thinking. This made this art work more meaningful as it has more things to see and think.

Apart from that, prompting new concepts is another element of art. Impressionism, as we all know, is a kind of oil on canvas but present in a new way in terms of light and shadow. It turns out attracts people and successfully become one of  influential art styles. Domestic does the same. Mary produced a new game that the others have never tried, and more importantly mix with some ideas and scenes. It is a really new method to enjoy in a game and enjoy art.

The other thing of being art is surely aesthetic. We can see there are many domestic pictures in the game, although they are not  arranged in order. Nevertheless, the artist intentionally arranged those picture with the purpose of provoking people's emotion and memory of that time and in response, I did get pleasure from it. It is obvious that the artist had judgement on deciding the arrangement of pictures according to what she wanted to present to us. Art does need an kind of art experience or skills, otherwise it could be nothing or the ideas could not convey to the viewers.

There is also an interesting part in this game. As players situate in the room to experience, there are two aspects of things coming out. One is what the artist convey to us through those visual elements that are shown in the game, which the other is what players get from walking throughout the room. It may be a kind of interaction, although those players may think of something differing from Mary's, as player in fact are experiencing the artist's memory.