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