Both excerpts from Interactive art and embodiment and Digital Art and Meaning: Interactive Installations, deal with the possibilities that interactive art has enabled since its beginning. These possibilities are manifested in different ways: either through the process of embodiment, where the spectator (or actor, in the case of interactive art) is posed with the potential to embody and represent something other than what he is usually used to, or through the process of inaugurating dialogue and reaching further understanding through the audience’s interaction with the piece. In a sense, though doing so in different ways, both authors eagerly acknowledge the catalyzing power of interactive art to transform the artist – artwork – voyeur dynamic, which had always traditionally stayed in their separate categories.
“Embodiment is moving – thinking – feeling, it is the body’s potential to vary, it is the body’s relations to the outside. Embodiment is what is staged in the best interactive art”
This phrase from Interactive art and embodiment struck me, as I had never actually thought of embodiment as a way to describe the process of interacting, responding, and understanding inherent to experiencing an interactive piece. Stern’s emphasis on moving, thinking, and feeling as facilitated by the body’s movement also struck a chord – the seemingly simple act of moving a finger, or jumping, or simply standing on a space when experiencing an interactive artwork is not meaningless. Once the spectator-turned-actor acknowledges his status in an interactive piece, his actions now become performance: either wary of the outcome, or in awe of what is happening in response, the user now embodies something else, he acts carefully, fully aware of the outputs happening in response.
“[Interactive art poses] an opportunity for self-discovery; it is an invitation to explore one’s own body in the process of interaction”
Among the many ideas touched on in Interactive Installations, this phrase caught my attention, as it delves into the possibilities that interactive art enables for the user separate from an awe for the technology that facilitates it. Indeed, an interactive work is not complete without someone to embody it, without someone to mediate it and trigger its magic. In this same line of thought, then should perhaps an equal amount of importance be given to the actors that trigger this outcome? Once their movement becomes performance, once they’re aware of their position of agency and power in the piece, do they also become part of the artwork? These were some of the questions that rose as I read this author’s words, which I hope to find more answers to as we develop more works throughout the semester.