Like the program, the memory in a computer is also invisible, but even more so because
for information to get into or out of memory it needs to travel through the program. This
process which connects the real world with the internal memory must involve
transformation but may or may not involve interpretation. It usually does not.
For example a moving image is stored as a moving image and later played back as the same moving
image. In this case transformation takes place at the input device, the camera system, by
digitizing the image and at the output device by undigitizing the image and displaying it.
This process is simply the regurgitation of raw data. It doesn't have to be. The current
structure of the computer allows for the possibility of interpreting an input and
subsequently storing this interpretation in memory. The original data need not be stored
This potential of the computer to be able to extract information from an input and
store it not as raw data but as associated data is one the fundamental characteristics that
allows for a work to be able to change and grow with time and even change its
vocabulary with time.
To me this is one of the most exciting and unique possibilities in
computer art and very little work has been done in this area. Works that perceivably
never repeat themselves. Works that respond to their environment not just in a short term
way, but in a long term way unpredictably and meaningfully. Easier said then done.
A short conclusion and then I'll show the last of the video documentation.
The difference between an interactive game and an interactive work of art is not just in the
subject matter. It's also in the program and interface, which are an important part of the
expression of a work. Artists working in this field will continue to be odds with the models
and directions of the multimedia industry.
Interactive art that uses a computer is not there yet. Probably the only meaningful
dialogues that occur while interacting with a work, are between the viewers and
themselves. Responses from the work that are altered reflections of the viewer's
responses. The limitations that we are up against at this point are no longer
technological. Possibly as we understand more about communication, it will be possible
to express not a thought but a fragment of a way of thinking and growing.
The difference between an interactive game and an interactive work of art
is not just in the subject matter.
The program and the interface are an important part of the
expression of a work. And lastly the computer industry's goals will always be in a different
direction than artists who want to create interactive art so collaborate with a programmer.
< BACK |