عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]چکیده [English]
As an introduction and problem statement, we start with some critical points that caught our attention and later developed into this research paper. In general, one of the vigorous barriers in interpreting the artistic genres – commonly called contemporary – is to offer a comprehensive interpretation of “which”. For instance, a large group of artists and authors who work in “Digital Art and Computer Art” often consider these areas and their genres to be equally the same while disregarding their substantial distinctions. The other evidence of such issue is evident where the main question of the study is handled in relation to “participatory - interactive” arts. Each work of art usually requires its reader to be involved, now the question is “is the reader a participatory observer? Or it should simply be called interactive reader? In other words, it is a question whether a work of art that benefits from “spectator participation” and his/her “interactivity” can be considered the same. This is because while in some cases it is a comprehensive interpretation that is important to be taken into consideration and in some other cases it is an individual interpretation that is important be considered. The following quotation from Dominic McIver Lopes (2010, p.35) in his book titled A Philosophy of Computer Art, can be a description of the definitions as it is called “Participatory – Interactive Arts” i.e. the arts the basis of which is to participate or interact with: “Interactivity is a buzzword. Like other buzzwords, its meaning seems obvious though it’s actually hard to define, and this makes it choice material for techno babble. We hear that bank machines and websites are interactive, that multimedia equals interactivity, that Microsoft Windows offers interactive help, that interactive TV is around the corner, and that interactive courseware supports interactive learning. One writer lists watching, finding, doing, using, constructing and creating as modes of interaction; then another adds that a light switch is interactive”.
The reflections of such flaw in interpretations, at the first level, take us to the main references related to these artistic genres that are in no case expresses clear distinctions between these seemingly similar categories, but rather basically different ones. And, on the second level, the artists or researchers who work with such subjects as participatory or interactive issue– often disregard such critical distinctions. Therefore, using a descriptive-interpretive method, this paper will try to offer an answer to such problem. First, several cases of misuse and sometimes inappropriate expressions of participatory – interactive arts which are evident in the main references of art works are identified and presented here. It is also indicated how the chaos in offering interpretations has prepared the ground for the artists’ misunderstandings, particularly in Iran. Second, a description and interpretation of basic elements of various genres of participatory interactive art are offered so to indicate how limiting such interpretation could be.
Theory and Methodology
As mentioned before we are trying to present some distinctive definitions on each artistic type by using literature review and adopting a descriptive-analytical method. We will do that by studying and analyzing the most essential elements in any artistic types that are “participation/ interaction –based” and by providing an example of each type.
The entire subjects that are addressed in this research paper could be summarized in two items; first, even by referring to the major resources of the research on participation/interaction-based arts, one could not find a distinctive definitions on each field and this in turn not only causes a mix-up of different types of arts with each other, but also, misleads the researchers into confusion when studying and analyzing the art works. This becomes more serious when one observes that the researchers and artists in the countries that consume those concepts, including Iran, call their works as interactive, participatory…with no consideration of the basic differences that exists between these artistic types; the second-and most important-consequence is that, by considering the most essential characteristics of any artistic type in participation/interaction-based category, one could place those works into eight different subcategories:
A) Participatory art: A work could be called participative, if: 1) the audience of the artistic work could change the display of the work; 2) he/she could perceive the meaning and perception of artistic work through the very creation of changes in display, and 3) this which induces change in work display is done without any computer-based interface. B) The cybernetic art: a work is an example of cybernetic art when, 1) its audiences are able to have an effect on the display of the work and alter it, 2) perceive the work through creation of that display, and 3) the artist allows the audience(s) to change the display through a cybernetic feedback loop. C) The relational art: a work could be called as relational art when: 1) the audiences are able to enter into it and change its display, 2) through that change in display, the audiences achieve a full understanding of the work through performing social actions and 3) this change in display is achieved through interaction of audiences with each other rather than an interaction between the audience and work. D) The satellite art; the satellite art could be considered as a type of art in which: 1) the audiences are able to determine and change the work display, 2) by emphasis on clause first, the perception of the work is entirely related to this change in display; however, 3) that particular action that causes change in display is not the interaction, it rather is an interpersonal communication among the remote audiences. E) The telepresence art: a telepresence art is a type of art that; 1) its audiences are able to change the work display via internet, 2) this change in display is created through passive interaction of audiences with the work; and 3) by considering the personal characteristics in this artistic type, full comprehension of the work should not be depended upon an interaction with other audiences. F) Telmatic art: in telematics art; 1) the audience (s) can and must change the display of the work, 2) any understanding of the work depends on the creation and changes of work display, however, 3) the audience’s action for changing the work display could not be categorized as interaction. G) Net art: net art is a type of art that: 1) its display happens through a website and the audience can change every time somebody lines to the art, 2) since the foundation of net art is based on the interactivity of audiences, their full understanding of the work depends on such interactivity, and 3) the audiences’ action to change the work display is considered a passive interaction. H) Interactive art: interactive art is a type of art in which: 1) the audience(s) are able to change the work display, 2) since the work is essentially interaction-based, full perception of the work depends on interacting with it and changing the work display and 3) the audience(s) engage in the work physically, actively and through computer-based interface.