Can you see me?: Questioning the Identity

 

  This project has two main aims.

  The first is to make interactive artwork without using hi-tech equipments (e.g. a video installation, a computer programme, a slide projector, etc.).  Interactive art is normally associated with hi-tech equipments.  For example, in Beryl Gream’s article, ‘Playing with yourself: pleasure and interactive art’ (1996), all examples belong to the hi-tech art.

  However, this does not have to be the case.  When I exhibited Rosetta Stone Series in Humid, the finalist show of Department of Visual Arts, Keele University, I saw the audience enjoy touching them.  Although this type of interaction does not bring any dramatic change to the appearance of the artwork, clearly this is a form of interaction.

  I will pursue this line of interaction through this project as well as through the Tactile Art Project.  And while I was working on the latter project, I realised that, when the audience touches the exhibits, he/she also becomes part of a spectacle.  This point leads me to the more important, second aim of the project: to question the audience’s identity.

  As Brian Longhurst argues (1998), recently, the position of the audience in museums and art galleries is destabilised through the introduction of interactive equipments - by interacting with some of the exhibits in a conspicuous way, the audience sometimes becomes a part of the spectacle in the exhibition space.  Difference between the audience and the spectacle is not clearly marked anymore.  Our identity as the audience in exhibition spaces is blurred.

  To demonstrate this point, I intend, in the first stage of this project, to make two domes, Can You See Me?, with panels of one-way mirror (each size approx. H100CM x W150CM x L150CM).  The audience will be encouraged to crawl in and out of the domes through the small openings.  With one of the domes, you can see the inside from the outside, but cannot see the outside from the inside.  What you can see when you are inside are a lot of your own reflected images, while you are seen by others as a part of a spectacle.  With the other one, one-way mirrors are facing the other way.  This time, a person inside can look at the others without being noticed, so that the other audience become a spectacle.

  In the second stage of this project, I wish to explore the issue of the location of identity in more general terms.

  It is often argued that one’s identity comes from the difference from others - the British are different from the Germans, Sally is different from Jane, and so on.  However, this difference is, as demonstrated in the case of the identity of the audience in the exhibition spaces, no longer marked clearly.  We do not have any clear location of our identity anymore (see Hetherington 1998, and Suganami 1998).

  I am currently conducting research on this issue, and hoping to complete the second stage of the project in two years’ time.

 

reference:

Graham, Beryl (1996) ‘Playing with yourself: pleasure and interactive art’ in Dover, Jon (ed.) (1996) Factual Dreams: new media in social context (London: Lawrence and Wishart)

 

Berger, John (1972) Ways of seeing (London: the British Broadcasting Corporation)

 

Hall Stuart (1997a) ‘The work of representation’ in Hall 1997b

 

----------- (1997b) Representation: cultural representations and signifying practices (London: Sage publications)

 

Hetherington, Kevin (1998) Expressionf of Identity (London: Sage Publications)

 

Suganami, Miho (1998) On Cultutal Hybridity (Keele University, Sociology Workpaper)

 

 

Home                                                    E-mail