I think that the projects presented were really interesting in that they used technology and devices that seem to be making us more isolated in public spaces and transformed them to make people more aware of the context of their life. My question is how lasting that revelation is, or if that matters. That is, if a person hears their wifi router make a modem sound will it really give them an increased sense of historical context in their computer use, or will it be a momentary contemplation? Is the piece more or less valuable depending on the reaction?
I guess I much preferred the projects that involved networks of people rather than the standalone pieces - I especially liked the idea of a network that exists when a line of cars are bumper to bumper. Not only could it make traffic flow better by letting everyone know what the problem was, but it could be a really neat way to connect with strangers who are, like you, stuck alone in their cars. It would make driving less of a solitary project and more of a group commute.

I felt totally opposite thing from today's seminar compared to what I felt from the Larry Gertz's seminar "location based entertainment." After Mr. Larry Gertz's seminar I became more appreciating the fact that I have this virtual space that I can create and do something in it without having to spend lots of money. But today watching lots of works to make virtual space or network space visualized into physical space, I felt certain nostalgic feeling about today's artists trying to go back to the non-digital era where things were relatively obvious and touchable. Like what Katherine Moriwaki mentioned today about people's different reaction between paper protype and mobile-device, eventhough the content was exactly same, the actual experience could be quite different by the media we use to communicate with. It sounds quite obvious, but we're so much used to today's technology, there seems to be lots of things we're forgetting or we don't even get a chance to learn from old days when communication between people was much closer and intimite.

On first glance, I was looking forward to seeing projects with parallel visual intrusion. I'm only half sure why I was of this state; I'm not totally IN to the pasttime of having my life intruded upon, yet with the abstracted imagery presented, I couldn't help but think that it was the only RIGHT thing to do. Can I be enabled (ennobled, even?) just by having seen these wondrous things? Must I opt in? Can I confer on others in my line of sight ability that is unexpected? The right red dress on the right person can knock someone senseless...can the right computerized/wi-fi-enabled evening gown strike the random guy on the street electronically breathless?

One thing that struck me about Jonah and Katherine's projects was their ingenius resourcefulness of cheap and effective uses of parts. There is a wealth of expressive power lying dormant in objects we encounter every day and in many of their projects, Jonah and Katherine have successfully channeled this, in the process giving us a chance to reflect on these objects from an altered perspective.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: