Thinking about the internet as a spatial entity with it’s own mass, size and shape - and trying not to visualise it merely as a network of interconnected points - is difficult. I’m looking for a progressive approach to objectifying the internet. One that takes into account it’s sculptural properties.
The image of the net as a huge spider diagram is a popular and easy way of illustrating how it operates. These images are often very beautiful but, for me, do not really express how we use the space and how this space could manifest itself.
World mapper is an interesting site i came across a couple of days ago: World Mapper
Although this falls into the category of information visualisation/representation I thought it interesting how the characteristics of the countries were altered - the swelling and whithering depending on what came in or out.
This would be an interesting format to apply to the internet: perhaps of data flow between servers? Each server being represented by an inflatable ball which expands and contracts as information flows to and from it. I imagine thousands of such ballons, all quite close together, vying for space and filling parts of a large room, squeezing against each-other - the noise would be incredible - maybe some would burst?
I like how this idea involves a physical volume. A form would be created from the inflated objects reacting against each-other and their surroundings. Maybe use liquid instead of air to give it weight? The object rests on a table or plinth (hey, traditional!) and slowly swells and subsides it’s various parts as it responds to data flow. Perhaps this would cause it to creep along the surface until it finally falls over the edge and destroys itself?
Sal Randolph’s reply to the introduction caused me to think about the differences and similarities between these two words so I thought i’d post this as a new thread.
I, for one, view sculpture and architecture as the same thing. But this is more to do with my approach to sculpture (which has more to do with reacting to, and interacting with, space). Sal points out that architecture is a space that you actually use, and I would agree with this. And although a sculpture does not always create a space that you use, the space around a sculpture can very often be affected by it’s presence. this in turn affects the actions of viewers of the sculpture.
This is the space that I am interested in, a sculptural space - an architectural/spatial manifestation - in the internet that affects the viewer’s perception.
I would like to quickly point out that I am not looking for ‘virtual’ spaces in the sense of 3D worlds or 3D representations of networks that you can explore. This ground has been quite thoroughly covered and there is a quantity of people who work in the field of data visualisation and create online artworks about the manipulation and representation of information. What I’m looking to define is a sculptural/architectural approach to perceiving and creating net-based art. It is this approach that is important to the definition of the work. Further-more I am not trying to drag net art back into the realms of ‘traditional’ art by using labels like sculpture, I just feel that this is an avenue of net art thinking that would benefit exploration. I would hope that it is beyond the discussion of ‘what to call’ the artwork and more to do with ‘how it happens.’
Things to think about:
- The spatial/architectural nature of website navigation.
- The spatial/architectural nature of interaction between user, hardware, software and information.
- The dynamics of the screen.
- Mass of information (both in terms of scale and physical property).
