ThePracticeofEveryday(Virtual)Life

Aparticipatoryandperformativeartisticenquiry

RebeccaGamble

Athesissubmittedinpartialfulfilmentoftherequirementsof

NottinghamTrentUniversity

forthedegreeofDoctorofPhilosophy

January2016

i

I,RebeccaGamble,declarethatthissubmissionismyownwork,andhasnot

beensubmittedforanyotheracademicaward.Theuseofallmaterialsfrom

sourcesotherthanmyownworkhasbeenproperlyandfullyacknowledged.

ii

ABSTRACT

ThePracticeofEveryday(Virtual)Life:

Aparticipatoryandperformativeartisticenquiry

Incontemporaryculture,human-to-humancommunicationisbecomingmediated

throughdigitalscreensandvirtualcommunication1.Oureverydaylivesarenowlived

inandbetweenphysicalandvirtualspaces,ina‘hybridspace’,augmentedwith

technologies,inwhichindividualsincreasinglyperformonlineasdigitalversionsof

themselves:avatars.Asaresult,‘everydaylife’hasbecome‘everydayvirtuallife’in

whichnewcommunicationpracticesandsocialbehavioursemerge.

Thisresearchisacritiqueofeveryday(virtual)life.AswithMicheldeCerteau’s

analysisofthepracticeofeverydaylifeinthe1980’s,inwhichtheday-to-daypractices

ofhumanbehaviourwerecritiqued,theincreasedfamiliarityof‘everydayvirtuallife’

necessitatesnewcriticalquestioning:Howdoweliveonline?Whatarethecommon

virtualcommunicationpractices?Andhowcanthisemergent‘hybridspace’be

criticallyquestionedthroughaparticipatoryperformanceenquiry?

Thisisanembodiedpractice,inwhichthecontributionstoknowledgearegained

throughtheactionandreflectionofparticipatoryperformance;eachraisingnew

criticalquestioningandanembodiedunderstandingofthecritiqueofeveryday

(virtual)life:specificallythecommunicationpracticesandhumanbehaviourspresent

inthedigital,whicharebroughttotheforegroundthroughtheirre-framingandre-

performanceinaphysicalspace.

Theresearchispresentedasatextual-visualthesisandonlineplatform,whichtogether

revealthecontext,methodology,documentationandcriticalanalysisofabodyof

practice-ledresearchcarriedoutbytheauthor.Thereaderisinvitedtoviewboth

alongsideeachother:www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com

146.4%oftheworld’spopulationusestheInternet,with73.5%ofthepopulationofEuropeasactiveInternetusers.Source:http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Iwouldliketothankthosewhohavebeeninstrumentaltothisresearchthroughtheir

participation,support,adviceandcritique.

Firstly,IwouldliketoexpressmygratitudetomyDirectorofStudies,Dr.DeborahHarty,

whojoinedatacriticalmomentinthePhD,forhergenerosityoftimeandhershared

understandingtowardspractice-ledresearch.ThankyoualsotosupervisorsMatthew

HawthornandProfessorTerryShave,andadvisorSallyFreeman,fortheirencouragement,

expertiseandguidance,toDr.ChristineWhiteandProfessorTomFisherforthePhD

opportunityandfundingatNottinghamTrentUniversityandtoexaminersProfessorKaty

MacLeodandProfessorDuncanHigginsfortheirvaluedinsight.

IwouldliketothanktheartistsandparticipantsthatIhaveworkedwithclosely,whohave

significantlyinformedthepractice-ledmethodologyandresearch.Iamextremelygrateful

tofriendsandcolleagues,thosewithintheThinkingThroughPracticeresearchgroup,the

SummerLodgeresidencyatNottinghamTrentUniversityandthestudiosatPrimary,who

haveprovidedaninvaluablecreative,supportiveandcriticalnetwork.Withparticular

thanksto‘criticalfriends’,MaureenGamble,NatashaJones,EmilyWarner,RhiannonJones,

Dr.BelenCerezo,GenelvaMeikle,KashifNadimChaudryandJulianHughes.

Finally,Iwouldliketoexpressmydeepestgratitudetomyfamily.ToEileen,Maureen,

Chris,Rose,Rob,TashaandAdam,fortheirconstantlove,supportandmostofall,patience.

iv

TABLEOFCONTENTS

Abstract………………………………………………………………………….………......iAcknowledgements……………………………………………………………….……iiTableofContents…………………………………………………………………..…..iiiFigures………………………………………………………………………………………viIntroduction………………………………………………………………………..……..1

Researchenquiry………………………………………………………………………….……..…1Proposition…………………………………………………………………………………….….…..1Thesisstructure………………………………………………………………………………..…...4ChapterSummaries…………………………………………………………………………..……6

CriticalEnquiry…………………………………………………………………..….…10

Revealingtheoriginsoftheresearchenquiry……………………………………..…10Methodology………………………………………………………………………….…13

DevelopmentofMethodology………………...………………………...…………….….…13ArtisticResearch…………………………...…………………………………………...….…….13ActionResearch…………………………...…………………………...…………………………14Kolb’sExperientialLearningCycle…………………………...…………………………...15Reflectioninandonaction…………………………...…………………………...……….…16Hospitality:ParticipationandFacilitation…………………………...…………….…..17Roles,relationships,responsibilities…………………………...………………………..18Participatoryperformanceasenquiry…………………………...………………….…..18

Context………………………………………………………………………..……………20

TheEveryday…………………………...…………………………...………………………….....20SocialGeography…………………………...…………………………...…………………….…22SecondLife…………………………...…………………………...…………………………..........23HybridSpace…………………………...…………………………...…………………………......28Participation…………………………...…………………………...………………………….......34

TheRomanticEncounter………………………………………………………….36Introduction…………………………...…………………………...…………………………........37OriginsandObservations:socialspaces,onlineandoffline……………………38Planning:SummerLodgeResidency2010…………………………...………………..41Theinvitation…………………………...…………………………...…………………………....45ActionandFacilitation:Reflectionsashost…………………………...………………46Reflectionandanalysis…………………………...…….……………………...………………47Summary…………………………...…………………………...…………………………...………50

v

Contributionstoknowledge…………………………...…………………………...……….50

“Let’sDanceSugarLips”……………………………………………………………52Introduction…………………………...…………………………...…………………………........53Observations:blurringthephysical–virtualspace…………………………...........53Planning:SummerLodgeResidency2011…………………………...………………..55Workshopinvitationandstructure…………………………...………………………….57ActionandFacilitation:Reflectionsofhostandguests…………………………..58Reflectionandanalysis…………………………...…………………………...……………….61Attemptingtoembodytheavatar…………………………...………………………….....62Summary…………………………...…………………………...…………………………...………64Contributionstoknowledge…………………………...…………………………...………..65

Mariela:cmd,click,control………………………………………………………66

Introduction…………………………...…………………………...…………………………...….67Observations:digitalgesturesmenuasperformancescore……………………69Planning:liveinterventionasMariela…………………………...………………………71ActionandFacilitation:Reflectionsashost…………………………...………………72Reflectionandanalysis…………………………...…………………………...……………….73Removingthedigital…………………………...…………………………...…………………..73Summary…………………………...…………………………...…………………………..............75Contributionstoknowledge…………………………...…………………………...………..76

MarielaHosomaki………………………………………………………………...….77

Introduction…………………………...…………………………...………………………….......78Observations:achievinghybridspace…………………………...………………………78Planning:tacticsforparticipatoryperformance…………………………...………..79Theinvitation…………………………...…………………………...………………………….....81Thedisclaimer…………………………...…………………………...…………………………..83ActionandFacilitation:Firstencounters…………………………...………………….83Scriptforperformer-hostattheentrance…………………………...…………………84ActionandFacilitation:Reflectionsofguest…………………………...……………..85Reflectionandanalysis:PerformingasMariela…………………………...……...…86Artistictacticsinparticipatoryperformancepractice…………………………....87Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………..89Contributionstoknowledge……………………………………………….………………...91

ThesisReview…………………………………………………………………………..92

Contributionstoknowledge…………………………...…………………………...……….95Whatnext?…………………………...…………………………...………………………….........95

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………..…...96

vi

FIGURESFigure1.TheBullringProject:Thomas.Photographicprintandtext.2003,p.10Figure2.ParticipantsusingChatBox,interactivenetworkedinstallation,2007,p.11Figure3.Methodologicaldiagram,June2012,p.14

Figure4.RecipesforParticipation,ShowandListenseminar,NottinghamTrentUniversity,2011,p.16Figure5.EncounterinSecondLifeasdigitalavatarMarielaEyre,April2010,p.23

Figure6.DocumentaryInterviewwithRebeccaGamble,publishedonline,2016,p.35

Figure7.TheRomanticEncounter,2010,p.36Figure8.TheRomanticEncounter,methodologicaldiagram,2010,p.37Figure9.ChatBox,networkedinteractiveinstallation,2007,p.38Figure10.FirstencounterinSecondLife,2009,p.40Figure11.GesturesMenuinSecondLife,2010,p.42Figure12.Thevirtualcafé,2010,p.43Figure13.AssignedavatarsinTheRomanicEncounter,2010,p.44Figure14.TheRomanticEncounter,2010,p.47Figure15.TheRomanticEncounter,2010,p.48Figure16.TheRomanticEncounter,2010,p.49Figure17.“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,2011,p.53Figure18.“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,methodologicaldiagram,2011,p.55Figure19.“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,workshopparticipants,2011,p.57Figure20.“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,digitalchoreographinSecondLife,2011,p.61Figure21.Mariela,cmd,click,control,gesturesmenuascafémenu,2011,p.67

Figure22.Mariela,cmd,click,control,observingdigitalmovement,2011,p.68

Figure23.Mariela,cmd,click,control,methodologicaldiagram,2011,p.69

Figure24.Mariela,cmd,click,control,2011,p.71

Figure25.Mariela,cmd,click,control,videostill,2011,p.74

Figure26.MarielaHosomaki,2014,p.77

Figure27.MarielaHosomaki,2014,p.80

Figure28.MarielaHosomaki,methodologicaldiagram,2014,p.86

1

INTRODUCTION

Researchenquiry

Howdoweliveonline?Howcan‘hybridspace’becriticallyquestionedthrough

participatoryperformanceenquiry?Andhowcanweunderstandtheroles,

relationshipsandresponsibilitiesoftheartistandparticipantinthismethodology?

Theoverarchingresearchquestioninthisthesisto‘howdowelive’originatesfromthe

theoreticalgroundingsof‘theeveryday’,inparticulartoHenriLefebvre’sCritiquedela

viequotidienneI(1947).Inthisresearch,however,thequestionbecomesspecifictoa

contemporaryeveryday,thatis,lifeonline.Thiscriticalinvestigationtakesplace

throughtheexaminationofthevirtualspaceofSecondLife,whichactsascatalysttothe

newspacesinwhichwenowresideasdigitalavatars.Thisenquiryisinformedand

refinedthroughacyclicalprocessofactionandreflectioninfourpiecesofparticipatory

performancepractice,whicheachgaincriticalinsightandraisenewquestionsinthe

understandingofhowweliveonline,throughandbetweenphysicalandvirtualspace:

inahybridspace.

Proposition

ThethesistitlereferstoMicheldeCerteau’sThePracticeofEverydayLife(1984),in

whichheexaminestheeverydaypracticesofordinarypeople,andtheindividualand

tactical‘waysofoperating’intheeveryday.Forthetheoristsof‘theeveryday’,thereis

aninsistednecessitytocreatestrategies(Lefebvre1947);constructsituations(Debord

1957);ordesigntactics(deCerteau1984)tocriticallyreflectonwhatmightotherwise

gounnoticed.Thisresearchproposesthateverydaylifeisnowalsolivedonline,in

virtualspaces,throughdigitalscreensandmobiletechnologies.Thisbecomesan

everydayinwhichweinhabitbothphysicalandvirtualspacesimultaneously,thus

affectingoureverydaypracticesofcommunication.Oureverydayis,therefore,now

livedbetweenphysicalandvirtualspace,ina‘hybridspace’,augmentedwith

2

technologies,whereweincreasinglyperformonlineasdigitalversionsofourselves:

avatars.Theincreasingfamiliarityofinhabitingandinteractingonlinecreatesanew

necessitytodesign‘tactics’tocriticallyreflectonthepracticeofeveryday(virtual)life,

inparticularhowwecommunicate.The‘hybridspace’betweenthephysicalandvirtual

canbeunderstoodas“aspaceinmotionandaninteractionbetweenperceived,

conceived,livedandvirtualspace.Thisspaceisformednotonlybymaterialityand

socialandpoliticalactions,butalsobydigitaltechnology”(Kraan,2006,p.39).This

researchexamineshowtheblurringbetweenthephysicalandvirtualspacecanbe

achievedconceptually,throughthetacticofparticipatoryperformance,ratherthan

technologicallywithaugmentedtechnology.Thisconceptualblurringofspacesis

examined,inparticular,inthepractice-ledenquirythroughattemptstoembodythe

digitalavatar,Mariela,inperformativeactionsinbothvirtualandphysicalspace.

Thethesisinvestigateshybridspacethroughtheinteractionbetweenvirtualand

physicalspaceandthecyclicalactionandreflectionofparticipatoryperformancein

fourpiecesofpractice-ledenquiry.Thesepiecesdevelopandtestoutnewtactics,

includingblurringtheboundariesbetweenthephysical–virtualspace,choreographing

physicalmovementusingdigitalrulesasperformancescores,re-performingthe

everyday,virtualcommunicationpracticesobservedinSecondLife,andperformingas

digitalavatar.

Inthisresearch,SecondLife2becomesthelocationforsite-specificinvestigationinthe

samewayartistsapproachsitesforinvestigationtouncoversocialandpolitical

problematicsthatexist,whichrequirequestioningfromanewperspective.In

consideringBenHighmore’sanalysisoftheconceptof‘theeveryday’as“thosemost

repeatedactions,thosemosttravelledjourneys,thosemostinhabitedspacesthatmake

up,literally,thedaytoday”(1974,p.1),thiscannotnecessarilyberelatedtothe

virtualworldofSecondLife.Asanonlinevirtualspaceitisnotthemostinhabited,

instead,thisvirtualspaceactsasthedeparturepointandcatalystforthispractice-led

enquiry:toexaminetherelationshipbetweenphysicalandvirtualspaceandthe

2SecondLifeisanonlinevirtualworld,createdbyAmericancompanyLindenLabin2003,inwhichusersinhabitthevirtualspaceasadigitalavatarandencounteroneanotherpredominantlythroughtextandgesturalformsofcommunication.

3

possibilitiesforachievingandquestioningthenotionofa‘hybridspace’.SecondLife

offersaheightenedexampleofthevirtualpracticesthatcanbeaccountedforacrossall

otheronlinesocialplatforms.Inthisresearchitisconsideredaperformancespacedue

toitsperformativenature;theawarenessofonesavatarsbodythroughthedifferent

viewingpoints‘inworld’(Rackam2006),theperceivedanonymity,theawarenessofa

liveaudienceandtheobservedbehavioursoftheavatarsthatinhabitthisspace.Itis

thesocialbehavioursandcommunicationpracticesthatweperforminourlives,in

bothonlineandofflinespacesthatIexamineinthisresearch.Inasimilarmethodtoa

Situationist3modeofinterveningintheeveryday,changingthecontextor‘framing’and

re-framing(Goffman1974),thisresearchintendstodrawattentionto“themost

repeatedactions”(Highmore1974)ofvirtualspace,tohighlighttheproblematicsthat

existandthereforenecessitatecriticalquestioningthroughnewtactics.

Inthisresearchitisthroughperformativeandparticipatoryactionandreflectionthat

theenquirytakesplace.Theperformativetacticsemployedinthepractice,of

interventions,eventsandencounterswithspacesandpeople,areasignificantanda

consideredcomponentofthework.Theseincludethewritteninstructionorinvitation,

thecontextandtheduration,whichareappliedtostructuretheactivationand

facilitationofparticipatoryperformances.SimilarlytotheFluxus4‘eventscores’ofthe

1960s(Brecht1959),observationsofvirtualcommunicationpracticesandthedigital

rule-basedinteractionbecomescoresforperformancescripts“toframeeveryday

actionsasminimalisticperformances”(Higgins2002,p.2).

Participatoryperformancecelebratesandactivatesanaudience,encouragingthemto

participateandperforminresponsetoaninvitation,instructionorstructured

situation.Byacceptingtheinvitationorchoosingtorespondtheparticipantbecomes

entrustedwithanactiveroletoshape,developordeterminethepiece,resulting

occasionallyinparticipantagencyandoccasionallyinartistvulnerability.Thereflection

3Situationistmodesengageintheconstructionofsituationsas“momentsoflifeconcretelyanddeliberatelyconstructedbythecollectiveorganisationofaunitaryambienceandagameofevents”(InternationaleSituationniste#1June1958).4Fluxusisamovementbornofthe1960sinwhichaninternationalnetworkofartistsblurredtheboundariesbetweenartandlife.Oneofthewaysinwhichtheydidsowasthroughthe‘eventscore’,tostructureexperimentalperformanceworks,whichcouldbecarriedoutbytheartistoranother.

4

andanalysisoftheparticipatoryperformanceenquiry,fromthepositionoftheartist

and/ortheparticipant,examinesandchallengestheroles,relationshipsand

responsibilitiespresentinthismethodology.Anditisthroughtheactionandreflection

ofthismethodologythatnewknowledgeisgeneratedandinwhich“performanceas

knowingtakesusbeyondthequotidian”(Salter,2010,p.349).

Thesisstructure

Thethesisstructureisbasedonthecyclicalmethodologydevelopedinthepractice-led

enquiryasaniterativeprocessofactionandreflection,adaptingDavidKolb’s

experientiallearningcycle(1984)to;observe;plan;action;facilitation;observation;

reflection.Thecorestagesofthiscyclicalprocessareusedtostructurethefourmain

chaptersofpractice-ledenquirythatexistasatextual-visualthesissubmissionanda

documentaryfilm,whichdrawstogetherthecriticalanalysisoftheresearch.Thisis

presentedwithinthethesisandonlineplatform:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com

Inordertoappropriatelysetthecontextforhowtheresearchisapproachedandto

outlinethemethodologicalandtheoreticalgroundingwhichinformsthepractice-led

enquiry,themethodologyandcontextchaptersarepresentedinthebeginningofthe

thesis.Inparticular,thesechapterspositiontheframeworkforthelanguageandcritical

analysisofhospitality,participation,theeverydayandhybridspace,beforetheir

examinationthroughpracticeinthesubsequentchapters.

Thesubsequent,fourcorechapterswithinthethesisareeachaccompaniedby

photographicimagesandanonlinevisualchapter,offurtherphotographicandvideo

documentation,whichisintendedforthereadertoviewbeforeandalongsideeach

writtenchapter,asanintegralpartofthethesissubmission.Thewritten-visualthesis,

togetherwiththeculminatingdocumentaryfilm,revealtheaction,reflectionand

criticalanalysisoftheenquirythroughthecyclicalmethodology,asvisualisedinthe

methodologicaldiagramsdevelopedtodemonstratethesix-partprocessforeachpiece.

5

Thethesisrevealstheresearchprocessandrefinestheresearchquestioningthrough

thefourpiecesofparticipatoryperformanceaspractice-ledenquiry.Theseinclude:The

RomanticEncounter,apublicparticipatoryeventthattookplacesimultaneouslyinLee

Rosy’sTeaCaféandavirtualreplicacaféinSecondLife;“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,a

participatoryworkshopchoreographingmovementusingthegesturesmenuofSecond

Life;Mariela:[cmd],control,click,apublicperformanceinterventionasdigitalavatar

Mariela,andMarielaHosomaki,agastronomicone-to-oneparticipatoryperformanceas

digitalavatarMariela.

Thewrittensubmissionofthethesisisstructuredinthefollowingchapters

• CriticalEnquiry

• Methodology

• Context

• TheRomanticEncounter

• “Let’sDanceSugarLips”

• Mariela:cmd,click,control

• MarielaHosomaki

• ThesisReview

Thevisualsubmissionofthethesisonline(www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com)is

structuredinthefollowingwebsitepages,asaccompanyingchapterstothefourcore

practice-ledenquirychapters.Thisincludesadocumentaryfilmandinterviewwiththe

authortooutlinethecriticalenquiry,methodology,documentationandoutcomesofthe

practice-ledenquiry.

• ResearchEnquiry:Documentaryfilmandinterviewwiththeauthor

• www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com

• TheRomanticEncounter:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/the-romantic-encounter

• “Let’sDanceSugarLips”:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/lets-dance-sugar-lips

6

• Mariela:cmd,click,control:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/mariela-cmd-click-control

• MarielaHosomaki:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/mariela-hosomaki

ChapterSummaries

CriticalEnquiry

Thischapterestablishesthecriticalenquiryoftheresearchthroughrevealingthe

originsofthepreviousparticipatoryperformancepracticeoftheauthor.Thisisa

reflectiveaccountwhichmapsthedevelopmentandemergenceofthepractice-led

research,theinvestigationofpublicspace,theencounterswithpeoplewhoinhabit

thesespacesandtheeverydaytechnologieswhichbegintostructuremodesofhuman-

to-humancommunication.Thischapterincludesvisualdocumentationandanalysisof

earlywork,whichisalsodiscussedintheinterviewwiththeauthor,inthe

documentaryfilm,publishedintheonlinesubmission.

Methodology

Thischapterrevealsthemethodologyforthispractice-ledresearchasenquiring

throughpractice(Frayling1993)andreflectinginandonaction(Schön1983).Ahybrid

methodologyofActionResearchandHospitalityisformed;actionresearchproviding

thesystematicandcyclicalprocessofactionandreflectionandhospitalityofferingan

artisticapproachtothefacilitationofparticipatoryperformanceasinvestigation.An

intimaterelationshipbetweenpracticeandtheoryisthereforedevelopedinthis

reflexivemethodology.Thechapteridentifiestheoriginsanddevelopmentofthe

methodologyandgivesdetailintheparticipationresearch,whichhasinformedthe

understandingandterminologyoftheroles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesbetween

theartistandaudience.Thisdetailsinitialreflectionsfromparticipationin‘performing

ashost’and‘performingasguest’,whichdevelopstheunderstandingoftheconceptof

hospitalityinparticipatoryperformance.

7

Context

Thischapterdetailsthecontextualframeworkfortheresearch.Thisincludesthe

theoreticalandartisticquestioningoftheeveryday,informedbyLefebvre,deCerteau,

Debord,Perec,Manovic,Kluitenberg,BourriaudandBishop;theinterestinthe

investigationofthevirtualspaceofSecondLife;thegroundingfortheresearchasan

on-goingartisticpracticetoexploretechnologyandhumaninteractionparticipation

andperformance;andthepoliticalpositionforcriticallyquestioningthefamiliarityof

newtechnologiesandthewayswecommunicateonline,towardsthedevelopmentofa

‘hybridspace’.

TheRomanticEncounter

Accompaniedbythevisualchapter:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/the-romantic-encounter

Thischapterrevealsthecyclicalprocessofthefirstpieceofpractice-ledenquiryofthe

live,publicparticipatoryperformanceTheRomanticEncounter,throughitsoriginsand

observations,planning,actionandfacilitationthroughthe‘reflectionsashost’,analysis

andsummary.Thispiecequestions:Howdoeverydaysocialpracticesandetiquettesof

meetingandcommunicatinginphysicalspacealterwhentransferredtoavirtual

space?Andhowaretheboundariesbetweenthephysicalandvirtualblurredinthelive

participatoryperformanceeventbetweenthetwospaces?

“Let’sDanceSugarLips”

Accompaniedbythevisualchapter:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/lets-dance-sugar-lips

Thischapterrevealsthecyclicalprocessofthesecondpieceofpractice-ledenquiryof

theparticipatoryperformanceworkshop“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,throughits

observations,planning,actionandfacilitationthroughthe‘reflectionsashost’and

‘reflectionsasguest’,analysisandsummary.Thispiecequestions:Howdoeveryday

socialpracticesandetiquettesofmeetingandcommunicatinginvirtualspacealter

whentransferredtoaphysicalspace?Specificallyinvestigatingthegesturesmenuto

8

choreographmovementofdigitalavatarstobere-performedinaphysicalspace.And

howarethedifferencesbetweenthevirtualandphysicalexaminedintheparticipatory

performancetocameraandinthesubsequentvideodocumentationofthis

performance?

Mariela:cmd,click,control

Accompaniedbythevisualchapter:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/mariela-cmd-click-control

Thischapterrevealsthecyclicalprocessofthethirdpieceofpractice-ledenquiryofthe

liveperformanceinterventionofMariela,cmd,click,control,throughitsobservations,

planning,actionandfacilitationthroughthe‘reflectionsashost’,analysisandsummary.

Thispiecequestions:HowcantheeverydayvirtualpracticesofSecondLifebecome

tacticsforparticipatoryperformancetocriticallyquestionhybridspace?

MarielaHosomaki:

Accompaniedbythevisualchapter:

www.thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/mariela-hosomaki

Thischapterrevealsthecyclicalprocessofthefourthandculminatingpieceofpractice-

ledenquiryoftheone-to-oneparticipatoryperformanceofMarielaHosomaki,through

itsobservations,planning,actionandfacilitationthroughthe‘reflectionsashost’and

‘reflectionsasguest’,analysisandsummary.Thispiecequestions:Howcantacticsof

participatoryperformancecriticallyquestionhybridspace?Andwhatarethepotential

roles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesoftheartist-hostandtheparticipant-guestin

thisprocess?

ThesisReview

Thethesisconcludeswithareviewofthepractice-ledenquiry.Thischapter

summarisestheoutcomesoftheresearchquestioning:Howdoweliveonline?Howcan

hybridspacebecriticallyquestionedthroughparticipatoryperformanceenquiry?And

howcanwedefinetheroles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesoftheartistand

participantinthisprocess?

9

Contributionstoknowledge

Thischapterconcludesbyidentifyingthecontributionsgeneratedthroughthe

embodiedpractice,inwhichthecontributionstoknowledgearegainedthroughthe

actionandreflectionofparticipatoryperformance;eachraisingnewcritical

questioningandanembodiedunderstandingofthecritiqueofeveryday(virtual)life.

Thisincludesthenewcriticalquestioningthatthisresearchraisesandtheongoing

practice-ledresearch,post-PhD.

10

CRITICALENQUIRY

Revealingtheoriginsoftheresearch:areflectiveaccount

Figure1.TheBullringProject:Thomas.Photographicprintandtext.2003

11

Every time I look at this image of Thomas it makes me smile. This image captures my first artistic investigation into a social and public space; the Bullring Market in Birmingham in 2003, during the early renovation of what is now the Bullring Shopping Centre and Selfridges store. During this investigation I spoke with the people living and working around the development site, we talked about the changes to this space and how this affected their everyday. In creating a photographic series of these encounters for my BA degree at Birmingham Institute of Art and Design, I presented their portrait with an insight to each person, through the simple statement of what they ate for breakfast.

This offers a visualisation to the core concepts of an ongoing practice and enquiry into social space, interactivity and encounters, framed by the everyday. A fascination with people drives the artistic practice, through a captivation with the interactivities and encounters that unfold in social spaces. Observations and accounts of these can offer insights into individual personalities, characteristics and relationships, but also into a wider social and cultural context of contemporary society. While there is always something emotive about the individual and relational aspects of the everyday, these observations can also raise socio-political questions.

I feel a strong necessity for us to be playful and creative in response to our environment: to draw attention to the overlooked, to feel like an individual and to reclaim ownership of the spaces we inhabit. The city becomes my playground: it is the stage for playful interventions, durational games and staged performances. I am driven by the live and unpredictable nature of encounters in the city and the human interactivity in these private and public social spaces.

Figure2.ParticipantsusingChatBox,interactivenetworkedinstallation,2007

12

The emergence of online social spaces, in my early twenties, became a new playground for this practice. This began with the exploration of Skype as platform for a series of remote encounters during my MA at University College Falmouth. It was, however, through this early experimentation that I started to question the need for these online spaces and communications (through screens) to maintain a grounding relationship to the physical world. On reflection, it is not the digital context or the technology that drives these investigations, but instead a fascination with how encounters and communications differ between online and offline spaces.

These are not purely self-reflective enquiries, but also participatory ones. I do not wish to play these games alone. Through often-playful interventions and staged performances, we make the familiar unfamiliar, uncovering new insights, new questions.

Although drawing attention to and framing something seemingly small and insignificant, such as what one man eats for his breakfast, or in an online context, how two avatars introduce themselves to each other, these can offer specific insights to the continually shifting site of the everyday. It is these origins and interests that ground the critical enquiry in this PhD, to the critique of everyday (virtual) life.

13

METHODOLOGY

Artisticresearch

InthisPhDtheterminologyofartisticresearchisusedtoarticulatetheintimate

relationshipbetweentheoryandpracticethroughareflexivemethodology.

[Artisticresearch]concernsresearchthatdoesnotassumetheseparationof

subjectandobject,anddoesnotobserveadistancebetweentheresearcherand

thepracticeofart.Instead,theartisticpracticeitselfisanessentialcomponent

ofboththeresearchprocessandtheresearchresults.

(Borgdorff2006,pp.6-7)

Thisparticipatoryandperformativeartisticresearchenquiresthroughpractice

(Frayling1993)andreflectsinandonaction(Schön1983),individuallyandwith

participants.Thisresearchintendstointertwinepractice,theory,contextualization

andreflection,inacyclicalandreflexiveresearchprocess,togeneratenewknowledge.

ActionResearch:ActionandReflection

Thisresearchisgroundedinanactionresearchmethodology,which,accordingto

McniffandWhitehead(2009),mustmeetthethreecoreconditionsofpolitics,

principlesandprocessoftheresearch.Inthispractice-ledenquiry,thepoliticsarethe

increasingfamiliarityofinhabitingandinteractinginvirtualspaceandhowthiseffects

humancommunication.Todrawattentiontotheseneweveryday(virtual)practices,a

participatoryandperformativeenquiryisconductedthroughthere-framingandre-

performingofonlinebehavioursobservedinthevirtualworldofSecondLife.The

principleofparticipationisintegral,whichseekstoactivateandfacilitateparticipants

inactiveparticipation,inwhichtherolesandresponsibilitiesofartistandparticipant

arequestioned.Finally,theprocessofactionandreflectionisfollowedsystematicallyto

enableanalysisandtogeneratenewknowledge.

14

Thedetailedsystematicprocessofthisartisticresearch,asvisualisedinthe

methodologicaldiagram,involvesanadaptationofDavidKolb’sfour-partcycleofplan-

act-observe-reflect(1984)toasix-partcycleofobserve;plan;action;facilitate;

observe;reflect.

Figure3.Methodologicaldiagram,June2012

15

Thiscyclebeginswith(1)observationsinthevirtualworldSecondLife,(2)this(and

thepreviouscycle)informsthestrategicplanningofactionsandtheconceptsfor

performances,testedoutinactivitiessuchasSummerLodge5;(3)theactionisthe

performativeartpracticeofliveevents,interventionsandworkshopsasparticipatory

performance;(4)theinvitationandfacilitationofparticipantsintheseactionsinvolves

hosting;(5)observationsandevaluation‘inaction’isachievedthroughliveobservation,

reflectedinthe‘reflectionsashost’livewriting;(6)finally,reflection‘onaction’is

achievedthroughviewingthedocumentationofphotographs,video,conversations,

disseminationofthepractice,andcontextualandtheoreticalanalysis.Inthefirstcycle

ofthisartisticresearchforexample,TheRomanticEncounter,observationsofthe

playfulandflirtatiousnatureofcommunicationbetweenavatarsandthetestingoutof

ideasduringSummerLodge2010informedtheconceptandplanningforaspeed-

datingeventbetweenavatarsandhumans.Theactionwasaparticipatoryperformance

eventbetweenavirtualandphysicalcafé,inwhichparticipantswerehostedand

facilitatedtoperformasassignedavatars.Observationsoftheparticipants’

performanceandreflectionsthroughconversationsandreviewofdocumentation

informedfurtherquestioningforthenextcycle.Thepracticeandthetheoryinformone

anotherthroughtheactionandreflectionwithinthisresearch.AsMcNiffand

Whitehead(2009)suggest,asthepracticeevolves,sotoodoesthetheory.

Reflectioninandonaction

InTheReflectivePractitioner(1983),DonaldSchönprovidesanepistemologyofartand

designpracticetoobservehowprofessionalsreflectinaction(during),andonaction

(following)theirpractice.Asemphasizedabove,thisartisticresearchreflectiontakes

placebothinactionandonaction.The‘action’,here,istheliveeventorinterventionof

participatoryperformance,oftentakingplacewithgroupsofparticipantsorinpublicto

5SummerLodgeisanannualeventatNottinghamTrentUniversityinwhichcurrentstaff,researchstudentsandexternalartistsinitiatenewdialoguesandcriticalexchangethroughengagingtogetherinaperiodofsustainedstudiopractice.

16

anaudienceofpotentialparticipants.Inthisartisticresearch,observationand

facilitationofparticipantstakesplaceusingreflectioninaction,whileconversations,

andtimespentwiththedocument-materialscollected(includingphotographsand

videos)takesplacefollowingtheliveaction,usingreflectiononaction.The

combinationofreflectioninactionandreflectiononactionresultsindetailedreflection

andanalysis.Thisgeneratesnewknowledgeandalsonewquestioning,thusinforming

thenextcycle.

Thereflectiononactionbringstheresearchprocesstoaninterimconclusion,andis

disseminatedatthispointtotheparticipantsandtoapublicaudience,through

performance,screenings,websites,exhibitions,talksandconferencepapers.The

outcomesfromthispublicdisseminationfurtherinformthereflectionprocess,through

theconversationandfeedbackfromaudiences.Thereflection,analysisand

disseminationtotheresearchcommunityandthewiderpublictogeneratedebateand

newknowledgeis,accordingtoBorgdorff(2006,p.18),“imperativetothedistinction

betweenpractice-as-researchandpractice-in-itself”.

Hospitality:ParticipationandFacilitation

Figure4.RecipesforParticipation,Show&Listenseminar,NottinghamTrentUniversity,2011

17

AccordingtoSwann(2002,p.56)“Participationandcollaborationinactionresearch

requiresthatallparticipantsshareinthedevelopmentalprocessinanemancipatory

role”.Whilethisiswidelyacknowledgedasanintegralcomponentofactionresearch,

thereislittleevidenceofhowresearchersachievetheengagementandempowerment

ofparticipantsinacollaborativeandreflexiveresearchprocess.Theconsiderationof

theparticipantinmyownparticipatoryartpracticeisanethicalone.Iconsidermy

rolethatofinvitingandfacilitatingparticipantsinacreativeandcollaborativeprocess.

Thisdifferstointeractiveworkwhereparticipantsareonlyableto“triggera

predeterminednarrativethroughaninput–outputdeviceandwhocanthenobserve

passivelytheprogrammedresultsofhisorheraction”(Broeckmann2007,p.200).

Inthisresearch,Ihaveexperimentedwithanumberofmethods-as-tacticstoinvite,

engageandfacilitateparticipants,toquestiontheroles,relationshipsand

responsibilitieswithinparticipation.Throughactionandreflectionontherolesand

responsibilitiesofartistandparticipant,Ihavefoundthelanguageandconceptof

hospitality,tobeusefulinunderstandingtheconvivialandreciprocalrelationshipthat

takesplacebetweenartist(host)andparticipant(guest).

Thetermhospitalityhasnotwidelybeenusedinthediscussionsofparticipatory

practice,insteadthetermsrelationalaesthetics(Bourriaud2002),participation

(Bishop2010),collaborationandconversation(Kester2004)havebeenarticulatedand

contested.However,thelanguageofhospitalityisincreasinglybeingcelebratedwithin

contemporaryart,forexample,the2012exhibitionFeast:RadicalHospitalityin

ContemporaryArt,attheSmartMuseuminChicago,presenting“aretrospectiveof

internationalartistswhoseparticipatorypracticesinvolvetheproduction,sharing,or

performanceofcooking,eatinganddrinkingtogether”(SmartMuseum2012).The

2012LiverpoolBiennial,entitledTheUnexpectedGuest,thecuratorialprogramme

exploredthethemesofhospitality“asanattitude,codeofconductandmetaphor”

(LiverpoolBiennial2012),andthe2012WorldEventYoungArtists(WEYA)exhibition

presentedanartcategoryfor‘gastronomy’.

18

“Thesocialactsofsharingfood,drinkingbeer,dancingsamba,discussingpolitics,and

runningacafé”,areexamplesofartworks,providedbyClaireBishopinthetext

Participation,(2006,p.10)todescribeartworks“whichappropriatesocialformsasa

waytobringartandlifeclosertogether”.Whilefoodisnotthefocusofthisresearch,it

isacknowledgedasamethodartistsusetoinviteparticipants,tobeginanexchange

andcreateafeelingofconviviality,throughtheactofsharingfoodanddrink.Italso

indicatestotheelementoftrustinvolvedintherelationshipbetweenartist-hostand

participant-guest,whichbecomesevidentintheexchangeoffoodanddrink.Other

socialactivities,suchasdancing,chatting,dating,becomecommonmethodsfor

exchangeswithparticipants,duetothesharedunderstandinginvolvedintheseactions.

Withinthisresearch,thesocialaspectispartofthemethodologyaswellasthestudy.

TheobservationswithinSecondLifeareoftenrelatedtothesocialbehavioursinthese

spaces,andaninterestinhowsocialactivities,suchasthosementionedabove,are

translatedinvirtualworlds,andvisaversa.Thesocialspaceofthecaféisusedasasite

tointerveneandperformin,duetotheimplicitetiquettesinherentinthesespaces,

makingthemrichsitestouseforthisartisticresearch.

Roles,relationships,responsibilities

Ibegantousethelanguageofhospitality,followingreadingJacquesDerrida’stextOf

Hospitality(2000),whichinformedtheartisticresearchpaperTheArtistasHost:

convivialactsinparticipatoryartpractice,presentedatTransmission:Hospitality

ConferenceatSheffieldHallamUniversity(2010),inwhichIproposed,forthefirsttime,

thatartistshostaudiencesinconvivialexchangesinparticipatorypractice.This

developedtoamoredetailedanalysisoftheroles,relationshipsandresponsibilities

betweentheartist(host)andtheparticipant(guest),presentinthepracticalchapters

ofthethesis.

Participatoryperformanceasenquiry

AccordingtoMichaelOakeshott(1933)therebecomesanecessityforresearchersto

un-familiarisethemselveswiththespaceorobjectthattheyarestudyingtobeableto

offeraninsightandcriticalanalysisofit.Hedescribestheresearchprocessofstepping

19

outsideoureverydayexperienceofpeople,objectsandplaces,andsubjectingthemto

differentsortsofexaminationasan“arrestofexperience”(Oakeshott1933inClough

andNutbrown2007,p.23).CloughandNutbrownsuggestthatthis“arrestof

experience”canbecharacterisedbyfourformsofradicalenquiry.Theseareradical

looking,radicallistening,radicalreadingandradicalquestioning(Cloughand

Nutbrown2007,p.23).Theiruseoftheterm‘radical’asenquiry,impliesafurther

criticalandpoliticalapproachtomakethefamiliarstrange,toidentifygapsin

knowledgeandtomakeaninformedposition.Inthefieldofperformanceart,theterm

‘radicalprototypes’wasusedbyAllanKaprow(1954)todescribetheexperientialand

experimentalperformanceartofhappenings.JudithRodenbeck(2011)arguesthat

thesehappeningsoffered“astrongandcannycritiqueofcontemporarysociety”.

Inthisresearch,the‘radicalenquiry’takesplacethroughthetacticsofparticipatory

performancetocritiquetheeverydaypracticesofvirtualspace.

20

CONTEXT

“Inonesensethereisnothingmoresimpleandmoreobviousthaneverydaylife.

Howdopeoplelive?Thequestionmaybedifficulttoanswer,butthatdoesnot

makeitanythelessclear.Inanothersensenothingcouldbemoresuperficial:itis

banality,triviality,repetitiveness.Andinyetanothersensenothingcouldbemore

profound.Itisexistenceandthe‘lived’,revealedastheyarebeforespeculative

thoughthastranscribedthem:whatmustbechangedandwhatisthehardestof

alltochange”(Lefebvre,1967).

Thisresearchproposesthateverydaylifeisnowalsolivedonline:wework,play,

communicateandsocialiseonline,invirtualspaces,throughdigitalscreensandmobile

technologies.Asinteractioninvirtualspacebecomesincreasinglyfamiliarand

ordinary,thiscreatesnewpracticesofeveryday(virtual)lifeandthus,aswiththe

theoristsof‘theeveryday’,new‘tactics’becomenecessarytodrawattentionto

criticallyquestionthe‘hybridspace’whichemergesthroughthedualinhabitingof

physical-virtualspacesimultaneously.

TheEveryday

Theconceptoftheeveryday,whichisalsoreferredtoasthequotidian,thehabitual,the

ordinaryandthebanalisusedasanappropriatetheoreticalframeworkforthetheories

andpracticesthatIobserveinthisresearch.Thephrase‘theeveryday’isanowa

recognisedconceptincontemporaryartpractice,andthetitletooneofthe

Whitechapel:DocumentsinContemporaryArt(Johnstone,2008).Inmyuseoftheterm

‘theeveryday’Iconsiderthisintwo-parts:thepracticesoftheeverydayandthespaces

oftheeveryday.Thepracticesoftheeverydayrefertotherepeatedactionsand

practicesthatmostindividualshaveincommon,thisincludescooking,eating,washing,

travellingandsleeping,forexample.Thespacesoftheeverydayareconsideredthose

inhabitedmostfrequently,thisincludesthehome,thestreet,thecityandthe

workplace,forinstance.However,whenreferringtothe‘online’practicesandspacesof

theeveryday,thesediffer.Onlineeverydaypracticesalsorefertotherepeatedactions

andpracticesofindividualsexcepttheircontextisonline;thesepracticesinclude

21

posting,tagging,commentingandsurfing,forexample.Theonlinespacesofthe

everydayarethemostfrequentlyinhabited,includingemailportals,socialnetworking

sites,onlinegamesorvirtualenvironments.

Theoreticalstudiesoftheeveryday,includingthatofStevenJohnstone(2008),mapthe

activitiesofculturaltheoristsandartistssincetheearly1960s.Whilethisisthestudy

ofwhatGeorgesPerec(1974,p.210)describesas‘thebanal,thequotidian,theobvious,

thecommon,theordinary,theinfra-ordinary,thebackgroundnoise,andthehabitual’,

itisthecriticalquestioningthroughtactics,actions,interventionsandeventsthatthis

hasbeenachieved.Thetheoreticalframeworkoftheeverydayanalysesthepractices,

actions,experiencesandspacesofeverydaylife.ThetheoriesofHenriLefebvre,Guy

Debord,GeorgesPerecandMicheldeCerteaumapahistoricalandtheoretical

landscapefortheanalysisoftheeveryday.Ofparticularsignificanceforthisresearch,

arethemethodsand‘tactics’thesetheoristsoffertothereader,encouragingplayful

andcreativeresponsestoeverydayspaces,inordertochallengetherulesofspacesand

radicallyinvestigatewhatcouldotherwisegounnoticed.

AsStevenJohnstone(2008)discussesthereareanumberofpositionstowardsthe

personal,aestheticandpoliticaldesiresofartiststoinvestigatetheeverydayin

contemporaryart.Theseincludetheviewthatthereisvalueinordinarybehaviour;a

desiretouncovertheextraordinary;tomakethefamiliarunfamiliar;touse

ethnographictacticstorecordinterestingencountersandhappeningsortoquestion

whathappenswhennothinghappens;awishtocelebrateordinarypeopleandthe

individualvoice;andaresponsibilitytosociallyengagecommunities.Heexplainsthat:

“theriseoftheeverydayincontemporaryartisusuallyunderstoodintermsofadesire

tobringtheuneventfulandoverlookedaspectsoflivedexperienceintovisibility”and

the“implicitnotionthataturntotheeverydaywillbringartandlifeclosertogether”

(Johnstone2008,pp.12-13).Individualandcollectiveactionsthatarepolitical,playful,

creative,orthoughtprovokingoffercriticalinvestigationsintotheeveryday,andcan

drawattentiontotheoverlookedandofferinsightsintocontemporarysociety.Thisis

whatartistsworkingwiththeeverydaycanoffer.Theirrolebecomesthatofan

observer,documenter,interpreter,activist,hostorfacilitator,negotiatingparticipatory

investigationsintoeverydaypractices,actions,experiencesandspaces.

22

SocialGeography

Theeverydayspacesunderinvestigationinthisresearchsharesimilaritieswiththe

methodsofsocialgeography,intheirexaminationofrelationshipsbetweensocieties

andthespacestheyoccupyanduse.Space/placehasanimportantroleinactively

constitutingsociety.AsSusanSmitharguesinSituatingSocialGeographies(1999),

therearethreerelationshipsbetweenspaceandsocietywithinsocialgeography,the

‘thirdspace’beingtheoneofmostsignificancehere.While‘firstspace’reflectssocial

activityand‘secondspace’constructssocialactivity,‘thirdspace’isameansof

resistanceandcelebration:“Ratherthanacceptingthesesocialconstructionsofspace,

wemightchallengethemthroughouruseofspace.Spacescanbeusedtoresist

oppressionandredefinesocialidentity”(Smith1999,citedinPainetal.2001p.4).

Thereisacloserelationshipheretohowpsychogeographychallengestheuseofspaces

andexplores“thebehaviouralimpactofurbanspace”onsociety(Coverley2010,p.10).

Inthisresearchtheconsiderationofthespacesinvestigatedare‘socialspaces’.Through

theinvestigationofencountersandinteractionsbetweenpeople,thesocialspace

becomesthesiteofinvestigationandintervention.InTheProductionofSpace,Henri

Lefebvre(1991,p.73)offersacriticalviewpointof‘socialspace’:

“(Social)spaceisnotathingamongotherthings,noraproductamongother

products:rather,itsubsumesthingsproduced,andencompassestheir

interrelationshipsintheircoexistenceandsimilarity–their(relative)order

and/or(relative)disorder.Itistheoutcomeofasequenceandsetofoperations…”

Whetherofflineoronline,socialspacesareaccessibleandmostlypublicsitesinwhich

peoplegatherandinteract,suchascafésandbarsorsocialplatformslikeFacebookor

virtualcafésinenvironmentslikeSecondLife.ClaireDocherty(2004,p.9)arguesthat:

“Ourunderstandingofsitehasshiftedfromafixed,physicallocationtosomewhere

orsomethingconstitutedthroughsocial,economic,culturalandpolitical

processes”.

23

SecondLife

Figure5.EncounterinSecondLifeasdigitalavatarMarielaEyre,April2010

SecondLife(SL)isanonlinevirtualworldcreatedin2003bytheAmericanCompany

LindenLab.UsersofSecondLife,called‘residents’,inhabitthisworldforfreeasdigital

avatars,andcommunicatewithoneanotherthroughinstantmessaging,gestures,and

voicechat.SLisavirtualworld,madeupofislandsanddigitalstructuresbuiltandpaid

forbyitsusers.Aneconomyexiststhroughthesellingofland,clothingandobjects

throughtheinternalcurrencyof‘Lindendollars’.Thecreativepossibilitieswithinthis

virtualspacearevast.AccordingtoCoryOndrejka,LindenLab’svicepresidentof

productdevelopment:

“Youcanbeawomansomeofthetimeandamantherestofthetime,andyou

don’tevenhavetolookhuman…therearehundredsofcontrols,whichallowfor

effectivelyinfinitepossibilitiesforhowyoucanlookin-world.Youcanlooklikea

realisticversionofyourself–oryoucanlookasoutlandishasyouwant.”

(citedinRackham,2006)

24

However,asMelindaRackham(2006,p.54)pointsout,despitethemyriadof

possibilitiesandfreedomofchoiceintherepresentationsofavatarsas‘onlineselves’,it

appearsthattheoppositeistrue;withmanyselectingan‘offthepegavatar’offeredby

LindenLab.Despiteoffering‘infinitepossibilitiesforhowtolook’andopportunities

forextraordinaryexperiencesandsocialencounterstherules,inventoriesandmenu’s

providedseemtoleadinteraction.MariaBacke(2009,p.109)proposesthat“rulesof

thesesocialspacesfunctionasafoundationandguidanceforidentityformation,andin

factalmostseemtoprescribeacertainwayofactingorbehaving”.Thisbecomes

evidentinthisartisticresearch,throughreflectionontheuseofthe‘gesturesmenu’

providedinSecondLife.WhilemuchresearchandartisticpracticeaboutSecondLife

focusesonbehaviour,identity,interactionandperformanceinthevirtual,digitalspace6

myresearchusesobservationsfromthevirtualandtheblurringbetweenthevirtual

andphysicaltoinvestigateapotentialhybridspacethatexistsbetween.theeveryday;

whichisnowalsolivedonline.Asoutlinedwithintheintroduction,SecondLifeisnot

consideredaneverydayspace,astheextraordinarypossibilitiesandencountersit

presents,suchasflying,transformingyouridentityorgenderinseconds,orteleporting

betweenlocations,arenottransferabletothephysicalworld.However,inGeorges

Perec’s(1974)definitionoftheeverydayas“thebanal,thequotidian,theobvious,the

common,theordinary,theinfra-ordinary,thebackgroundnoise,andthehabitual”,itis

possiblefortheseattributestobesaidofavirtualspacefrequentlyencounteredin

whichtherebecome‘common’languagesandetiquette,‘ordinary’behavioursand

‘habitual’practices.

WithinSecondLife,gesturesanddancingarekeyformsofcommunication,inthesocial

andpublicspaces;occupiedbyavatarsstruttingasifonacatwalk,movingtheirhips,

flickingtheirhairandtwirlingtheirhybridbodies.Eachofthesepublicspacesin

SecondLifeissimilar;thesamebehaviourisrepeatedbydifferentavatarsandappears

tobecomeaneverydayvirtualpracticeofthisspace.Groupsofavatarssharethespace

asaperformanceplatform;strutting,dancing,changingtheirappearance,and

occasionallyshoutingorannouncingsomethingobscureorrude.InFromRitualto

Theatre:Thehumanseriousnessofplay,VictorTurner(1982)definesritualas6SuchasPaulSermon,SecondFrontandEvaandFrancoMattes

25

essentially‘performance,enactment’,whichcanberelatedtotheperformanceof

movementandgesturesinSecondLife,whichappeartobeasocialeventandritual.As

MarvinCarlson(1996)pointsoutinPerformance:acriticalintroduction:

“ForGoffman,the“frame”isanorganizingprincipleforsettingapartsocialevents,

especiallythosethat,likeplayorperformance,takeonadifferentrelationshipto

normallifeandnormalresponsibilitiesthanthesameorsimilareventswouldhave

as“untransformedreality”outsidetheconfinesoftheframe.”(Goffman1974,

p157,citedinCarlson1996,p35-36)

InThePresentationofSelfinEverydayLife,ErvingGoffman(1959)definesperformance

as“alltheactivityofanindividualwhichoccursduringaperiodmarkedbyhis

continuouspresencebeforeaparticularsetofobserversandwhichhassomeinfluence

ontheobservers”(Goffman1959,p2).Whatarethedifferencesthentoperformancein

adigitalcontext,whereyoucan’tbesurewhoisobservingyouandwhenandwhat

influenceyoumayhaveonthem?Iwouldarguethat,toanextent,youareanobserver

ofyourownperformance,asMelindaRackam(2006,p.54)suggeststhrough

‘simultaneouslyoccupyingthethreepositionsofuser,viewer,andavatar’,andthrough

theseparationofyourselffromyourdigitalself.However,thismaybedifferentfor

thosewholivetheirlifethroughtheiravatar,andthereforemaynothavesucha

distancetotheiractualidentity.Thissharessimilaritiestohowweperforminother

networkedonlinecommunities,suchasFacebook,whereoneremainsadigitalself,

althoughnotthroughamaterialpresenceofanavatarcharacter,insteadinthewritten

profile,statementsaboutoneselfinthethirdpersonorinthecarefulselectionofwhat

imagestosharetoprojectaconsideredidentity.OrinYouTubewhereoneuploads,

publishesandwatchsvideosofoftenbanalacts;sharingprivatelivestoapublicand

worldwideaudience.

ThisresearchthereforequestionshowSecondLifecanactasaframeworkto

investigatetheeverydaypracticesofvirtualspacethroughaparticipatoryand

performativeartisticpractice.Thisinvolvestheinteractionbetweenthevirtualandthe

physical,blurringtheseboundariesandcreatingahybridspacethroughthere-

performanceofthedigitalgesturesofavatars.

26

HybridSpace

ErikKluitenberg(2006,p.8)arguesthat“wearelivinginanenvironmentinwhichthe

publicisreconfiguredbyamultitudeofmediaandcommunicationnetworks

interwovenintothesocialandpoliticalfunctionsofspacetoforma‘hybridspace’”.He

outlinestheimportanceofdesigning“freespacesandactiviststrategiestoencourage

publicandprivateactionwithinthishybridspace”(Kluitenberg,2006,p.8).Dutch

artistGordonSavicic,achievesthisinhisworkConstraintCity–Thepainofeveryday

life,performedaspartofTracingMobilityinNottingham,May2010,inwhichhe,and

willingparticipants,walkedthroughthecitywearingacorsetthattighteneddependent

onthenumberof“wirelesssignalstrengthofenclosedencryptednetworks:Thepiece

ofworkisadigitalartperformanceandacity-interventionthataddressesbothpublic

andprivatespacewithintherealmofeveryday‘constraints’”(Savicic2010).

Asoutlinedintheintroduction,hybridspacecanbeunderstoodas“aspaceinmotion

andaninteractionbetweenperceived,conceived,livedandvirtualspace.Thisspaceis

formednotonlybymaterialityandsocialandpoliticalactions,butalsobydigital

technology”(Kraan,2006,p.39).LevManovic(2005,p.4)considersthisinteraction,

throughthe“overlappinglayersofdataonthephysicalspaceascreatingan‘augmented

space’”.Unliketheexperienceofvirtualspace,augmentedspacemaintainsan

awarenessofthephysicalenvironmentwheninteractingwithdataandmobilescreens;

“thedisplayaddstoyouroverallphenomenologicalexperiencebutitdoesnottake

over”(Manovic,2005p.5).Mostcrucially,Manovicconsidersaugmentedspaceasnot

onlyinteractionachievedtechnologically,butalsoconceptually.HeusesCanadian

artist,JanetCardiff’s“audiowalks”asanexampletoillustrate“theaestheticpotentialof

overlayinganewinformationspaceoveraphysicalspace[…]Thepowerofthis

interactionliesintheinteractionbetweenthesetwospaces–betweenvisionand

hearingandbetweenpastandpresent”(Manovic,2005p.6).

Anotherartistthatachievesapowerfulinteractionbetweenvirtualandphysicalspace

isCanadianartistMichelleTeran.Thisexplorestheinteractionbetweentechnologiesor

onlinesocialmedianetworksinurbanenvironments.Shestagesinterventionsinthe

citysuchasguidedtours,walksandopen-airprojections,participatoryinstallations

27

andhappenings.InBuscandoalSr.Goodbar(2009)participantsjoinedabustourto

exploretheSpanishtownofMurcia.Thelandmarksforthistourwerenothistoric;

insteadtheywerelocationsofgeotaggedYouTubevideos.Ateachlocationthetour

guide(anactor)wouldleadthetourgrouptotheoriginallocationofthegeotagged

video,wheretheoriginator(s)ofthevideowouldbeencouraged(withpriorinvitation)

tore-performtheiroriginalvideotothegroupandtocamera.Thisincludedapiano

recitalinayoungmanshome,skateboardingtricksbyagroupunderabridgeand

singingasonginthestreet,originallyperformedwithfriendswhendrunk.Thesurprise

attentiontothemandtheawkwardnessoftheirlivere-performancedrewattentionto

theincreasingfamiliarityandcomfortablenessinperformingtoweb-cameraand

potentiallytheworld,whenpublishingonline.Mostinterestingly,thosewhodecline,

seeminglyduetofeelingembarrassed,aremoreembarrassedtoperformlivetoasmall

groupofpeoplethaninuploadingavideotoapubliconlinesite.Thisbecomesacritical

questioningofthepracticeofeveryday(virtual)life,inwhich,throughYouTube,one

cannowengageintheonlinebroadcastingofonesmundaneactivitiesthroughvideos,

statusupdatesandprofilepictures.Thisworkoffersinsightsintohow,withthe

increasingfamiliarityofbroadcastingoneselfonlineandtheperceivedanonymityof

virtualspace,thereperhapsbecomesaremovalfromwhomtheyareinteractingwith.

Inanotherexample,UKartistPaulSermon’sworkTheyLiveinSecondLife(2008),

“promptsasocialandcollectiveexperiencebetweenstrangersandbetweenrealities”.

PerformedbetweenthevirtualworldofSecondLifeandagalleryinManchesteraspart

ofFuturesonicFestival,itquestioned:

“IsSecondLifeaplatformforpotentialsocialandculturalchange?DoesSecond

Lifeinfluencefirstlives?AndcouldourfirstlifeexistencestarttoreflectourSecond

Lifeconscienceasthiscommunitycontinuestogrowanddevelopintothefuture?”.

ThisSecondLifeperformanceisofparticularinteresttomyresearchasitgoesbeyond

theboundariesofSecondLifeasascreen-basedinteractionbetweendigitalavatars

throughtheuseofacomputermouseandkeyboard.Itconnectedremoteonlineusers

athomeusingSecondLifetothoseinthe‘firstlife’environmentinManchester.It

achievedthisthroughlivemusicandprojectionplayedsimultaneouslyinboththe

28

virtualandphysicalspace–wheredigitalavatarsandgallerygoerscoulddance

togetherthroughlife-sizeprojections.

TheartistgroupSecondFrontwhohavebeenperforminginSecondLifesince2006

createdigitalperformanceswithhistoricinfluencesfromTheatreoftheAbsurdand

Fluxus.ThepieceIwitnessedintheirperformanceattheRemoteEncounters:

Connectingbodies,collapsingspacesandtemporalubiquityinnetworkedperformance

conference(CardiffUniversity11th-12thApril2013),wasalivere-enactmentofaFluxus

workbyAlHansen“YokoOnePianoDrop”andwasusedasan‘eventscore’bythe

groupinSecondLife.Thissharessomesimilaritiesbetweentheartistictactics

employedinthisresearchtoextractandcreateperformanceinstructionsforlive

events,withinahistoricaltrajectoryofFluxusevents.However,SecondFront’s

performanceextractedaphysicalworkwithevidentimpossibilitiesandperformeditin

avirtualspacetoplaywiththelimitlesspossibilitiesofdroppingmultiplepianosfroma

height.Thisisdifferenttotheapproachwithinthispractice-ledenquiry,asthecritical

questioningandtacticsemployedintheresearcharetoextractobservationsfroma

virtualspaceandre-performtheminthephysicalspace.

Inthisrelationshipbetweenthephysicalandvirtualoneisalwaysphysicallylocatedin

abodyandinasitewheninteractinginavirtualspace.Oftenbodilyinteractionmaybe

veryinactive–sittingatacomputer,sometimesunawareofthebody(Salter,2010)

whilst‘flying’throughavirtualworldandengaginginavatar-avatarortext-text

communication.Whilstphysicallyinactive,oneisinstructinganavatartomove,gesture

andspeaktoothersinavirtualspace,asobservedinSecondLife.

Participation

Thiscontextualisestheresearchwithinparticipatoryartpractice,introducesthe

historicallineage,andquestionstherolesandreciprocalrelationshipsoftactics,

invitations,instructionsandaudienceasparticipant-guestandartistasfacilitator-host.

Thisalsointroducesthepracticeandreflectionofparticipatoryperformancefrom

experiencesoftheartistandtheparticipantinordertodrawconnections,demonstrate

themethodologyandrevealtheresearch.

29

AccordingtoBorisGroys(2009,p.5)“atendencytowardsacollaborative,participatory

practiceisundeniablyoneofthemaincharacteristicsofcontemporaryart”.The

heritageofparticipationinartisrootedinthe1950s,fromJohnCage’sexperimental

musicalcompositions,toGuyDebordandtheSituationistInternational,AllanKaprow’s

HappeningsandNeo-DadaandFluxusArt.InNeo-DadainMusic,Theatre,Poetry,Art,

GeorgeMaciunas(1962)describedthispracticeas‘anti-art’forms:

“Theanti-artformsaredirectedprimarilyagainstartasaprofession,againstthe

artificialseparationofaperformerfromitsaudience,orcreatorandspectator,or

lifeandart”.

IntheWhitechapel:DocumentsonContemporaryArtseriesonParticipation,editor

ClaireBishop(2006)mapsthehistoricallineageofparticipationintheoreticaland

artisticpracticestothepresentday.InherowncontributionViewersasProducers

(2006,p.10),sheexplainshow“thepracticeofparticipationappropriatessocialforms

asawayofbringingartclosertoeverydaylife[andinthisprocess]strivestocollapse

thedistinctionbetweenperformerandaudience,professionalandamateur,production

andreception”.InConversationPieces,GrantKester(2004)usestheterm‘dialogical

practice’todescribetheconceptofcommunityandcollaborationinmodernart.This

conceptiscitedtohavebeenderivedfromRussianliterarytheoristMikhailBakhtin,

“whoarguedthattheworkofartcanbeviewedasa‘conversation’–withalocusof

differentmeanings,interpretationsandpointsofview”(Kester2004,p.10).Nicolas

Bourriaud(2002,p.113),theFrenchcuratorandartcritic,coinedtheterm‘relational

aesthetics’todescribe“…asetofartisticpractices[ofthe1990s]whichtakeastheir

theoreticalandpracticalpointofdeparture,thewholeofhumanrelationsandtheir

socialcontext,ratherthanasingleindependentandprivatespace”.Intheworks

identifiedas‘relational’byBourriaud,thegalleryvisitorsarethecentralfocus;they

encounteroneanotherthroughtheartworksofsocialstructures,interactive

sculptures,eventsandgamesofferedbytheartists.Inmanyoftheexamplescitedin

thesetexts,theworksoftenofferastructurewithinwhichacommunitycanbeformed

throughasharedexperience.Whiletheformationofsuchacommunityhasbeen

challengedbyBishopas‘onlytemporaryandutopian’,itcanbejustifiablyberegarded

30

asasociallypoliticalresponsetotheincreasingvirtualrelationshipsmadepossibleby

theWorldWideWeb.InBourriaud’sopinion(2001,citedinDocherty2004,p.43),

theseworksrespondto“thedesiretopromptphysicalandface-to-faceinteraction

betweenindividualsortocreateanimmersiveenvironmentand‘micro-utopias’within

theeveryday”.However,theartworksBourriaudconsiderstoberelationalarefroma

selectedcohortofartistswhoseworkispredominantlypresentedinagallerycontext

toagallery-goingpublic,ratherthanincityandonlinespaceswhereotherpublics

exist.These‘relational’workshaveadistinctfunction,inthattheyareintendedtobe

usedratherthanmerelytobecontemplatedbytheaudience.AccordingtoBourriaud

(2002,p.113)“…theroleofartworksisnolongertoformimaginaryandutopian

realities,buttoactuallybewaysoflivingandmodelsofactionwithintheexistingreal,

whateverthescalechosenbytheartist”.Headdsarguesthat“…aworkmayoperate

likearelationaldevicecontainingacertaindegreeofrandomness,oramachine

provokingandmanagingindividualandgroupencounters”(Bourriaud,2002,p113).

Theopennessoftheworkinthiscontextisintegraltoartworksthatunfoldthrougha

processofperformativeaudienceparticipation.

InhistextTheOpenWork,UmbertoEco(1989,p.4)discussestheopenworkinthe

contextofboththe‘completed’artworkandthe‘open’artwork:

“Everyreceptionofaworkofartisbothaninterpretationandaperformanceofit,

becauseineveryreceptiontheworktakesonafreshperspectiveforitself“.

AccordingtoEco,theartistproducesanunfinishedpieceofworkandtheninvites

activeparticipationfortheworktobecomecomplete.Itcanbearguedthatallartworks

producedarenecessarilyopentoreceptionandinterpretation,andarebroughttotheir

ultimateconclusionsbytheaudience.However,thetraditionaldistinctionbetween

artistandaudiencecanonlybegintobere-definedthroughworkthatinvitesactive

participation,performativeinteractionandcollaboration,inwhichitbecomes,truly

‘open’.Inthiscontext,itistheaudiences’choicetodefinetheirrole:aspassive

participant,activeparticipantorcollaborator.Inthisresearchparticipatory

performancecelebratesandactivatesanaudience,encouragingthemtoparticipateand

performinresponsetoaninvitation,instructionorstructuredsituation.Byaccepting

31

theinvitationorchoosingtorespondtheybecomeentrustedwithanactiveroleto

shape,developordeterminethepiece,resultingoccasionallyinparticipantagencyand

occasionallyinartistvulnerability.

Withthefirsthistoricalandtheoreticaloverviewofsociallyengagedparticipatoryart,

ArtificialHells:ParticipatoryArtandthePoliticsofSpectatorship,(ClaireBishop2012),a

newcriticalperspectivetothisfieldisprovided.Thisraisespotentquestionsregarding

artistsworkingwithparticipants,particularlyinperformativeworksthatemploy

participantstoenactaspecificrole,whichshereferstoas‘delegatedperformance’.She

suggeststhattheinclusionof“otherpeoplesbodiesasthemediumofhisorherwork”

raisesquestionsandethicalissuesand“canoftenpromptaccusationsofexploitationor

manipulation”(Bishop2012,p.220).Thishasinformedmycriticalreflection,

particularlyon‘activeparticipation:reflectionsonperformingas‘guest’’,inwhichmy

activeroleasparticipantinotherartistsworkshasvariedwithsubsequentexperiences

fromjoytomanipulation.Furthermorethistextprovokesusefulquestioningonthe

reasoningbehindartists’desirestoworkwithothers,activateaudiencesoroffer

agencythroughparticipatorymodelsofworkingtogether.InthisresearchIhave

includedtheactionandreflectiononbothmyrolesasartist-hostandparticipant-guest.

ThereforeofferingafirsthandperspectiveonaspecificsetofUKpractices,thatmoves

thelargelytheoreticalapproachtothe‘ethicsandaestheticsofcontemporarylabour’

thatBishopoffers,tooneofdirectexperienceascriticalquestioning,inparticulartothe

roles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesbetweentheartistandparticipant.

Inthisartisticresearch,criticalquestioningoftheeverydayisachievedthroughatactic

ofre-framing;takingtherules,behaviourandlanguageinthevirtualspace,andre-

framingtheseinphysicalspace,todrawattentiontohumaninteractioninahybrid

space.Thesearereflectionsonlivedexperiencesandphenomenaincontemporary

society,asPhilipGlahn(2007,p.169)suggests:

“Digitalmediahaveprovidednewspacesforcommunicationandsocial

organization—theopportunityfornewutopianrapturesaswellasnewformsof

deliberationandaction.Increasingly,artists,hackers,andactivistsunderstand

themselvesasfacilitatorsofemancipatoryprocessesandprovidersoftools,seeking

32

toturnspectatorsintotheagentsofnewpublics,intoparticipantsinanewtechno-

collectivefuturebasedontheproductionofsurplusknowledge,sharedintellect,and

community”.

Ineachpieceofworkcarefulconsiderationisgiventotheroleoftheparticipantand

howtheycanbeactivatedandencouragedthroughinvitationorinstruction.Inmy

practicetheparticipantisinvaluable,withouttheiractiveandcreativeparticipationI

wouldnotbeabletomakethework.Theinvitationorinstructionandconsiderationfor

howtoworkwithparticipantsispartoftheplanningstageforthepiecesofwork,

offeringopenopportunitiesforinterpretation,participationandcollaboration.This

relatestopersonalvaluesinworkingwithothersinaparticipatorymanner..The

increasednumbersofactiveparticipantsonline(sharing,contributing,collaborating,

mash-ups)createsacultureofactiveproducersofcontentaswellaseverydaypractices

ofproducingandcontributingtoonlinecontent.However,howcriticalarewe?Howare

weusingthesespacestodrawattentiontoimportantmeaningfulcontent?Ifweare

nowlivingourlivesthroughtheseonlinespaces,whataretheimplications?

AsBenezra(2008,p.10)pointsoutinhisforwardtoTheArtofParticipation:1950–

Now;

“[…]itisnowgenerallyacceptedthatthesesocialnetworkingsiteshavebegunto

radicallytransformthewaysinwhichwerelatetoeachother–notonlyonline,

butalsoasasociety”

Inthisbook,whichaccompaniedanexhibitionattheSanFranciscoMOMAofthesame

title(2008-2009),atrajectoryisbridgedbetweenthehistoricallineageofparticipatory

artand,howartistsworkingwithaudiencesasparticipantsbegantoadoptand

contributetothecollaborativestrategiesoftheWeb2.0movement.Whilethistext

drawsattentiontothisimportantbridgeandpositsatheoreticaltextbyLevManovic,it

referencesfewartistsanddiverseworks.Insteaditfocusespredominatelyonthe

galleryspaceorthere-enactmentofperformancesinonlinegalleries.Inaddition,there

islessofafocusontheartistsusinginterventioniststrategiesworkingwithdigital

technologytoquestiononlinespaces.Theseworksalsohaveacleartrajectoryfrom

AllanKaprow’sFluxusevents,whichshareverysimilarperformativeconceptstothe

33

workswhicharepredominantlynotworkinginagalleryormuseumcontext,insteadin

thecity,onthestreetorthroughonlinesocialmediaplatforms.

Theactivationandempowermentoftheaudienceismirroredinparticipatoryculture

(Jenkins2006),whichinthespiritofweb2.0intendstoencourage‘audiences’to

participateandcontributecreatively.Irwinetal(2009,p.64)arguethat:

“Ratherthansimplyreceivingandinterpretingart,audiencemembersbecome

analysersorinterlocutors,evenactiveparticipantsintheartworks.Artisno

longerjustaboutvisualstylebutsocialpurpose.Educationisnolongerjustabout

individualachievementbutsocialunderstandingandcontribution”.

Inthetext,OutsourcingAuthenticity?DelegatedPerformanceinContemporaryArt,Claire

Bishop(2009,p.111)citesartistsPhilCollins,DoraGarciaandJeremyDellerasartists

whommarkashiftinthenotionof‘participation’,inparticulartheperformanceofthe

participants,inworksinthe1990s:

“Alloftheworksraisequestionsofperformanceandauthorship,andin

particulartheissuesofethicsandrepresentationthatensuewhentheartistisno

longerthecentralagentinhisorherownwork,butoperatesthrougharangeof

individuals,communitiesandsurrogates.Intheworksoftheseartists,

performanceisdelegated–or,tousemoremanageriallanguage,‘outsourced’–

tootherperformers.Thesepeoplemaybespecialistsornonprofessionals,paidor

unpaid,buttheyundertakethejobofbeingpresentandperformingata

particulartimeinaparticularplaceonbehalfoftheartist,andfollowingtheir

instructions.”

Whiletherearesomesimilaritiestotheapproachofpractice-ledenquiryinthis

research,thisdifferssignificantly,astheworksattempttocreateparticipatory

performancewhichcanmovebeyondaninstructiontoperformaspecificrole,toan

invitationtocreativelyparticipateandrespond,withinaframeworksetbytheartist.

Thesedo,however,haveanincreasingrelationshiptothe‘performancere-enactment’

oftheliveperformativeintervention.However,itislessconsideredas‘intense’and

34

moreofafleetingencounterasittakesplaceinacity,publicly,orinanonlinespace

whichdoesnothavetheconventionsofagalleryorperformancespaceinstaging

performativeinterventions.Forexample,whileMariela:cmd,click,controlcouldbe

consideredaliveone-offperformanceasitsharedsimilaritiestoaperformancewitha

seatedaudienceandspecificduration,ittookplaceinacaféonaSundayafternoon.It

waspartofanartistfestivalandotherperformancestookplacethesameday,however,

halfoftheaudiencewereun-expectantcafé-goers.Theparticipationinthispiecewas

muchmorestructuredwithlessactual‘performance’bytheaudience,howeverinthis

piece,theyinstructedme‘asartist-performer’tomoveand/ortodanceattheirtable.

ThepowerbetweentheartistandtheaudienceshiftedandasperformerIbecame

morevulnerable.

Documentation

Inmostcaseswhatremainsfollowingaparticipatoryperformanceisanimage-an

imagethatgetswidelydistributed,latertoberecognisedandinterpretedbyan

audiencewhoweren’tpresentfortheliveparticipation.Inthisimagetherewill

generallybeanumberofparticipantswhoarecaught“live”inaction,respondingtothe

artists’invitationorinstructiontoparticipatethroughphysicalinteractionwiththe

workpresentedordirectlywiththeartistorotherparticipantsthroughactionor

exchange.Theseimagescapturethe‘completed’pieceof‘openwork’(Eco1989);a

workthatsuccessfullyengagedanaudienceinparticipationandfulfilsthecycleof

artist-audience-artwork.However,theseimagescapturemorethanthis,theypresenta

complexrelationshipbetweentheartistandtheaudience.Here,again,theaudiencenot

onlybecomeactiveparticipants,butalsoperformersinthework.Theyare

photographedandviewedaccordinglybyaliveorremoteaudiencewhoviewthe

documentationatalaterdate.

35

Figure6.DocumentaryInterviewwithRebeccaGamble,publishedonline,2016

InthisPhD,documentationofthepractice-ledresearchispresentedthroughstilland

movingimageinthewritten-visualthesisandonlinesubmission.Theadditionofa

documentaryfilmtiestogethertheanalysisthroughinterviewwiththeauthor-

performer-researcherandthedocumentationoflivepractice.Thedocumentaryfilm

revealsthecriticalposition,originsoftheresearchandtheembodiedknowledge;also

becomingapieceofworkitself,throughnewfilmfootageandperformance-to-camera

fromboththeartistandparticipantsinthispractice.

36

THEROMANTICENCOUNTER

Figure7.TheRomanticEncounter,2010

Thereaderisinvitedtoviewtheaccompanyingvisualchapterbeforeandalongsidethis

writtenchapter.Thevisualchaptercanbefoundonline,here:

http://thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/the-romantic-encounter.

Thechapterpresentsselecteddocumentationofthepractice-ledenquiry,includingthe

methodologydiagram.Thechapterisstructuredusingthecorestagesofthedeveloped

methodologicalcycleofobserve;plan;action/facilitation(livewriting:‘reflectionsas

host’);reflection/analysis;andsummary.

37

Introduction

TheRomanticEncounterwasalive,publicparticipatoryperformancethattookplace

simultaneouslybetweenthesocialsettingsofaphysicalcaféinNottinghamandreplica

virtualcaféinSecondLife.Ittookplaceforthedurationoftwohoursasascheduled

publiceveningeventaspartofNottingham’sGameCityfestivalandalsoSideshow,the

officialfringetoTheBritishArtShow7.ThevirtualcaféinSecondLifebecamethe

stageforchanceromanticencountersbetweenavatarsperformedbythirty-six

differentparticipantsinthephysicalcafé,whoalternatedinsetsofsixeverytwenty

minutes–similartoaspeed-datingevent.Asthefirstpieceofworkinthepractice-led

enquiry,thisfollowedaperiodofobservationsandreflectionsinphysicalandvirtual

cafésandwasshapedbyartisticandtheoreticalresearch,particularlyaddressingthe

conceptoftheeveryday.Thischapter(visualandwritten)revealstheprocess,action

andreflectionofTheRomanticEncounterandidentifiessignificantinsightsfromthis

workandhowthisinformedthenextpieceinthepractice-ledenquiry.

Figure8.TheRomanticEncounter,methodologydiagram2010

38

OriginsandObservations:socialspaces,onlineandoffline

TheRomanticEncounteroriginatedfromknowledgeofartisticpracticesthatcreate

situationsforencountersbetweenpeople,oftenachievedbytransforminggalleriesinto

socialsettingsorcreatingeventsinpublicspaces.Forexample,inRirkritTiravanija’s

culinaryperformancesingalleries(1992–1995),inNeilCummingssocialcinema

eventsinthecarparkofatowerblock(2006)andinmyownfunctionalinstallationsin

galleries(2005–2009).Theartworks,particularlyingallerysettingsinthe1990s,

whichattemptedtosetupsocialcontextsforaudienceparticipation,activatedNicolas

Bourriaud’stheoryof‘relationalaesthetics’(1998,p.113)inwhichheproposedthat

“artworksshouldbejudgedaestheticallyonthehumanrelationshipsthattheyprompt

orproduce”.InConversationPieces(2004,p.1)GrantKesterfurtherargued,“artists

haveadoptedaperformative,process-basedapproach[becoming]…‘contextproviders’

ratherthan‘contentproviders’.Theseartworks,suchastheexamplehegivestoPeter

Dunn’swork,involve“thecreativeorchestrationofcollaborativeencountersand

conversations,wellbeyondtheinstitutionalconfinesofthegalleryormuseum”.

Figure9.ChatBox,networkedinteractiveinstallation,2007

39

Inmypreviousworkwithintheseries‘EventsforaConversation’(2006-2007),I

investigatedaccessible,everydaymodesandspacesforconversationbetweenpeople.

Usingtelecommunicationandtheinternet,Iexperimentedwithdifferentmodesof

communication,networkingpublicspacestopeopleshomesinparticipatoryevents.

ThisculminatedinChatBox(2007),afunctionalandfuturisticpublic

telecommunicationboothusingSkypesoftwareforvoicecallsandvideochatsviathe

internetglobally.Thiswasarelationalparticipatorypieceofwork,physicallysituated

inagalleryinFalmouthwhereparticipantsmetstrangers,reconnectedwithfamilyand

friendsandhaddinnerdateswiththeirspousevirtually,throughthescreen,web-

cameraandmicrophone.Itwasthroughthegroundingofrelationalpracticeand

researchthatIbecameinterestedinnetworkedperformancebetweentwoormore

remotespaces,andthepossibilitiesforliverelationaleventsbetweenpeoplewhoare

notphysicallyco-present.ThecollaborationbetweenartistsPatrickSimonsandKate

Southworth(GloriousNinth)andRuthCatlowandMarcGarrett(Furtherfield)intheir

pieceNovember(2006)isasuitableexampleofnetworkedperformance.Theartists

linkedtheirfourlocationsonlineviavideocameraandvoiceusingApple’siChat

software.Inthispiecetheyshared‘aneverydayperformance/ritual’ofeatingraw

garlictogetherwhilereadingimprovisedtexts.Thisliveeventachievedashared

sensoryexperiencebetweenperformerswhileconnectedremotelythroughdigital

screenandsoundfromfourphysicallocations.

Theinterestineverydaytelecommunicationandtheinternetasnetworkedspacesfor

everydaypracticesofmeeting,socialisingandsharingsocialactssuchaseatingand

drinkingledmetothevirtualworldofSecondLife.Aswithotheronlinesocialmedia

platforms,SecondLifecreatesaspaceforvirtualinteraction.However,thisdigitally

constructedspaceisexperiencedthroughthecreationofadigitalselfasavatar,

inhabitingavirtualworldofsocialspacesincludingcafés,bars,shopsandrestaurants

andalsoeducationalspacessuchasuniversitiesandmuseums.Firstencountersofthis

virtualspaceasmydigitalavatarMarielaEyreweresurprising.Iwasstruckbythe

vastnessandcomplexitiesofthevirtuallyconstructedworld;withitsownworldmapof

locationstoteleportto,optionstobuylandtobuildyourownresidence,andseemingly

infinitepossibilitiesofcreationofyourdigitalavatarthroughtheirgender,hair,eye

andskincolour,bodyshapeandclothing.Thisbecamethesiteformyartistic

40

investigationsduetothevirtualworldbeingaconfineddigitalspace,encounteredasa

digitallyconstructedavatarbodywithveryspecificandinterestingparallelsand

differencestothephysicalworld.

ThroughaseriesofobservationsandencountersinSecondLife,indifferentspacesand

withotheravatars,Ifoundtheretobecommonbehaviours,partlydependentonones

familiarityofSecondLifeandthematurityofonesavatar;dependentonhowlongone

hadbeenaSecondLife‘resident’for.Newresidentslikemyselfstumbledthroughthe

space,unfamiliarwiththemovementcontrols(ofwalk,runorfly)andwith

undevelopedcloneavatars,onlyslightlyadaptedfromthetemplateavatarappearances

offeredwhenfirstenteringthevirtualworld.

Figure.10.FirstencounterinSecondLife,2009

Asnewavatars,wecollectivelyobservedthelong-termresidentsconfidentlyglide

throughthespace,theatricallypresentingtheiravatarsthroughextravagantclothing

andprovocativemovements.Themodesofcommunicationinthisvirtualworldinclude

groupmessaging,throughpublictextavailabletoeveryoneinthesamevirtual

location;andinstantmessaging(im),throughtextordirectvoiceconversationbetween

specificavatarsifagreedbyoneanother.Inadditiontothis,andseeminglythemost

41

frequentlyusedmodeofcommunication,wasthecustom‘gesturesmenu’ofanimations

formovement,providedbycreatorsLindenLab.

Thisgesturesmenucontainslargelyflirtatiousortheatricalgestures,includingblowing

kisses,twirling,dancing,clappingandbowing.Intheseinitialavatarencountersin

SecondLife,Iobservedandexperiencedhighlyflirtatiousbehaviourthrough

performedgesturesbetweenprovocativelydressedavatars.Itappearedthatthe

majorityof‘publicspaces’inSecondLife-incomparisontotheclosedpassword

protectedspacesofuniversitiesandotherprivate‘landmarks’-weremeetingspaces

forchance,playfulandperhaps‘romantic’encountersbetweenanonymousavatars.

Theperceivedanonymitywithinthisspace,aswithotheronlinespaces,seemedto

authoriseandencouragebehavioursthatwouldbelesscommoninphysicalpublic

spaces.

Theseinitialobservationsinitiatedinterestinthepotentialsimilaritiesanddifferences

betweenphysicalandvirtualsocialspaces-inparticular,cafés-asmeetingspaces.This

raisednewquestionstoinvestigatethroughparticipatoryperformanceinthepractice-

ledenquiry:

Howdoeverydaysocialpracticesandetiquettesofmeetingandcommunicating

inphysicalspacealterwhentransferredtoavirtualspace?Andhowarethe

boundariesbetweenthephysicalandvirtualblurredintheliveparticipatory

performanceeventbetweenthetwospaces?

Planning:SummerLodgeresidency

DuringtheSummerLodgeresidencyinJuly2010atNottinghamTrentUniversityI

encounteredandobservedbothphysicalandvirtualcafélocations.Icloselyexamined

andrecordedtheetiquettesandmethodicalstepstakeninthepracticesofenteringa

physicalcafé:sittingatatable;orderingfromthemenu;interactionwiththewaiterand

othercustomers;andpickingupanddrinkingacupoftea.

42

Figure.11.GesturesMenuinSecondLife,2010

InSecondLife,whileIfoundvirtualcafésoccasionallyinhabitedbyotheravatarsand

withsimilaroptions(e.g.tousecommandkeys;tositatatableandpickupahotdrink),

thesespaceswerenothostedasaworkingcafé.TowardstheendoftheSummerLodge

residencyItransformedmystudiointoacafé:aninstallationforoneday,servingtea

andcakeonfourtablesfortwo.Theintentionsforthisrelationaleventweretotest

methodsofinvitation,facilitationandreflectionbysuccessfullycreatingatemporary

convivialenvironmentwithintheenclosedstudio.Inthisspace,participantscouldread

anddiscusstheoutcomesoftheaction-researchgeneratedduringtheresidency,

presentedasamenuonalargeblackboardcoveringonewallofthestudio.

Theconvivialenvironmentwasachievedthroughacombinationofthesharedopen

invitationintheFineArtbuildingoftheUniversityto“joinfortea&cakeandaperuse

ofthemenu”;thewelcomeandfacilitationfrommyselfandastudioassistant,which

mirroredobservationsoflanguageusedinwelcomingcustomerstoacafé;andtheoffer

ofseating,freefoodandhotdrinks.Thecafé–installationandeventinitiateda

43

reciprocalencounter,facilitatingcollectivereflectionandfeedbackinexchangefor

refreshments.Theuseoffood,drinkorsocialsituationinparticipatoryartworksis

acknowledgedbyClaireBishop(2006)tohavebeen‘appropriated’byartistsasmethod

togatherandengagepeoplewiththeintentiontoinitiateconversationorreciprocal

exchangethroughasharedact.ThisinformedtheplanningofTheRomanticEncounter

inthedecisiontouseanexistingcaféspaceinthecityandinthemethodsforactivating

participation,includingthewritteninvitation;thepre-bookingoftimedencounters;the

settingoftheenvironment;andthestructuredinstructionandfacilitationonce

participantsenteredthephysicalcaféandwerefirstintroducedtothevirtualcafé.

TheexistingcaféspaceselectedwasLeeRosy’sTeacafé,situatedonBroadStreetinthe

citycentreofNottingham.Thiswasthemostappropriateinthecityduetoitslocation,

interiorandbroadbandspeed.Theinteriornaturallydividedtheentranceandwelcome

spacefromtheseatingarea,creatingtwospacesthatallowedforanoff-stage

observationandanon-stageparticipatoryperformance.

Figure.12.Thevirtualcafé,2010

TodigitallyconstructthevirtualreplicaofLeeRosy’scaféIworkedwithSecondLife

developerslinkedtotheUniversity,usingover200imagestakenoftheinterior.

Accuratelyreplicatingdetailsofthephysicalspace,includingthedécor,signage,

44

floorboards,tables,appliances,flowers,candlesandcupsfeltessentialinattemptinga

potential‘blurring’ofphysicalandvirtualspace.Participantsbeingsituatedinboththe

physicalandthevirtualcafésimultaneouslyfortheeventwasimportanttooffera

collectivesensualexperiencebetweenenvironments,includingthetemperature,

smells,musicandbackgroundsoundofthecafé,orthetasteoftheteaandcoffeewhich

couldtriggeraconversation.

Figure13.AssignedavatarsinTheRomanicEncounter,2010

TheSecondLifedevelopersprovidedsixdigitalavatarstoassigntoparticipantsinthe

physicalcaféfortheirperformanceinthevirtualcafé,includingthreefemaleandthree

maleavatars.Thisdecisionwasmadefollowingtimeconstraintsforparticipantsto

createtheirownavataridentityaheadoftheevent.GesturesfromtheSecondLife

gesturesmenuwereextractedandprintedonaphysicalmenucardtoclearlyguide

participantsininstructingtheiravatartomoveinthevirtualcafé.Ienlisted‘co-hosts’

45

withinthephysicalcafétofacilitatethefast-pacedturnaroundofsixsetsoftwenty-

minuteencounters,andonevirtual‘host’toremotelyfacilitateavatarsinthevirtual

café.Theco-hostsinthephysicalcaféwereaskedtocreateanavatarnametousein

theirintroductorywelcomeandtofollowascriptintheirinitialfacilitationofthe

‘participant-guests’.

Theinvitation

Theimportanceofbeingasupportedandscheduledeventwithintheprogrammeof

GameCityandSideshowwastoensuretheopeninvitationtoparticipatecouldbe

publicallydisseminatedandtheeventsituatedwithinthecontextofbothagamingand

contemporaryartfestival.Awebsitelinkwasgivenwiththeinvitationtoanonline

event-bookingpage,whereparticipantscouldbooktheirscheduled‘romantic

encounter.Thepublicinvitationwasintentionallybriefandprovocative,intendingto

intriguetheaudiencetowhatmightoccurandtopromptthemtoconsidertheir

interactionandpotential‘performance’beforearrivingattheevent.Theinvitation

read:

“YouareinvitedtoTheRomanticEncounter,takingplaceatLeeRosy’sTeaCaféin

NottinghamonThursday28thOctober,between6.30pm–8.30pm…Foronenightonly

therealandthevirtualwillmingleasLeeRosy’sbecomesthestageforyourchance

romanticencounterwithanavatar.Makeyourselfup,dresstoimpressorcomeindisguise

–arrivingbetween6.30pmand8.15pm–andremember,pressF3toblowakiss…RSVPto

bookyourencounter.”

Theoriginalwritteninvitationtoparticipate,animageofeachavatar,theprinted

gesturesmenuandablueheart-shapedfeltbadgewerepresentedinthirty-six

individualenvelopestobegiventoeachparticipantatthebeginningoftheirencounter.

46

ActionandFacilitation:

ReflectionsasHost

OnThursday28thOctober,LeeRosy’scafé,anindependentcaféinNottingham

andareplicacaféinSecondLife,becomethesiteandstageforencountersand

performancesinthephysicalandvirtual.Myco-hostsMoses,MinnyandHector

andI,Mariela,worktirelesslytopreparethephysicalandvirtualsitefor

performance;sixtablesfortwo,eachwithacandle,flower,milkjug,sugarbowl

andlaptop.Thecafécounter,till,shelves,floor,wallsandceilingsarereplicatedin

thevirtualspacewhilethesixavatarsreceiveamakeoverinpreparationfortheir

performance.Profilephotosofeachavatarareprintedandplacedinenvelopes

withaninvitationtoperform.OntheafternoonbeforetheperformanceImeetto

conferwithmyfellowcaféhosts,whowillwelcomeandwaitonourguestsduring

theirencounter.Thephysicalcaféandthevirtualcafémeet,theavatarsare

wokenup,thehoststietheiraprons.It’s6.25pmandtheguestsbegintoarrive.

“HelloandwelcometoLeeRosy’sCafé,Iwillbeyourhost,Mariela,pleasetakeaseat

here.Inthisenvelopeyouravataridentitywillberevealed,thisidentityis

anonymous.Towalkusethearrowkeys,tospeaktypeintothedialogueboxandto

gestureusethegesturesmenu.Pleaseletmeknowifyouhaveanyquestions.When

thebellsounds,itistheendofyourencounter.CanIgetyouahotdrink?”Allsix

participantsareseatedatatablealonewithalaptoprunningSecondLife.The

eventbeginsandthephysicalandthevirtualbegintominglewhilethe

participantsinhabitandperforminthephysicalandvirtualcafésimultaneously.

Asthebellsoundstomarktheendofthetwenty-minutesandthefirstsetof

encounters,webegintowelcomeandseatnewguests.Onceseatedpeopleseem

intenselyimmersedintheirinteractionwiththescreeninfrontofthem,some

occasionallylookingupandoverthescreen,asiftospeculatewhoseavatarthey

arespeakingtointhevirtualcafé.Astheirencounterends,participantsremainin

thephysicalcafé,perhapscontinuingconversationsstartedinthevirtualcafé,or

totrytoobserveothersintheirnewencounters.Myco-hostsandIwelcomeand

seatsixsetsofsixparticipantsattwenty-minuteintervals.Astheeventcomestoa

closewethankourfinalparticipants,ourco-hostinthevirtualcaféandeach

other.Weblowoutthecandles,clearthetablesandclosethelaptopsandthe

eventisfinished.

47

Figure14.TheRomanticEncounter,2010

Reflectionsandanalysis

FollowingtheliveeventofTheRomanticEncounter,reflectiononactiontookplace

throughobservationofphotographicdocumentation,readingofthedigitaltranscriptof

text-basedconversationwithinSecondLifeasgeneratedbytheparticipantsduringthe

event,andthroughconversationswithco-hostsandsomeparticipantsfollowingthe

event.

TheRomanticEncounterwastheresultofactionandreflectiononaseriesof

encountersandobservationsmadeinSecondLife,andgrewfromfascinationwithhow

avatarsmetandinteractedwithone-anotherinpublicandsocialspaces.This

questionedtheseeminglyinfinitepossibilitiesthatLindenLabboastispresent:the

perceivedanonymityofperformanceasdigitalavatar;thestructuredrule-based

interactionthroughthegesturesmenu;andthedurationofliveperformativeeventas

assignedavatar.

48

Itbecameclearthroughtheinvestigationthatthetheatricalandprovocativeactions

includedinthegesturesmenupre-determinedtheflirtatiousbehaviouroftheavatars,

manyofwhomworerevealingclothinganddisplayedsexualisedmovements.The

gesturesmenuincludesblowingkisses,twirling,clappingandbowingandanumberof

pre-animatedandhighlyprovocativedances.WhittyandCarrsuggestthat“cyberspace

isauniquespace.Itisaspacewhereonecanbeplayfulwithpresentationsofself.Itis

alsoaspacewhereonecan‘playatlove”(2006,p.1).Thisnotionof‘playing’atlove,in

avirtualworldofanonymousavatars,becamethelineofenquiryforthisfirstpieceof

artisticresearch.Thisintendedtoquestionhowsocialspaceandsocialactivitiesare

translatedandperformedonline,inSecondLife.

Figure15.TheRomanticEncounter,2010

Thescenarioofalivespeed-datebetweenavatarswasusedtoinviteparticipantsto

considerthiseventasaplayfulandparticipatoryperformance.Thetitleandinvitation

ofthispieceofworkintendedtobeprovocative,andtoactivateparticipantsin

consideringhowtheymightdressorperform.Thephysicalco-presencewithinthecafé

challengedtheanonymityofvirtualcommunicationonline,bycreatingaprobability

gameofencounteringoneoffiveothersintheroom.Whilesomeparticipantsseemed

unawareoftheirphysicalpresenceinthecafé,someoccasionallyglancedupfromtheir

screentoviewwhomtheymightbespeakingto,whichsubsequentlyaffected

behavioursinperformingtoeachotherorbeingmoreconsciousofappropriatesocial

behaviour.Thisdifferedtoon-goingobservationsofencountersinSecondLifeinwhich

attimesthebehavioursbetweenavatarsseemschallenging,dismissiveoraggressive.

49

Overthetwo-hourevent,thirty-sixpeopleparticipatedofdifferentagesandgenders,

predominatelyfrombackgroundsinresearch,gamingandart,mostwithlittleorno

previousinteractionwithSecondLife.Participantsperformedinthevirtualspaceas

assignedavatars,throughmovementandwritten,textualconversations,publicly

displayedoneachscreen.Intheseconversations,mostlyshortsentencesconsistingof

tenwordsorless,participantsdiscussedtheirmovement,themusicbeingplayedinthe

realcafe,andtheclothestheywerewearing.Mostlythesewereintroductoryor

enquiredintohowtofunctionandmanoeuvrethespace,includinghowtositdown,

jump,flyanddance.Theirindividualexplorationofthevirtualsitebecametheir

collectiveexperience,andduetotheunfamiliarityandtothegroupchatconversations,

ratherthanone-to-oneconversations,theirperformancesasavatarsrarelydeveloped

furtherbeforetheendoftheir20-minuteencounter.Ialsonotedintheperformancesof

assignedavatarsthatthereweredifferencesinapproach,whichfromconversations

withparticipantsfollowingtheevent,wereconnectedtohowmuchtheyrelatedto

theiravatar.Inparticular,forexample,thosewhomwereperformingasanavatarthey

didn’trelateto,duetotheirappearance,weremoreplayfulintheirperformanceas

theyconsideredhowthatavatarmightbehave,moveandtalktoothersdifferentlyto

themselves.Thisinvolvedlargelystereotypingdependentontheirclothing,hairstyle

andtattoos.Therewerealsosituationswheretheperformanceoftheiravatarledto

dancingonthecounter,theremovalofclothingandleavingthevirtualcafétoexplore

theimmediatesurroundings.

Thesocialsituationwassetforparticipantsinapubliccafé,withitsimplicitetiquettes

inarrivaltoaninvitedtime,beingwelcomed,seatedandservedadrinkbyawaitress-

host.Theaddedsituationofaspeed-dateeventwasintroducedasamethodto

structurethedurationofencountersandtomirrortheobservationsIfirstmadeinthe

virtualworldofSecondLife,inwhichthecommunicationbetweenavatarsseemed

predominantlyflirtatious.Theparticipantswerewelcomedtothevirtualcaféthrough

thescreenattheirtable,bytheirvirtualwaitress-hostastheavatarassignedtothem

onarrival.Theinitialintentioninthevirtualspacewastomirrorthatofanencounter

betweentwoavatars,seatedatatablefortwointhevirtualcafé,howeverthisdidnot

occur.Whileitwaspossibletobeseatedinthevirtualcaféatatablefortwoandtobe

50

servedavirtualdrink,fewchosetositdowntogether.Insteadtheavatarsinthevirtual

caféspenttheirtimeexploringthevirtualspaceanditsimmediatesurroundings,their

avatarsmovementandthegesturesmenu.Insteadofone-to-oneinstantmessage(im)

conversationstheyalljoinedinagroupconversationthatbecameadigitaltranscriptin

SecondLife.Mostinterestinglythistranscriptmappedapatternbetweeneachofthesix

setsofencountersoverthetwo-hourevent.Ithighlightedthattheconversations

betweeneachotherweredominatedbydiscussiononeachother’sappearanceand

movements.Itdemonstratedthatmostoftheircommunicationwasinfactnon-verbal,

andinsteadgestural,throughtheuseoftheSecondLifegesturesmenu,inparticular

throughdancingtogether.

Summary:contributionstoknowledge

Thefirstquestionraisedintheplanningstagesofthispractice-ledenquiryreferredto

thewaysinwhicheverydaysocialpracticesandetiquettesofmeetingand

communicatinginphysicalspacealterwhentransferredtoavirtualspace.Thispiece

ofworkidentifiedthatthisiseffectedbythestructureandpossibilitiesprovidedby

LindenLab,creatorsofSecondLife.Mostnotably,thisrevealedthedominantformof

communication,particularlybetweennewavatars,asthegesturesmenuprovidedin

SecondLife.This,aspreviouslyobservedininitialobservationsofthevirtualspace,

significantlyaffectsthetypeofinteractionpossiblebetweenavatars,becominghighly

theatricalandmostlyflirtatiousthroughthegesturesmadeavailableintheprescribed

menu.Thissubsequentlystructurestheinteractionbetweenavatars,makingit

challengingtopracticedifferentkindsofbehaviourthanflirtingorWhittyandCarr’s

notionof‘playingatlove’(2006,p.1).

Interestingly,inJune2010,creatorsLindenLabmovedall‘adultcontent’toaseparate

islandforover18’s,essentiallycreatingavirtualredlightdistrictwithinSecondLife

wherebehaviourssuchas‘cybersex’arepermitted.However,inmyencountersand

actionsinSecondLifesinceJune2010,Ihavenotobservedanydifferenceinthe

commoninteractionsbetweenavatarsorinthegesturesmenuprovidedforinteraction

-thesebehavioursseemembeddedinthisvirtualspace.MariaBacke(2009)

highlightedtheadvertisedsloganspublishedbyLindenLab,suchas“YourWorld.Your

51

Imagination”.Sheproposed,that“therulesofthesesocialspaces[withinSecondLife]

functionasafoundationandguidanceforidentityformation,andinfactalmostseemto

prescribeawayofactingorbehaving”(2009,p.109).Thisisillustratedinthefindings

ofTheRomanticEncounter,particularlyinhowthegesturesmenuactsasastructureor

ruletoencounterthevirtualspaceandotheravatars,thusprescribingtheirtheatrical

andflirtatiousbehaviour.Thisthereforeraisednecessitytofurtherinvestigatethe

gesturesmenufromSecondLifethroughparticipatoryperformanceinthenewcycleof

practice-ledenquiry.

Thesecondquestionraisedintheplanningstagesofthispractice-ledenquiryreferred

tothepossibilitiesofblurringtheboundariesbetweenthephysicalandvirtualspace

throughtheliveparticipatoryperformanceeventbetweenthetwospaces.Thiswork

onlypartiallyachievedablurringbetweenspacesinitsattempttocreateapotential

hybridspacethroughparticipatoryperformance.Thiswaslimitedtotheaestheticof

thenetworkedcafésandtotheintroductionofthehosts,usingtheiravatarname.While

participants‘blurred’thetwospaces,asintended,throughtheiractionofparticipatory

performance,inhabitingthephysicalandvirtualcafésimultaneously,theirobservation

ofthiswasminimal.Thiswasduetoanunawarenessoftheirbodilypresenceinthe

physicalspaceasmostwereimmersedinthevirtualspacethroughthedigitalscreen.

ThiswasaffectedbytheirunfamiliarityofthevirtualspaceofSecondLife,theirnewly

assignedavatarandthelimitedtimeoftwentyminutesfortheirencounter.This

highlightedtheimportanceforthenextcycleofparticipatoryperformancetobe

structuredasalonger,morein-depthdurationwithfacilitationofasmallergroup.

52

“LET’SDANCESUGARLIPS”

Thereaderisinvitedtoviewtheaccompanyingvisualchapterbeforeandalongsidethis

writtenchapter.Thevisualchaptercanbefoundonline,here:

http://thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/lets-dance-sugar-lips.

Thechapterpresentsselecteddocumentationofthepractice-ledenquiry,includingthe

methodologydiagram.Thechapterisstructuredusingthecorestagesofthedeveloped

methodologicalcycleofobserve;plan;action/facilitation(livereflectionsashostand

guest);reflection/analysis;andsummary.

53

Introduction

“Let’sDanceSugarLips”wasaparticipatoryperformancetocamerabetweenmyself

andsixparticipants,whichbeganasachoreographeddanceinavirtualspacewithin

SecondLifeusingthegesturesmenuandwasre-performed,inattempttoembodyour

avatarthroughmovement,inaphysicalspacewithintheUniversityaspartofthe

SummerLodgeresidency2011intheFineArtdepartment.Shapedasasix-hour

workshopwithasmallgroupofinvitedparticipants,includingartistsandartstudents,

thisintendedtofurtherinvestigatethehybridspacebetweenvirtualandphysicalspace

throughtheperformanceofdigitalavatars.Asthesecondpieceofworkinthepractice-

ledenquiry,thiswasinformedbytheobservationsandoutcomesofTheRomantic

Encounterandthequestioningthatthisfirstpieceraised.Thischapter(visualand

written)revealstheprocess,actionandreflectionof“Let’sDanceSugarLips”and

identifiessignificantinsightsfromthisworkandhowthisinformedthenextpiecein

thepractice-ledenquiry.

Observations:blurringthephysical-virtual

InTheRomanticEncountertheintentionwastoblurtheboundarybetweenthe

physicalandvirtualthroughthecreationofapublicparticipatoryperformanceevent,

whichtookplacesimultaneouslyinthephysicalandvirtualsettingofacafé.Thiswork

questionedhowtheeverydaysocialpracticesandetiquettesofmeetingand

communicatinginphysicalspacealteredwhentransferredtoavirtualspace.On

reflection,thisintentiontoblurtheboundariesbetweenthephysicalandvirtual,

throughtheparticipatoryperformanceeventbetweenthetwospaces,waslimited.This

wasduetoparticipantsbeingnewtothevirtualspaceandhavinglittletimetobecome

familiarwiththespaceortheirassignedavatarforperformance.Thisaffectedthe

awarenessoftheirbodilypresenceinthephysicalcaféasattentionwasfocusedonthe

screenintheirvirtualinteraction.

Thenotionofthegesturesmenuwithinsecondlifeactingasrule‘toprescribeawayof

actingorbehaving’(Backe,2009,p.109)sharessimilaritiestothatofthe‘EventScore’

54

presentinearlyFluxusworksofthe1960s.InitiatedbyAmericanartistGeorgeBrecht

in1959,thismethodwasadoptedwidelybyFluxusartistsasaperformancescriptfor

eventsandexercises.InFluxusExperience(2002,p.2)HannahHigginsstatesthat“in

theEvent,everydayactionsareframedasminimalisticperformances,or,occasionally,

asimaginaryandimpossibleexperimentswitheverydaysituations”.Theseemingly

simpleinstructions,presentedaseventscoresbyBrecht,achievedmuchmorethanan

offerofaperformancescript.Thesebecamemethodstoframeexperiencesofthe

everydayandinvolveaudiencemembers,usingtheplayfulelementsofagame-like

structure.Inthisworkasimilarapproachismadeintheuseofthegesturesmenuasa

rulebasedstructureor‘score’forthechoreographingofavatarsmovementinthe

virtualspace.Theintentionofthisframedperformanceistoraisecriticalquestioning

oftheeverydayvirtualpracticepresentinSecondLifeofcommunicatingthrougha

prescribedgesturesmenu.

Figure18.“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,methodologicaldiagram,2011

55

ObservationandreflectiononTheRomanticEncounterpromptedtheneedtoreverse

theattentionfromthephysical-virtualtothevirtual-physical:raisingquestionto

possibilitiesofextractingthevirtualpracticesofthisspacetobere-performedinthe

physical.Specificallyexaminingthegesturesmenuasruleorscoretochoreograph

performanceandtheattempttoembodyouravatarsphysicallythroughre-

performanceoftheirmovement.Reflectionsonthepreviouscyclealsoraisedthe

necessityforthenextpieceofworktobeoflongerduration,withasmallergroupof

participantswhomwouldhavetimetocreatetheirowndigitalself:avatarinSecond

Liferatherthanperformingasanassignedavatar.

ItwasthroughreviewingthedocumentedtranscriptoftheconversationduringThe

RomanticEncounter,inwhichInotedthattheparticipants’discussioninthevirtualcafé

relatedtoeachothers’movementandtheinvitationtooneanothertodance.Onone

occasionanavataradds“Let’sDanceSugarLips”tothecollectiveconversation.The

wordingofthisinvitationencapsulatedtheplayfulandslightlyprovocative

performancethatwasintendedintheframeworkoftheeventasaspeed-datebetween

avatars.Thisphraseasinvitationwaslaterselectedasthetitleforthenextpieceof

workintheaction-reflectioncycle,inordertocontinuetomirrortheinitial

observationsfromSecondLifeandthepreviouscycleofwork.

TheseobservationsfromTheRomanticEncounterraisednewquestionstoinvestigate

throughparticipatoryperformanceinthepractice-ledenquiry:

Howdoeverydaysocialpracticesandetiquettesofmeetingandcommunicating

invirtualspacealterwhentransferredtoaphysicalspace?Specifically:how

canthegesturesmenuchoreographmovementofdigitalavatarstobere-

performedinaphysicalspace?Andhowarethedifferencesbetweenthevirtual

andphysicalexaminedintheparticipatoryperformancetocameraandinthe

subsequentvideodocumentationofthisperformance?

Planning

In“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,therefore,Iintendedtofurtherinvestigategesturalformsof

communication,observedthroughinterventionsinSecondLifeandreflectionson

56

participantsintheirvirtualperformancesinTheRomanticEncounter.Onreflectionand

inmovingtheanalysistothenextcycleofpractice-ledenquiry,Iplannedforthenext

pieceofpracticetotakeplaceduringtheSummerLodgeresidencyinJuly2011at

NottinghamTrentUniversity.Thiswasduetotheimportancetoworkcloselywitha

smallgroupofparticipantsinanintensesix-hourlongparticipatoryworkshop,tothe

accessofcomputerequipment,accesstoSecondLifeandaperformancespace.The

intentiontocoincidewiththeresidencywasalsotohaveanaudiencewithwhomto

sharethefinalperformancetocamera.

Theresidencybeganwiththeanalysisofthetranscriptgeneratedintheconversations

betweenparticipantsoverthetwo-hourlongeventinthepreviouswork.Itransformed

thisintoapotentialscriptforperformance,tobere-performedtofurtherreflectonthe

outcomesanddocumentsofthiscycleofenquiry.Anextractofthiswasreadaloudwith

thehelpofpeopleintheaudienceaspartofapaperforapostgraduateconference.In

thereadingofthisaloudinapublicspace,asitechoedthroughthelecturetheatre,it

drewattentiontothedifferenceofshorttextualcommunicationpresentinthevirtual

space.Thephrase“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,extractedfromthisoriginaltranscript,

becameaformofnewprovocationandinvitationformyselfandtheparticipantsofthe

workshoptoinvestigatetheoftensocialpracticeofdancing,inaparticipatory

performancebetweenvirtualtophysicalspace.

Forthesix-hourworkshopIinvitedsixparticipantstojoinmeinthecollectiveaction

andreflectionofparticipatoryperformance.Thisincludedthreeartistsandthree

undergraduateartstudentsfromtheUniversity.Itwasimportantthattheywouldbe

dedicatedtothesix-hourstoenabletimeforcollectiveconversation,planning,action

andreflection.Inthiscase,followingthelastcycle,Iintendedtoworkmoreclosely

withparticipants,andthereforeinvitedthemtobepartofthecyclicalmethodology.

57

Workshopinvitationandstructure

Tobegin,theinvitedparticipantsreceivedthefollowinginformation:

AspartoftheSummerLodgeresidencyatNottinghamTrentUniversityIwillbe

playingwithascript–forthefirsttime–thathastranspiredfromdialoguesand

exchangessharedduringtheparticipatoryperformanceTheRomanticEncounter,

whichtookplacebetweenaphysicalandvirtualLeeRosy’sCafé.Thishasraised

questioning as to whether talking, flirting, and dancing in an anonymous and

virtualspacecanbemirroredortranslatedinaphysicalspace.

Iwillbeworkingwithsixartistsinaworkshopsettingtoplaywiththereadingof

thisscript,toexplorepossibilitiesofperforming,movinganddancingasanavatar

andtoexplorenewmodesofparticipatoryperformancepractice.

The “Let’s Dance, Sugar Lips” Workshop is an experimental and collaborative

workshopbetweensevenartists.Wewillexplorethepossibilityofembodyingan

avatar: Can we think, move, chat, perform and dance as a digital self? This

involvesplayingwiththereadingofanexperimentalscript,creatingadigitalself,

choreographing a dance in Second Life and dancing with each other and each

othersavatars.

12.30–1.30:Introductions

1.30–2.30:Playingwiththescript

2.30–3.30:Creatingyouravataridentity

3.30–4.00:Choreographingaone-minutedanceinSecondLife.

4.00–4.30:Break

4.30–5.30:Dancingwithavatars

5.30–6.30:Discussion

58

ActionandFacilitation

Reflectionsofhostandguests

Withthenegotiationsbetweenfivetechnicianscomplete,Isuccessfullyhave

accesstocomputerandperformancespaces,theappropriatesoftwaretoopen

SecondLifeonsevencomputers,andthecamerasandscreensneededforthe

performance,beforetheworkshopparticipantsarrive.Withthedocuments

printedandthecamerassetupinboththevirtualandphysicalspace,Ifinally

tapetheboundaryofthecameraviewandsetoutsevenchairs.Imeetand

welcomeeachoftheparticipantsastheyarrive.Oncesettledintheworkshop

spaceweareseatedandIbeginwithanintroductiontotheworkshopcontext

andstructure,Isetthecontextofthispracticeascomingfromaninterestin

everydaypracticesandhumanbehavioursandhowthishasshiftedtothevirtual

practicesthatexistinourinteractionsonline.Whilethereisacontextand

structurefortheworkshop,Iencourageeachartisttoconsidertheirpersonal

interestandquestioningthroughthisindividualandcollectiveaction-reflection.

Weeachsharethiswiththegroup:Rebecca:

IamalsointerestedinwhoMarielais(mydigitalavatar),whyshelooksthewayshe

doesandwhyIhaveadesiretodancewithher,copyher,movelikeher?Thereisa

connectionhere;sheismyvirtualidentity.Iaminterestedinexploringherfurther.Iam

alsointerestedinhowweworktogether,howwemightperformcollectivelyandwhat

happensinthisenvironmentasweattempttomovelikeanavatar.

Brendan:

Interestedinthepostmodernnotionofthatpeopledon’thaveafixed,consistentself,

thatwearecontingentoncontextandcircumstanceandinastateoffluidity,andIwas

wonderingiftheavataristhemanifestationofthatfluidself.Iaminterestedinwhatthe

realityisofdancinginbothspaces.

LJ:

OneofthethingsthatI’mlookingforwardtoistheideaofmovement,I’minterestedin

theincidentaleverydayactionsandhowthatinformsyouridentityandhowthatcould

beusedinamorecreativeway.IamlookingforwardtoseeinghowIcanforman

identitythroughcertainmovementsoftheavatar.

59

Katherine:

Iaminterestedincreatingsomekindofuncannycomputerisedversionofmyself,totry

tomakeanaccuratereplicaofmyself,soitwouldbequitesimilar,butnotlikeme.I

wanttoseewhatcharacteristicsIkeepandwhichonesthatIjustcan’tgetanywhere

nearto.MaybeempathisingwithmyselfandtryingtoprojectwhatIdoincertain

situations,andactingthatout,virtually.Steppingoutsideofmyselfandseeingitonthe

screen.

Sally:

Iaminterestedinbodilymovements;Ithinkitwillbequiteinterestingtobecome

awareofthis,asobviouslywetakeourbodilymovementsasquiteinstinctive.Itwillbe

interestingtobemoreawareofthesesubtlebodilymovements,andthedifferencesyou

cancreate,andhowthatcouldaltersomebody’sperception.

Emily:

Alotofthingsinmyworkaretodowithputtingthingsintoboxes,thereisametaphor

ofputtingthingsintoboxes:todayIfeellikeI’mcreatinganidentityinavirtualbox.

Theprocessofconstruction–deconstruction,andhavingaplaywiththis.Iamalso

interestedinthis,asonasociallevelIlovedancing–itwillbeinterestingtoexplore

thatwithinacreativeandartisticprocess.

WithallparticipantshavingnopriorexperienceofSecondLife,Ifacilitatetheir

firstintroductiontoit.Astheyopentheapplicationforthefirsttime,theyare

giventheoptionofeightavataridentitiestoselectfrom,includingmale,female,

animalandrobot.Afterpickingan‘offtheshelf’avatarIintroducethemtothe

‘Inventory’withinSecondLife,whereoptionstoclothingandbodypartsare

availableandwheretheycanalterthesizeandshapeoftheiravatar’sbodyand

features,andtheirskin,hairandeyecolour.Wenowsitinsilence,intworowsof

computers,carefullycreatingandeditingourdigitalselves.Someattemptinga

digitalreplicaoftheirownphysicalappearancewithotherscreatingapotential

alter-egosharingsomesimilaritiestotheirappearance,andothers

experimentingwithadifferentgendertothemselvesorasahybridavatar

betweenhumanbodyandmachine.AfterabreakfromthescreenIintroducethe

participantstothegesturesmenuwithin‘MyInventory’inSecondLife.Thisisa

listof‘Gestures’whichactaspre-designedanimationstoinstructyouravatarto

move.ThesecanbetriggeredbysettingdifferentshortcutkeyswithinSecond

60

LifeandviewedusingthevariousviewpointswithinSecondLife;makingit

possibletoviewyourownavatarfromabove,infrontorbehind.Themenu

includesmaleandfemalegestures,somewithsoundeffects.Webeginby

experimentingwithallofthese;theparticipantstakingpleasureinseeingtheir

avatarmoveforthefirsttime.Weeachspendtimefamiliarisingourselveswith

thegesturesmenu,creatingnewtriggersthroughshortcutkeys,andtestingout

differentpatternsofgestures.Workingtothedurationofone-minuteandusing

themenuasscript,weeachchoreographourownmovementinthevirtualspace

–makingnotesofoursequence:/rock/muscle/stretch/whistle/dance1

/smoke/bow/clap.Withlittlerehearsaltime,wegatherouravatarswithin

SecondLife,toperformtocamera–throughtheuseofiShowUscreencapture

software.Themusicstartsandwebegintodance;franticallyhittingkeys,typing

shortcuts,pressingbuttonsusingthescriptcreatedasalistofgesturesfromthe

menu.Withafewfalsestartsandattempts,wefinallyachieveaperformanceof

movementasagroup,endingasaone-minute,twenty-seconddance.

WereconveneinthephysicalperformancespacewhereIplaybackthefinal

virtualperformancetocamera.Eachfascinatedinwatchingthemovementof

ouravatar,andsuddenlyawareofthenextchallenge:torepeatthisphysically

throughourbodyintheperformancespace.Inordertowarmupandpractice

mimickingmovementthroughliveobservation,wegatherinacircletoconduct

anexercise.Withconcentrationsingularlyplacedontheparticipantopposite,

eachparticipantobservesanother’sbody.Whileattemptingtoremainstill,each

ofuscloselyobservetheothers’slightestofgesture;theblinkingoftheireyes,

thetwitchingoftheirlips,themovementoftheirfingersorreadjustmentoftheir

posture.Observationsmadearethenre-performedandslightlyexaggerated.As

eachexaggerationripplesthroughthecircle,wegainmomentumfromtheinitial

stillmovementuntilourbodiesarenaturallydancingtogether.

Weorganiseourpositionsinthephysicalspacetomirrorthatofouravatarsin

thevirtualspace.Thescreenplayingthevirtualchoreographedmovementis

positionedunderneaththecameraintheperformancespace.Themusicstarts

andwebegintodance;mimickingouravatarsbodies,attemptingtoviewthe

61

screenwhilemovingthroughthespace,tryingtonotobstructorcrashintoone

another.Oureyesfixedonthescreen;wejump,stretch,twirl,runanddance

throughtheinstructionofourdigitalavatar.Werepeatthisthreetimesand

withoutthemusic.

ReflectionsandAnalysis

Figure20.“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,digitalchoreographinSecondLife,2011

Followingtheworkshop,reflectiononactiontookplacethroughtheobservationofthe

capturedvideofromtheperformancesinthevirtualaswellasphysicalspaceand

throughconversationsandreflectionswiththegroupofparticipants.Thevideo

documentationoftheperformancetocamerainthevirtualandphysicalwaseditedto

becomeasplit-screenvideo,inwhichthefirstperformanceandtheattemptin

mimickingthedigitalavatarsgesturescouldbeviewedtogether.Thisfollowedwiththe

disseminationofthevideototheresearchcommunityinSummerLodgeresidency.

“Let’sDanceSugarLips”wastheresultoftheactionandreflectionofthefirstcycleof

practice-ledenquiry,TheRomanticEncounter.Inparticularthisintendedtofurther

examinethemodesofgesturalcommunicationanddigitalmovementpresentinSecond

Life,structuredthroughthemenuofgesturesprovidedbyLindenLab.Idesignedthe

workshoparoundthesystematicprocessofaction-research,inwhichtheparticipants

62

wereinvolvedintheplanning,actionandreflectionstagesofthecycle.Participants

werefacilitatedintheiruseofSecondLife,howevernotintheircreationoftheirown

digitalavatarortheselectedmovementoftheirchoreographeddance.These

choreographyscoresbecamelistsofkeyboardfunctionkeysandshort-cuts,totrigger

gestures,suchas/dance1,/bow,/clapandF6totwirl,drawingsimilaritiestothe

Fluxuseventscoreasinstructionforperformance.Thisresultedinaone-minuteand

twenty-seconddanceinthevirtualspace,capturedthroughthesoftwareiShowU.It

wasthefinaldance,offiveattempts,whichweagreedtouseasthevideofromwhichto

mimicandre-performthedance.Thisre-performancewasthroughtheliveobservation

andmimickingoftheavatarsgestures,asviewedthroughascreenintheperformance

space.Therewasnopracticeorrehearsalofthesegestures.Weperformedthisfour

timestoallbeabletofollow,ascloselyaspossible,thedigitallychoreographed

movementsofouravatars.Thereweresomedifficultiesinremainingintheposition

thatmirroredthevirtualspace,asthiswasreversedinthephysicalspace.Wenoticed

thattheuseofmusicinthephysicalperformanceledourselvestonaturallybeginto

dance;respondingtothebeatofthemusic.Wedecidedtochangethisandtoinstead

dancesilently,sothatattentionwasdrawnonlytothemimickingofdigitalgesture.

Attemptingtoembodytheavatar

Inthispractice-ledenquiry,weattemptedtoembodyouravatarsinaphysicalworld.

ThedigitallychoreographeddancefromSecondLifewasthenrepeatedphysically,as

weattemptedtomimicouravatarperformance.MelindaRackham(2006)considersit

anecessityto‘becomeanavatar’invirtualnetworkedspacesinorderto‘operateina

parallelspace’andtoinhabitandinteractwithothersinthismulti-usercommunity:

“Tobecomepartofthevirtualnetworkedenvironmentinamultisensorymode,

theusermustinhabitthesoftware-constructedmaterialpresenceofanavatar,

producinginterlinkedpossibilitiesforsubjectiveandinteractiveperspectives.

Thisprovidesphysicaldimensionandparametersforcontactintheworld,a

malleablecodedskinwithwhichtheusermaytouchothersinsoftspace.”

(Rackham2006,53-54)

63

Theprocessofcreatingadigitalself:avatar,inavirtualspaceinvolvesidentity

formationmostlythroughthedigitalbodyandappearanceoftheavatar.Theoffer

madebyLindenLabforthisvirtualworldasaspacewithinfinitecreativepossibilities

foravataridentityconstructionappearstobetrueinthereflectionsontheworkshop.

Forexample,ofthesixparticipants,onechangedgender,onecreatedadigitalversion

ofherself,twohadelementsoftheirbodilyappearanceincorporated,butwere

drasticallydifferentinappearancealsoandoneavatarbecameahybridbetweena

humanbodyandablackcar.Onemorphedshape,genderandnon-humanformsmany

times,untilheranoutoftime.Duetocreatinganavatarwithnolimbswhocouldn’t

performthedance,withhislackoftimeandtechnologicalunderstandingheresultedto

goingbacktothestartandselectinganavatarofftheshelf,forwhichhechoseanavatar

whomresembledthefilmcharacterEdwardScissorhands(1990).

Theattempttoembodyanavatarthroughmovementandgesturesisclearinthevideo

documentation,aswemovemoremechanicallyandthroughtheconcentrationand

uncertaintyonourfaces.Therebecamegreatdifficultyinrepeatingaccuratelythe

choreographedmovementinthevirtualspace,inpartduetothedelaybetweenthe

humanphysicalcommandsofthecomputerkeyboardandmouse,tothespeedatwhich

theSecondLifegestureanimationbegan.Interestingly,thisbecamemirroredinthe

physicalre-performance,whichcanbeseeninthesplit-screenvideodocumentation,

wherethereisadelaybetweentheparticipantsviewingthemovementonscreenand

instructingtheirbodytomimicthis.Intryingtoachieveasenseofembodimentinour

avatarsthroughthisactofstudyingandmimickingmovement,insteadwhatisachieved

isamomentarydisembodimentfromthephysicalworld,unawareofeachotherorthe

camera,inthissilent,non-spontaneous,andunsocialactofperformingadance

choreographedusingthegesturesmenuofSecondLife.

Fromstudyingthevideothereisclearuncertaintyinourmovements,asweattemptto

performa1minute,20secondchoreographeddanceofanewlycreatedavatarin

SecondLife,withlittlepracticeandnorehearsal.Webeginbyfacingthecameraand

continuetoturntofacethefront,staringblanklyandemotionlessly,asavatarsdo,ina

similarwaytohowavatarswonderinSecondLife.Oneparticipantspendsmuchtime

wonderingaround,attemptingtobeinthecorrectpositionandfailingtomoveas

64

ambitiouslyasshehaschoreographedheravatartomove.Oneparticipantismetwith

thechallengeofinterpretingthephysicalityofacarasatorso.There-framingfromthe

digitalmakesthisdanceabstract,ridiculousandhumorous,similarlytotheattributes

ofthetranscriptfromTheRomanticEncounter,re-framedasascriptforperformance.

Thevideodocumentationofthisexperimentalpracticemapsthebeauty,absurdityand

impossibilitiesintheattempttoembodyadigitalself.Theuncertainandrobotic

movementsofthedancersachievesadisconnectionanddisembodimentfromthereal

worldtheyarewithin,unawareofeachother,thecamera,theaudience,orthemselves.

Theinclusionofthemusic(“EverybodyDance”byChic,1973)onthefinalvideoedit

wasincludedduetofirstbeingusedwhenchoreographingthedanceinthevirtual

space.AttheclosingeventoftheSummerLodgeresidency,Iprojectedthesplitscreen

videoofourdigitalandphysicalperformanceofavatars,theaudiencesreactionswere

offascinationandamusementandwatchingthemwatchingusonscreenimmediately

feltlikea‘performance’tothem;onethatentertainedandreceivedanapplause.

Summary

Thefirstquestionraisedintheplanningstagesofthispractice-ledenquiryrelatedto

howeverydaysocialpracticesandetiquettesofmeetingandcommunicatinginvirtual

spacealterwhentransferredtoaphysicalspace?Thispieceofworkinvestigatedthe

virtualpracticeofperforminggesturesinSecondLifeusingaprescribedmenuoffered

byLindenLab.Thisparticipatoryworkshop“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,employedthe

gesturesmenuasperformancescriptor‘score’tochoreographadancedigitally,tobe

re-performedinanattempttoembodytheavatarthroughthemimickingofmovement.

Thetransferalbetweenthevirtuallychoreographeddance–tothere-performancein

physicalspacewaschallengingduetosomeoftheimpossibilitiesofmovingourbodies

inwayswhichareonlypossibleinadigitalspace.Inthisprocessthesocialand

relationalcontextofdancingtogetherwasremoved.Theactionbecameanindividual

performanceratherthanacollectiveone:eachperformingmethodicallytoinstruction–

as–choreographicscoreinthevirtualspaceandlaterintherepetitionofthemovement

inthephysicalspace.Therebecameanoticeableautomatedmodetoourbehaviour

65

duringandafterthephysicalperformance,thereforesuggestingthephysical

embodimentofdigitalavatarispossible.

Thesecondquestionrevealedthedifferencesbetweenthevirtualandphysical,

examinedintheparticipatoryperformancetocamera,andinthesubsequentvideo

documentationofthisperformance.Theexaminationtookplacethrougheachspace

actingas‘frame’tocriticallyviewtheother(Goffman1961).Interestinglyinthe

processofembodyingouravatarthroughmovementinthephysicalspace,weachieved

atemporarydisembodimentfromthephysicalspace.Thisbecamenoticeablethrough

thevideodocumentation,inwhichparticipantsarerarelyawareofeachothersbodies

orthepotentiallyself-consciousactofdancingtocamera.

Contributionstoknowledge

InthisworkIdevelopedacloserrelationshiptomyavatarMariela,andthroughthere-

performanceofhervirtualgesturesandmovementIfirstencounteredwhatappeared

toachieveablurringbetweenthevirtualandphysical,thanpreviouslyexperienced.

Thiswasduetotheconnectionandre-framingofthevirtual:physicalandthefirst

experienceofbeginningtoembodyavatarinthephysicalspacethroughparticipatory

performance.Thismotivatedthequestioningleadingtothenextcycleofenquiry:to

investigatepossibilitiesforperformingasavatarinaphysicalspacewithoutthe

presenceofdigitaltechnology.Whilethisworkgeneratedanaction-reflectionbetween

thesixparticipantsandmyself,itsdisseminationinaprivateperformancespaceaspart

ofaninternalresidencyresultedinnotachievingawidercollectiveinvestigationof‘the

everyday’inapublicsituationthroughparticipatoryperformance.Thisraisednew

necessitytosituatethenextcyclemorepublically.

66

MARIELA:CMD,CLICK,CONTROL

Figure20.“Let’sDanceSugarLips”,digitalchoreographinSecondLife,2011

Thereaderisinvitedtoviewtheaccompanyingvisualchapterbeforeandalongsidethis

writtenchapter.Thevisualchaptercanbefoundonline,here:

http://thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/mariela-cmd-click-control

Thechapterpresentsselecteddocumentationofthepractice-ledenquiry,includingthe

methodologydiagram.Thechapterisstructuredusingthecorestagesofthedeveloped

methodologicalcycleofobserve;plan;action/facilitation(livereflectionsashost);

reflection/analysis;andsummary.

67

Introduction

Mariela:cmd,click,controlwasaliveparticipatoryperformanceasdigitalavatar

Mariela,structuredasaninterventioninTheWalkCaféinNottinghamtocafé

customersonaSundayafternooninJuly.IttookplaceaspartoftheFoodforThought:

NoisyEatersperformanceprogramme,curatedbyBacklitGalleryforNotLostFestival.

Forthedurationofone-hour,thedigitalavatarofMarielawaspresentinthecafé.

Customerscouldordergesturesfromthemenuprovidedontheirtable,afterwhich

Marielawouldbedeliveredtotheirtabletoperform.Asthethirdpieceofworkinthe

practice-ledenquiry,thiswasinformedbytheobservationsandoutcomesof“Let’s

DanceSugarLips”andidentifiessignificantinsightsfromthisworkandhowthis

informedthenextpieceofpractice-ledenquiry.

Observations:digitalgesturesmenuasperformancescore

Figure21.Mariela,cmd,click,control,gesturesmenuascafémenu,2011

In“Let’sDanceSugarLips”thepiecereversedtheinitialinvestigationinTheRomantic

Encounterfromthephysical:virtualtothevirtual:physical,inusingoneasaframeto

observeandanalysetheotherthroughparticipatoryperformance.Itdidthisthrough

68

adoptingthegesturesmenuofSecondLifetochoreographadanceinthevirtualspace

tobere-performedinaphysicalspaceandthroughtheresultingsplit-screenvideoof

theseactions.Thisoriginatedfromobservationsofthegesturesmenuasarule-based

instructionformovement,which,duetotheprescribedgesturesprovidedbyLinden

Lab,resultsinatheatricalandflirtatiousdisplayofbehaviourincommunication

betweenavatarsinSecondLife,thusaffectingthesocialpracticesofthisspace.On

reflection,theexperienceofbeginningtoembodyouravatarsthroughthemimickingof

theirdigitalmovementdevelopedtheresearchasthepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife,

presentinthegesturalcommunicationofSecondLife,begantobecriticallyquestioned

throughthetacticofre-performanceexternaltothevirtualspace.

ThisraisedanincreasedinterestintheexplorationofmydigitalavatarMarielaEyre,in

particular,tothepotentialforphysicalembodimentofherthroughparticipatory

performance,withoutthevirtualspacebeingpresentintheliveperformance.I

thereforereturnedtoSecondLifetoexamineandpracticethemimickingofdigital

gesturesofMariela.

Figure22.Mariela,cmd,click,control,observingdigitalmovement,2011

InthisobservationandonreflectionfromthepreviouscycleInotedthesignificancein

theactofinstructingthedigitalavatartomove,usingalistofcommand(cmd)keys,

keyboardshortcutsandmouseclicks.Thisinitiatedthetitle‘cmd,click,control’within

thetitleofthisnextcycle.

69

Figure23.Mariela,cmd,click,control,methodologicaldiagram,2011

Theobservationsfollowing“Let’sDanceSugarLips”informedthepractice-ledenquiry

toinvestigate:

HowcantheeverydaycommunicationpracticesofthevirtualspaceofSecond

Lifebecometacticsforparticipatoryperformancetocriticallyquestion‘hybrid

space’?

Planning:liveinterventionasMariela

InMariela:cmd,click,control,therefore,Iintendedtoonceagainextracttherulebased

structureofthegesturesmenuofSecondLifeastacticforcreatingascriptorscorefor

participatoryperformance.However,inthispiecethegesturesmenuwashandedover

totheparticipants,withwhichtheycouldcreatethe‘score’tochoreographlive

movementofadigitalavatarinaphysicalspace.Thisintendedtointroducenewlevels

ofresponsibilityandtrustintherelationshipbetweenartistandparticipant.On

reflectionandinmovingtheanalysistothenextcycleofenquiry,Iplannedthispieceto

70

takeplaceinthepublicsettingofacitywideartsfestival,toenableanewaudienceof

potentialparticipants.

InplanningtheeventIspenttimeinSecondLifetofurtherexplorethegesturesmenu

andtocarefullystudyhowherdigitalbodymoveswheninstructedbyoneofthe

animatedgestures,includinghowshestoodorsatbetweengestures.Ipracticed

mimickingthesedigitalgesturesthroughphysicalmovementtoattempttoaccurately

re-performthem.InadditiontothisIworkedwithadressmakertocreateanoutfitthat

accuratelyrepresentedherappearance.Mariela’sclothinginSecondLifeiscreated

fromthefree‘inventory’providedbyLindenLab,thisincludesblackknee-highboots,

blackskinnyjeans,abodiceandshortflaredskirtwhichgathersatthewaste.Herbody

isnotadaptedfromtheinitial‘off-the-peg’avatar,whichIselectedonfirstentering

SecondLife;itbecameimportanttonotadaptthisinmyintereststorespondtothe

frameworkssetbyLindenLab.However,hershortpinkhair,hergreeneyecolour,the

flowerbehindherearandtheorientaldragontattooacrossherbackareadaptationsto

makeherappearancedifferenttootherdigitalavatarsinSecondLifeandwhichalso,in

part,reflectmyownpersonality.Itwasimportanttoreflecttheseelementsofher

appearanceinattemptingtoembodyherwithinthephysicalworld,whichincluded

hairstyle,heaviermakeup,fakeeyelashesandtemporarytransfertattoos.

TheimportancefortheperformanceinterventionasMarielatobepartofacurated

performanceplatforminacitywideartfestivalwasinprovidinganewphysicalspace

inthecityandadifferentaudiencewithinthesupportedframeworkoftheartistic

programme.Inparticular,Iworkedwiththecuratoraheadoftheeventtodiscussthe

printedinvitationtoparticipate,theduration,arrivalanddepartureandthevideo

documentationoftheliveperformance.Thewaitingstaffofthecaféwerebriefedonthe

structureoftheinterventionandtheirinvolvementintakingordersfromamenuof

gesturesprovidedwithinthecafébeforeleadingmetothetablesforperformance.

ThefirstintroductiontoMarielawasas‘Today’sSpecial’withinaprintedmenuforcafé

customersandfestivalgoerswithintheprintedprogrammeofthedaysperformances.

Thiswasaccompaniedbydetailsofhowtoorderandalistof‘Mariela’sGesturesMenu’.

71

Thisread:

Marielaisthegirlwiththedragontattoo.Sheliveshernomadicvirtuallifeonlineina

SecondLife,driftingthroughthisdigitallandscape,squattinginotheravatarshomes

andislands,longingtofindotherstodancewithher.

MARIELAISHERE

MARIELAISTODAY’SSPECIAL

Youcanselectand[cmd]herto/danceforyou,blowyoua/kiss,/lol,or/bowtoyou.

TocommandMarielatomoveforyou,selectagesturefromthegesturesmenuand

placeyourorderwithoneofthewaitresses.

MARIELA’SGESTURESMENU

/bow

/clap

/dance1

/dance2

/dance3

/dance4

/kiss

/kmb

/lol

/smile

/smoke

/wave

ActionandFacilitation

Figure24.Mariela,cmd,click,control,2011

72

Reflectionsashost

It’s1.00pm,Sunday.Twohoursbeforetheperformance.I’mathome,acrosstown

fromthecafé.Imakemyselfup:hairbackcombedandbee-hived,make-upand

falseeyelashesapplied,temporarytattoostransferred.Ilayerthegarments:

bodice,jeans,skirt,shirtandzipuptheknee-highblackleatherboots.Idrinktwo

shotsofvodkaandawaitmypre-bookedtaxi.InthetaxithereIamsilentuntilwe

arriveatthestreetleadingtothecafé.Itakeadeepbreathandenteratexactly

3pm.Thebellatthetopofthedoorsoundsasitopens,theonlyannouncementto

thearrivalofMariela.Shesitsdownonachairatareservedcornertableatthe

entrancetothecaféandisstill.Sheawaitsherfirstcommand.Asshewaitsher

bodyslowlyslumps,becominginactiveavatar.Tenminuteslaterthewaiter

arriveswiththefirstorder.Hegentlyplacestheorder-sliponthetableinfrontof

Marielaandmovestowaitatthecafécounter.Shepausestoviewthecommand.It

reads:“Table4.2xSmile.”Shestandsandapproachesthewaiter.Heleadshertoa

cornertablewheretwowomenareseated.Sheplacestheorder-sliponthetable

infrontofthemandperformstwosmiles.Thisisfollowedbyashortpausebefore

turninginoneswiftmovementandreturningquicklytoherseat.Shesitsdown

andisstill.Thenextorder-slipisreceivedafewminuteslater.Thewaiterplaces

theorder-sliponthetableinfrontofMarielaandtakesonestepback.Shepauses

toviewthecommand.Itreads:“Table6.dance#2.1xwave.”Shestandsandisled

bythewaitertoamiddletableontheleftwheretwowomenareseated.She

placestheorder-sliponthetableinfrontofthemandperformstheanimated

dance/2followedbyonewave.Thisisfollowedbyashortpausebeforeturningin

oneswiftmovementandreturningquicklytoherseat.Shereceivesanapplause

fromthetwowomenandafewsurroundingtables.Shesitsdownandisstill.She

awaitshernextcommand.Overthenextforty-minutes,fourmoretableorders

aremadewiththewaiterorwaitress.Witheachorder-slipreceivedsherepeats

thesameactionin:herarrivaltothetable,herperformanceofthecommands

listedontheorder-slip,theshortpauseandquickreturntoherseat.Eachtime

andwiththelongerlistofcommands,sheseemstoattractmoreattentionwithin

thecaféandtheapplauseseemstoripplefurtherfromthetablebeingperformed

to.Inthelastfewminutesoftheperformanceintervention,Marielareceivesa

73

finalorder-slipfromthewaiter.Heplacestheorder-sliponthetableinfrontof

Marielaandtakesonestepback.Shepauses,thistimeforlonger,toviewthe

command.Itreads:“1xwave.1xlol.1xdance#4,1xsmoke,1xkmb,1xsmile,1x

clap,1xbow.”Shestandsandisledbythewaitertotheimmediatetableonthe

rightwhereawomanandtwomenareseated.Sheplacestheorder-sliponthe

tableinfrontofthemandperformseachcommandlistedinsequenceonthe

orderslip.Thisisfollowedbyashortpausebeforeturninginoneswiftmovement

andreturningquicklytoherseat.Shereceivesashortapplausefromthe

surroundingtables.Shesitsdownandisstillforaminutebeforestandingand

departingthecafé.Thebellatthetopofthedoorsoundsasitcloses,theonly

announcementtothedepartureofMariela.

ReflectionandAnalysis

FollowingtheliveinterventionofMariela:cmd,click,control,reflectiononactiontook

placethroughobservationofphotographicandvideodocumentationandtheorder-

slipstakenbythewaitersandwaitressesinthecafé.Ialsogatheredfeedbackthrough

conversationswiththecuratorandsomefestivalgoerswhoparticipated.

InMariela:cmd,click,controlIattemptedtoembodymyavatarMarielathroughmy

appearanceinclothing,hairstyle,makeupandtattoos,andinmybodilymovementand

gestures.ThiswastheresultofanintenseperiodofobservationsmadeinSecondLife

tostudyandpracticethemimickingofdigitalgesturesofMariela.Forthedurationof

thehour,IperformedasMariela.Sheremainedinthecornerofthecaféwhile

customerswereinvitedtoorderfromthegesturesmenuprovidedontheirtablewhen

orderingtheirfoodanddrinkwiththewaiterorwaitress.Whenanorderwasmade

fromthegesturesmenu,Marielawouldbeledtothetabletoperformthesequenceof

commandstomirrortheactionofselectinggesturesfromamenutocommandan

avatartomoveinSecondLife.

Removingthedigital

InthispieceIremovedthepresenceofthedigitalscreenofaliveorrecorded

demonstrationofthevirtualspaceofSecondLife.Insteadthepresenceofmydigital

74

avatarMarielaonlyexistedinawrittentitleandintroductiontoherandinmyphysical

presenceperformingasherforonehourduringtheevent.Thetitle,‘Mariela:cmd,click,

control’referredtotheactionsintheinstructionofthedigitalavatartomove,usinga

listofcommand(cmd)keys,keyboardshortcutsandmouseclickstotriggergestures

fromthemenu.Thetitleintendedtodrawparticipantsattentiontothedigitallanguage,

inparticularcmdasacommonabbreviationforcommandkeyonacomputerkeyboard,

inordertomaketheconnectiontotheperformancesvirtualorigins.

TheexperienceinperformingMariela:cmd,click,controlwaschallenging.While

participationwasstructuredtoorderinggesturesfromaselectionoftwelve,this

resultedinthecommandtoperformandrepeatrehearseddigitalgesturesinanumber

ofdifferentsequencestotablesoftwo-to-fourpeopleinabusycafé.Thisresultedina

feelingofexposureasaperformer-to-table,followinganumberofcommandsinwhich

toentertainorbemusethosepresent,suchasdance;smoke;kiss;wave;laugh;clap;

bow.WhileIfeltvulnerableduringtheperformance,asthoughaperformingpuppetto

ademandingaudience,onreflectionfollowingtheeventIfelttheaudiencehadbeen

generousintheirparticipationastheypushedtheirownlimitstojoininand

reciprocatedwithasenseofencouragementintheiractivationoftheavatartoperform,

withoutwhichtherewouldhavebeennoevent.

Figure25.Mariela,cmd,click,control,videostill,2011

75

Throughobservingthevideodocumentation,itbecameclearthatparticipationwas

alsochallenging.TheflirtatiousandsexualnatureofthegesturesperformedinSecond

Lifeismadestrikinglyclear,throughtheintimate,yetpublic,one-to-oneparticipatory

performanceofuncomfortableorhumorousgesturalperformanceoftheartist.Thereis

aclearuncomfortablenesspresentintheirreaction;astheyvisiblywidentheireyes,

nervouslylaugh,lookatoneanotherorcovertheirmouth.Thisisdue,firstly,tothe

difficultiesfelttowardsthecommandofanotherpersontoperformunfamiliar,

theatrical,roboticorsexualisedgesturesdirectlytotheminapubicspace,andsecondly

totheawarenessoftheirexposuretotherestofthecaféaudienceandtotheir

participationandreactionbeingfilmed.Infeedbackreceivedfromparticipantsthere

wasanoticeableconnectionmadebetweentheperformanceinterventionandthe

digitalcontextinwhichitoriginated.Thismaterialisedthroughthelanguageand

invitationusedontheprintedmenuandintheemotionless,roboticbehaviourand

repetitivemovementsofMariela.

Summary

Thequestionsraisedinthiscycleincluded:howtheeverydayvirtualpracticesof

SecondLifecanbecometacticsforparticipatoryperformancetocriticallyquestion

hybridspace.Itisthroughthetacticofparticipatoryperformanceinthisworkthat

attentionwasdrawntothecommand,clickandcontrolactionsofinstructingadigital

avatartomove.Thesemovements,whenremovedandre-performedfromtheiroriginal

digitalcontext,highlighttheproblematicnatureofeverydayvirtualcommunication,as

itfeelsuncomfortabletoperform,participateorwitnessthisinaphysicalspace.

Whileitexistsasaparticularexampleofvirtualeverydaylife,inonevirtualspace,

encounteredthroughthedigitalembodimentofanavatar,itrelatestomanyofthe

behavioursthatcanbeaccountedforacrossonlinesocialplatforms.Forexample,the

apparentauthorityfeltthroughtheanonymityofonesavatarorprofile,thedistance

betweenwhatisconsideredrealornotduetocommunicationthroughthescreen,an

increasingfamiliarityincommunicatingviascreen,throughtext,comments,tags,

images,videosandgestures.

76

ItwasinthispieceinwhichIobservedthatthroughthelanguageandrule-based

structureofthepracticeofcommunicatingthroughgesturalforms,andthroughthe

participationinthere-performanceofthis,thataquestioningofhybridspacecould

begintobecriticallyquestioned.Thiswasachievedthroughthegradualremovalof

digitaltechnology,andinsteadthroughtheemergenceofembodyingdigitalavatar,

whomnowexistsexternallytotheoriginatingvirtualspaceofSecondLife.

TheembodimentofMarielainthispiecehoweverwaslimitedtotherepetitionof

virtualgesturesinstructedbytheaudience-participantsinthecaféandhercurrent

digitalappearance.AsMarielabeginstodevelopintoanadvancedavatarthroughtime,

thiswouldneedtobereflectedintheaestheticoftheadvancedavatarscommonin

SecondLife,whombecomevisualspectaclesthroughtheircreativeandtechnically

complicateddigitaldesignsofhybridbodies;parthuman,partotherspecies,part

machineorpartanimatedobject.

Contributionstoknowledge

Thisledtothequestioninginthenextcycletofurtherinvestigaterule-basedstructures

astacticsforparticipatoryperformanceinvestigationofhybridspacewithout

technologyvisiblypresent.Thenextcyclewillcontinuetoinvestigatepotentialtactics

forparticipatoryperformance,specificallyintheinvitation,instruction,duration,levels

ofchoiceandresponsibilitybetweenartist–hostandparticipant–guest.Inorderto

developthisinvestigationitbecamenecessarytochangethestructurefromthe

performanceinterventioninapublicspace,whereparticipationisperformedself-

consciouslyduetothesurroundingaudienceandcamera,toaone-to-oneencounter

betweenartist–hostandparticipant–guest.

77

MARIELAHOSOMAKI

Figure26.MarielaHosomaki,2014

Thereaderisinvitedtoviewtheaccompanyingvisualchapterbeforeandalongsidethis

writtenchapter.Thevisualchaptercanbefoundonline,here:

http://thepracticeofeverydayvirtuallife.com/mariela-hosomaki

Thechapterpresentsselecteddocumentationofthepractice-ledenquiry,includingthe

methodologydiagram.Thechapterisstructuredusingthecorestagesofthedeveloped

methodologicalcycleofobserve;plan;action/facilitation(livereflectionsashost);

reflection/analysis;andsummary.

78

Introduction

MarielaHosomakiwasalive,one-to-oneparticipatoryperformancebetweenmyselfas

digitalavatarMarielaandparticipantsattheHatchNights1-2-1performanceevent,

devisedforaudiencesofone,atPrimaryartiststudiosinNottingham.Foratwo-hour

durationaudienceswere“invitedtoencounteraone-to-onegastronomicperformance

thatplayswithnotionsofhostandguest”.Tacticsofinvitation,instruction,choiceand

trustweretestedintheon-goinginvestigationofhybridspaceandtheexaminationof

participatoryperformancepractice.Asthefourthandculminatingpieceofworkinthe

practice-ledenquiry,thiswasinformedbytheobservationsandoutcomesofeachof

thecycles,inparticularMariela:cmd,click,control,whichidentifiedsignificantinsights

fromthisworkandhowthisinformedtheresearch.

Observations:achievingahybridspace

InMariela:cmd,click,controlthepresenceofthevirtualspacewasremovedto

investigatethepracticeofeverydayvirtuallifethroughtheliveperformanceofdigital

avatarMarielausingthegesturesmenuextractedfromSecondLife.Thispiecewas

structuredasaliveperformanceinterventioninaphysicalcafé,aspartofthe

performanceprogrammeofacitywideartfestival.Thisresultedinthecafébecoming

stageforperformanceswithamixofunsuspectingcafécustomersandfestivalgoers

becomingaudiencemembersandpotentialparticipants.Inthispiecetheparticipation

beganbychoosingtoorderfromthegesturesmenu,providedoneachtablewithinthe

café.Followingtheorderingofanumberofgestureswiththeirwaiterorwaitress,

Marielawouldbedeliveredtoperformattheirtable.Followingtheperformanceof

eachgestureinsequenceofhowithadbeenordered,shereturnedtoherownseatin

thecornerofthecaféandremainedstill,similarlyto‘inactive’digitalavatars,untilshe

receivedanothertableorder.Thispieceofworkresultedintheembodimentofdigital

avatarMariela,achievedforthefirsttimepublicly,throughtherehearsedre-

performanceofbodilygestures,whichoriginatedfromSecondLife,andalsothrough

thealteringofappearanceincludingclothing,hairstyle,make-upandtemporarytattoos

transferredtotheskin.

79

Theperformancerevealedthepracticesofeverydayvirtuallifeinthevirtualworldof

SecondLife,inwhichavatarscommunicatepredominantlythroughgesturesusinga

menuoftheatricalandflirtatiousgesturesprovidedbycreatorsLindenLab,whichthus

affectthetypesofbehaviourcommoninthisvirtualworld.Themostchallenging

aspectsintheperformanceasMarielaandintheparticipationoftheaudiencewerea

resultofthepublicintimacyofperformingprovocativegesturestotablesoftwo-to-four

people.

ThispieceraisedinterestinthefurtherperformanceofMarielaasdigitalidentity,

independentfromthevirtual,inordertofurtherquestionmodesofbehaviourwhich

mirrorthatofavirtualrule-basedstructureandcouldexaminetheroles,relationships

andresponsibilitiesoftheartistandparticipantinparticipatoryperformancepractice.

Thisadvancedtheinvestigationoftactics,specificallyfromthegesturesmenuusedin

Mariela:cmd,click,control,toadaptingtacticsusinginsightsfromeachcycleof

practice-ledenquiry,includingtheinvitation,instruction,duration,levelsofchoiceand

responsibilitybetweenartistandparticipant.Theobservationsfromthethreeprevious

cyclesofpractice-ledenquiry,specificallyintheexaminationoftheeverydaypractices

ofSecondLife,examined:Howdoweliveonline?Thisandtheanalysisofandactive

participationinotherartistsworksledtothequestioningforthisfourthand

culminatingcycle:Howcantacticsofparticipatoryperformancecriticallyquestion

hybridspace?Andwhatarethepotentialroles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesofthe

artist-hostandtheparticipant-guestinthisprocess?

Planning:tacticsofparticipatoryperformance

InMarielaHosomaki,thetacticsofparticipatoryperformanceincluded:invitation,

instruction,duration,rule-basedstructuresofchoice;touseoneofsixinstrumentsto

eitherfeedtheperformer,ortoeatfromthesculpturalgarmentwornbyMariela,and

trust;implicitintheintimateone-to-oneencounterinaprivatespace.

Intheprocessofattemptingtoembodymydigitalself:avatar,Mariela,thisdeveloped

fromthemimickingofgesturesinthedigitallychoreographeddance“Let’sDanceSugar

Lips”totheextractionandre-performanceofgesturesinaliveperformanceinstructed

80

byparticipantsinMariela:cmd,controlclick.Followingthesetwoevents,Mariela

existedasadigitalself,externaltothevirtualworldinwhichshefirstexisted.Through

theperformanceofherinthephysicalspace,therebecameabridgingandan

achievementofthenotionof‘hybridspace’withouttheoriginalvirtualspaceordigital

technologiespresent.Thisnextcycleinthepractice-ledenquiry,therefore,attempted

tofurtherthis;bycreatingnewtacticsofparticipatoryperformance,basedonthose

observedinthevirtualspacefromthegesturesmenu,toanewsetofrulestostructure

theinteractionandparticipationintheone-to-oneencounter.Therulesinthiscycle,

actingastactics,specificallyaimedtostructuretheinteractionbetweentheartistas

host-performerandtheaudienceasparticipant-guestinasimilarwaytohowthe

interactionbetweenavatarsinSecondLifeisperformed.

InordertofurthertheembodimentofMariela,althoughnowadevelopedavatar

followingherencounterswithmoreadvancedavatarsinSecondLife,stillneededher

physicalappearancetobecomethatofahybridbody,sotomirrorsimilarlyadvanced

digitalavatarswhichoftenextendtheelementsofthehumanbody.Thisintendedto

enableparticipantsfirstencounterwithherwithoutpriorindicationtoherasanavatar

“livinghervirtuallifeonlineinSecondLife”asIhadindicatedpreviouslyinthepublic

invitationtoMariela:cmd,controlclick.

Thedecisiontoincludefoodandtocreateagastronomicperformanceoriginatedfrom

theongoingexaminationoftherolesandimplicitresponsibilitiesbetweentheartist-

hostandparticipant-guestinparticipatoryperformance.Reflectionandanalysisto

participatorypracticesandtheoriesdevelopedtheconceptofhospitalityinthis

research.Whilethisconcepthasnotalwaysrelateddirectlytofood,perhapsmoreoften

tothesocialspaceforencounters,ithaspreviouslybeenusedasamethodtoengage

participation,throughtheconvivialactthatexistsinthesharingoffoodanddrink.

Inconsideringthepossibilitiesforthecombinationofaone-to-onegastronomic

participatoryperformanceasahybrid-bodiedavatar,Iworkedwithadressmakerand

asculptortovisualisethepossibilitiesforthisconstruction.Incollaborationwe

consideredpotentialstructuresandmaterialssuitableforwearablesculptural

garments,whichfoodcouldbecarriedorpresentedon.Itwasimportantthatthefood

81

besmallandcompactenoughtositwellonthegarmentsoitcouldbeeasilyaccessed

duringtheperformance.Wedecided,therefore,thatsushiwouldbeanappropriate

foodtypetomeettheseconsiderationsandfollowingresearch,discoveredthatthe

smallesttraditionalsushicommonlyeateninthUKwasthehand-rolledhosomaki

sushi,withriceandingredientswrappedinnori(seaweed)toa1-inchdiameter.This

waslaterincludedinthetitleofthegastronomicperformance;MarielaHosomaki,to

givetheaudienceasensethattheywouldbeencountering‘someone’ofthatname,and

toalsogiveapotentialindicationthatthefoodofferedwouldbesushi.

Theliveparticipatoryperformancewasstructuredasatwo-hourdurational

performanceofone-to-oneencountersbetweenmyself,performingasMarielaandthe

participantswhochosetoencountertheworkduringtheperformanceeventcurated

bytheEastMidlandsperformanceplatformHatch.Itwasintegralforthispiecetobe

encounteredwithinastructuredplatformforperformancesforaudiencesofone,asit

enabledtheparticipantstobewillingindividualswithsomeexperienceorinterestin

performanceandparticipation,ratherthantherandomnatureoftheaudience-

participantsofaninterventioninapublicspace.Thiswasduetotheintimatenature

andtrustrequiredbetweentheperformerandtheparticipantinthispiece.

Thesixinstrumentsincludedtoselectfromtoencounterpiecewere:ametalskewer,

woodenchopsticks,metaltongs,ametalbull-dogclip,ametaldecoratorsscrapperand

acoldcutsfork.

Figure27.MarielaHosomaki,2014

82

Theinvitation

Thepublicinvitationread:

HatchPresentsPrimaryNights:1-2-1

Sunday1stDecember2013

PRIMARY,SeelyRoad,NG71NU

4.30pm–9.00pm

Hatch,theEastMidlands’leadingperformanceplatform,opensupthePrimary

buildingforaselectionofperformancesdesignedforanaudienceofone.Mark

yourdancecardattheHatchBarandchooseyourownadventuresforanevening

ofintimateandplayfulencounters.

PerformancesbyEhsanGill,KatyBaird,LauraDeeMilnes,LeentjeVandeCruys&

TineFeys,LisaNewmanwithAlexLeistiko,randompeople,RebeccaGamble,

RichardHancock,SamMant&TraciKelly

Freeevent(paywhatyouthink)-nopre-bookingrequired

SupportedusingpublicfundingbytheNationalLotterythroughArtsCouncil

England.

ThiseventispartofPRIMARYISOPEN2013,aweekendofopenstudios.

ThepublishedinvitationfortheMarielaHosomakiperformanceread:

MarielaHosomaki

TheBoilerHouse

6.00pm–8.00pm

Youareinvitedtoencountera1-2-1gastronomicperformancethatplayswith

notionsofhostandguest.Chooseyourinstrumentatthedoor.Youareinvitedto

eitherfeedoreat.Theencounterendsonthesoundingofthebell.

MarielaHosomakiisanewartisticcollaborationbetweenaperformer,sculptor

anddressmaker.

RebeccaGamble,KashifNadimChaudryandGenelvaMeikle.

83

ActionandFacilitation:Firstencounters

Thedisclaimer

Thefirstencounterfortheaudience-participantiswithaperformerwhowelcomesyou

atthedoor,drawsyourattentiontotheprintedscriptandreadsitaloudtoyou.The

invitationonthedooractedasa‘disclaimer’.Thisread:

Audiencesofonewerewelcomedasguestsatthedoorbytheir‘host’andreadan

intentionallybriefinvitationtoparticipate,titledasa‘disclaimer’.Thiswasreadtothe

participant-guestbythehost,aperformerwhowasgiventheroletofacilitate

participation.Theyweretheninstructedtochooseananumberbetween1–6andto

indicatewhethertheywouldchosetoeatortofeed,toentertheperformancespace

aloneandaskedtosoundthebellwhentheywantedtoendtheirencounter.On

enteringthedarkenedspacetheyweremetbyMarielaHosomaki,asilentavatar

wearingasculpturalgarmentwhichheldoverfiftypiecesofhosomaki-rolledsushi.The

instruments,numbered1–6werepresentedonthewallforparticipantstounhook

andusetopickupthesushitoeatortofeedittoMariela.Atanypointparticipants

couldsoundthebelltoendtheirencounter–givingthemachoiceofhowtoencounter

theperformanceandhowlongtoexperienceitfor.

84

A‘host’wasemployedasanadditionalperformertowelcomeandfacilitatepotential

participantsbeforetheirencounter.Shewasgivenascripttoreadfrom,thisread:

MarielaHosomaki:Scriptforperformer-hostattheentrance

Whenpeoplearewaitingbythedoor,smile.Waitforthemtoapproachyouandaskto

takepart.Orsimplysay;

“Areyouwaitingforyourencounter?”

PAUSE

smile.

“Welcome.”

“Firstly,Imustdrawyourattentiontothedisclaimer”

PAUSE

READ:

“Chooseyourinstrument.”

(showthemthecards1–6,letthempickandtakeone,thentakeitbackandsay;

“OK,you’reinstrumentnumberis___”

PAUSE

“DecidetoFeedortoEat.”

(Thisisintentionallymeanttobeambiguous,givenootherinformation)

PAUSE

“Eatonlytheshouldersifyou’revegetarian.”

PAUSE

“Allencountersarefilmed.”

PAUSE

“Thesoundofthebellendstheencounter.YouorMarielacansoundthe

bell.”

PAUSE

“Leaveviatheentrance.”

PAUSE

Pushopenthedoor,walkthroughit,pickupthetorch,turnitonandshineit

downthestairs.Turnandsmileattheaudiencemember.

85

ActionandFacilitation

Reflectionsasguest

WayneBurrows,publishedforHatch:

“RebeccaGamblewithNadimChaudry&GenelvaMeikle:MarielaHosomaki

“[…]I’mallowedthroughthedoorthatleadsdownintothecellarwherethe

digitalavatarofRebeccaGamble,awomanknownintheartificialrealmsof

SecondLifeasMarielaHosomaki,standssilentlyamonglitcandles,avarietyof

numberedservingimplements(rangingfromchopstickstoskewers)hungonthe

wallfacingher.Beforedescending,however,thereareformalitiestoobserve,as

Gamble’sassistant[…]issuesinstructionsandrequiresdecisions:wemustchoose

anumber,decidewhetherwewill‘feed’or‘eat’.Onlythen(alldecisionsmadenot

knowingwhatliesinwait)canweproceed.Onenteringthespaceoccupiedby

MarielaHosomaki,thesceneisuncanny:awomanstandsfrozeninsidean

elaborateredform,asculpturalcostumemadespecificallyforGamblebythe

sculptorNadimChaudryincollaborationwithdressmakerGenelvaMeikle.[…]

Perhapsit’slesstheformthat’sunsettlingthanthewayitsfoldsareserving

dishesfilledwiththesmallegg-likerollsofsushiwe’vecommittedtoeatusingthe

implementdesignatedbythatchosennumber.Itaketheskewer,spearasushiroll

somewhereinsidealowerfoldofthehost’sgownandeatit,thenwonderifit’s

appropriatetospeak,ormakeeyecontact,beforeitbecomesclearthatGamble,or

Mariela,dependingonhowweconsidertherelationshipofthecostumetoits

inhabitant,isapparentlyelsewhere.Ireturntheskewertoitshook,lookbackasI

preparetoleave[…]andrealisethatthehostseemstohavedevelopedaquite

differentmeaningtothatofthegiveroffood,thepersonIvisitinthiscellar.AsI

turntogo,Gamble,orMariela,remainsperfectlystill,castingflickeringshadows

acrossthepeelingpaint-workonthecellarwalls,whiletheairispermeatedwith

thecombinedscentsofburningwax,freshsushianddampearth.”(Burrows

2013)

86

Reflectionandanalysis

Figure28.MarielaHosomaki,methodologicaldiagram,2014

FollowingtheliveparticipatoryperformanceofMarielaHosomaki,reflectiononaction

tookplacethroughtheobservationofphotographicandvideodocumentation.Ialso

gatheredfeedbackthroughconversationswithmyperformer-hostandsome

participants.

PerformingasMariela

InMarielaHosomakiIembodiedandperformedasmydigitalavatarMariela,inwhat

feltlikehercomingtolifeforthefirsttimethroughtheperformance,yetwithno

technologypresent.Inthispiece,wearingahighlydetailedsculpturalgarmentthat

movedawkwardly,theappearanceofMarielasharedsimilaritiestotheavatarsin

SecondLife,whoseclothingoftencombinesanimationandinwhichcultures,genders

andotherspeciescollidetocreateahybridavatarbody.Thesculpturalgarmentworn

wasdesignedtomoveasonesolidobject,tocreateasenseofahybrid-body;thefigure

oftheavatarblendingintothisunfamiliarshape,moreakintoapyramidsculpture.The

ridges,pocketsandalcovesofthegarmentwerethenfilledwithonehundredpiecesof

87

hosomakirolledsushi,beforebeginningtheperformance.Thiswasquitechallengeing

asthegarmentwasheavy,uncomfortableandtheunevenfloormadeitdifficultto

performrehearsedcomputersisedmovements.Thedurationoftheparticipatory

performance,ofthreehoursoverall,inthedark,dampandcoldspacewasalso

physicallychallenging.However,thedifficultyanddiscomfortIexperiencedmoving

aroundinthegarment,furtheredmyabilitydisengagewiththeparticipantsandto

developanemotionlessexpressionwithlittleornoeyecontactwiththem.

Asanticipated,eachencounterbetweentheperformer-hostandparticipant-guestwas

entirelydifferentwithsomeencountersslowandquietwheretheparticipantchoseto

host,nurtureandfeedtheperformerdelicately.Otherschosetofeast,feed,observe,

lure,examineinquisitively,sometimesuncomfortablyso,withencountersvarying

betweenfiveandthirtyminuteslong.

Artistictacticsinparticipatoryperformancepractice

Intheexaminationofappropriateartisticexamplesintheuseoftacticsintheir

practice,specificworksofSophieCalle,MarinaAbramovic,YokoOnoandworkby

InstantDissidenceinwhichIwasanactiveparticipant,shouldbesited.Japaneseartist

YokoOno’sCutPiece(1965)isasignificantexampleofearlyone-to-oneperformance,

whichinvitedaudiencesonstagetocutandtakeapieceofherclothing.Thisradically

challengedthetraditionalroleoftheaudienceinperformancefrompassivespectator

toactiveparticipant-performer.Thisworkraisesanumberofquestionsaboutthetrust

intherelationshipbetweenartistandparticipantinparticipatoryeventsand

performances.Throughthetacticofinvitation,intheoffertotheaudienceto

participateorre-performthepieceusingawritteneventscore,sheshifted

responsibilityontotheaudiencetoperform;challengingthenotionofauthorshipin

participation.SerbianperformanceartistMarinaAbramovic’sworkmostdistinctively

testsvulnerability,responsibilityandpowerinparticipatoryperformance.Most

notably,inRhythmO(1974),sheembodiedapassiveroleinasix-hourdurational

performance,whilethegalleryaudiencewasencouragedtoapproachherusinganyof

the72objectsprovidedonthetablebesideher.Theaudienceweregivenachoicein

howtoparticipate,toobserveorinteractusingobjectsthatcaninflictpleasureorpain

88

ontheperformer,includingacomb,water,grapes,ascalpel,kitchenknife,gunand

singlebullet.Abramoviclaterdiscussedhowviolatedshefelt,astheaudience

undressedher,carriedheraroundthegalleryandcuther.Itbecameaconfrontational

environment,withoneaudiencememberloadingthegunandholdingittoherhead

andanotherremovingitandthrowingitoutofthewindow.Abramovic’sworkradically

teststheseissuesthroughtacticsoflongduration(6hoursormore),thelimitsofthe

bodyandpossibilitiesofthemind:“Stretchingthelengthofaperformancebeyond

conventionalboundariesalterstheviewer’stypicalperceptionoftimeandencourages

bothperformersandaudiencetoengagewiththisexperience”(MarinaAbramovic

Institute(MAI)).FrenchartistSophieCalle’swork,ofteninvolvingperformativerituals,

gamesandplayfulactionsintheeveryday,isexemplifiedinherbookDoubleGame

(1999)throughthepresentationofaseriesofworksframedbycollaborationwith

writerPaulAuster.InAuster’snovelLeviathan(1992)hecreatedafictivecharacter

namedMariabyusingandinventingpartsofSophieCalle’slife.Inordertobringherself

andthefictivecharacterofMariaclosertogether,Calleusedhistextastacticfor‘rules

toagame’inaseriesofperformativeactions.Inorder‘tobelikeMaria’sheperformed

TheChromaticDiet(1997),wheresheateonlyonefoodcolourperdayforaweekand

DaysUnderTheSignofB,C&W(1998),whereshespentwholedays‘underthespellof

b,corw’,including‘BforBig-TimeBlondeBimbo’,‘CforConfession’and‘WforWeekend

inWallonia’(Calle,2007,p.22).

The‘minglingoffactandfiction’inDoubleGameandtheembodimentoffictional

characterMariabyCallerelatestohowIhaveapproachedtheembodimentofMariela,

mydigitalavatar,inmypractice-ledresearch.Thereisalsoaconnectionbetweenhow

CalleusesthetextwrittenbyAustertostructureactionsandperformancesasMariato

howIhaveusedthewritten‘gesturesmenu’fromthevirtualworldofSecondLifeto

structuremyactionsandperformancesinphysicalspaceasMariela.

ItwastheembodimentandappearanceofMarielaandtheroleoftheparticipantthatI

wantedtodevelopfromMariela:cmd,click,control.Iwantedtofurtherquestionthe

trustandvulnerabilityoftheserolesfollowingreflectiononworks,suchasthatOno

andAbramovic,whichexaminetherelationshipbetweenartist-performer-hostand

audience-participant-performer.Thiswasalsoinfluencedonreflectionofmyown

89

participationinothersworks,suchasInstantDissidence,wheretheparticipant

experiencesademandingrole,withmoreresponsibility,whichIargueresultsina

rewardingexperienceasaparticipant.IfeltIhadpotentiallycreatedsuchaconvivial

andfacilitatedenvironmentpreviously,thattherewaslesspotentialparticipation

present(intheirdecisionmakingandaction)beyondthestructureprovided.Without

furtheringthisinthispieceIcouldnotachievethereciprocalrelationship,the

questioningofhost-guest,northeuncertaintyofresponsethatarisesonceyouhand

oversomeresponsibilityandtrusttotheaudience-participant.

Summary

Thequestioningraisedinthispractice-ledenquiryreferredtohowcanhybridspacebe

criticallyquestionedthroughparticipatoryperformanceandwhatthepotentialroles,

relationshipsandresponsibilitiesareoftheartist-hostandtheparticipant-guestinthis

process.

Firstly,thispieceachievedacriticalquestioningofhybridspacethroughthe

participatoryperformancebetweendigitalavatarMarielaandparticipants.The

gesturesmenuwhichhadstructuredthepreviouspublicperformancewasreplacedby

myown:movinginacomputerisedway,aspreviouslypracticedwhenstudyingthe

digitalmovementsbetweengestures.Therenowbecameadifferentsetofrulesand

choices,decideduponattheentrancetotheprivateone-to-oneperformance.This

offeredlevelstotheparticipantinhowtheywouldapproachtheirencounter,but

remainedina‘menu’ofinstrumentsandchoicesforhowtoapproachit.Forexample,in

Mariela:cmd,click,controlparticipantscouldchoosemovementstobeperformedfrom

thegesturesmenuprovidedtotheirtableinthecafé.InMarielaHosomakiparticipants

couldchoosetheirinstrumentfromanumber1-6,whetherto‘feedortoeat’andupon

thedurationoftheirone-to-oneencounterinaclosedspace.Inthispiece,eachnew

participantbecamesimilartoanewavatar-residentofSecondLife:enteringnervously

andinquisitively(asIdidwhenIfirstencounteredSecondLife)toanunknownspace,

performingasan‘off-the-pegavatar’,followingtherules,instructionsandstructured

90

choicesavailableinthespaceandtestingoutdifferentwaystoencounteranother

withinthishybridspace.Theparticipantencountersmirroredthatofobservations

madeinSecondLife,particularlyinhowavatarsoftenapproachoneanotherin

inquisitive,playful,dismissiveoraggressiveways.AswithSecondLife,thechoiceto

endthedurationoftheirencounter,atanytimebysoundingthebellinthe

performancespace,mirroredtheoptiontoremoveoneselffromthevirtualspaceby

leavinglocationorloggingout.Thisthereforeinformstheresearchthatthroughthe

creationofahybridspace,thatexistsbetweenthephysicalandvirtualthrough

extractingandperformingelementsfromthevirtualintothephysical,thatthe

everydayvirtualpracticesthatexistonlinecanbeobservedandexaminedexternalto

thisspace,throughthecommonbehavioursthatareproducedthroughthe

participatoryperformanceofaone-to-oneencounter.

Secondly,thepotentialroles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesoftheartist-hostand

theparticipant-guestweretestedthroughthetacticsemployedintheparticipatory

performance:ofinvitation,instruction,choiceandtrust.Theofferofchoice,in

particular,inhowtoencounteranintimatework,tobesituatedasaone-to-one

performanceinaprivatespaceandtoinvolveeatingandfeedingfood,testedthelevels

oftrustbetweentheartistandparticipant.Thishighlightedthevulnerabilityininviting

theaudiencetobecomeparticipant,tohaveanactiveroleinshapingtheirone-to-one

encounter.Thiswasmostnoticeableintherolestakenonbyeachparticipantduring

theperformance,whichrangedfromdirective,whereintimidatingattemptsweremade

tocoaxthemovementandreactionoftheavatar,toattentive,displayingmore

nurturingbehaviour,orevendismissive,limitinginteractionswiththeavatarand

insteaddirectingtheirattentiontowardsthefoodprovided.AsRichardSchechner

(1968)argues,theaudienceparticipantsbecome“co-subjects”oreven“equals”inhis

work,toachieveafeedbackloopbetweenperformer-spectatorandtoincreasethe

uncertaintyoftheperformanceoutcome.However,this“liberation”asco-subjectshas

insomecasesleadtohisperformersfeelingmistreatedorexploitedbythespectators.

Thereisavulnerabilitypresentinallparticipatoryartworkswhichinvitethe

participanttoperformandshapetheirowninteraction;however,thisisheightenedin

participatorypracticesinwhichtheartist-performercreatesaspaceinwhichthey

performashost,allowingtheparticipantgreaterresponsibilitybyinvitingthemtojoin

91

areciprocalandoftenintimateexchange.Thisisdemonstratedintheworkssited,

includingYokoOno’sCutPiece(1965),MarinaAbramovic’sRhythmO(1974)and

InstantDissidence’sWhenNightFalls(2011),inwhichtheparticipantisentrustedwith

anactionthatcoulddirectlyaffectthephysicalcomfortoftheperformer.

Contributionstoknowledge

Thisexaminationillustratesthattheroleofperformer-hostsharessimilaritiestothat

ofadigitalavatar,astheybecomeapotentiallyvulnerablesubject.Theshared

similarityismostnotableintheexperienceasperformerintheone-to-oneencounter

withparticipant,inwhichtheperformerisapproachedandtreatedasthoughnon-

humanoranobject.Inthisencounterthereisanassumedanonymity,asisfeltina

virtualspacewhileencounteringdigitalavatarsremotelythroughascreen,and

perhapsaninterestintestingtherulesandetiquettesofthisspace.Theassumed

anonymityintheparticipatoryperformanceofMarielaHosomakiorInstant

Dissidence’sWhenNightFallsispresentduetotheclosedspacefortheone-to-one

encounter,inwhichtherearenootherobservers.Whilethereisacamerapresentin

thesetwoexamples,theclosedspaceandabsenceofanobserverlimitsself-

consciousnessandsocialconformity,empoweringtheparticipanttoperformandto

testtheboundariesoftheroleandresponsibilityentrustedtothemasparticipant-

guest.

92

ThePracticeofEveryday(Virtual)Life

Aparticipatoryandperformativeartisticenquiry

THESISREVIEW

Asoutlinedintheintroductiontothethesis,theincreasingfamiliarityofeveryday

virtuallifenecessitatesnewcriticalquestioning:Howdoweliveonline?Howcan

hybridspacebecriticallyquestionedthroughparticipatoryperformanceenquiry?And

methodologically,whataretheroles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesoftheartistand

participantinparticipatoryperformance?

Inthispractice-ledenquirythehybridspacebetweenthephysicalandvirtualwas

criticallyexaminedthroughparticipatoryperformance.Inthisresearchthe

observationsofSecondLifebecamethe‘eventscores’and‘tactics’forliveactions,

interventionsandparticipatoryperformances.Thisvirtualspacewasselectedforthe

researchduetothepossibilitiesinthedirecttranslationandcomparisonbetween

virtualandphysicalsocialspacesandtheperformativityofsocialactions,whichare

performedbyavatarsusingthefunctionsandrulesimposedbySecondLifecreators

LindenLab.ThroughanexaminationofthevirtualspaceofSecondLifeasdigitalavatar

Mariela,Ifoundthatwhilethereareseeminglymanyopenandcreativewaystolive,

encounterandperformonline,thereareetiquettes,restrictionsandproblemswithin

this.Forexample,inSecondLifeavatarsmove,‘perform’andencounteroneanother

usingaprescribedgesturesmenu,designedbycreatorsLindenLab.Thismenu

containsmostlyperformativeandflirtatiousgestures,whichresultsintheatrical,

provocativeandsomewhatdangerousdisplaysofbehaviour.Inthisvirtualspace,

whichcanbearguedisconsistentacrossotheronlinesocialmediaplatforms,people

performanonymouslyasdigitalavatarsandthereforebehaveinawaythatcouldbe

seenasinappropriateinphysicalpublicspaces.Thisraisescriticalawarenessin

particulartoissuesofresponsibility,trustandvulnerability,presentinparticipatory

performanceandpresentinthebehavioursbetweenthevirtual:physical,forexample

whatcanbedeemedappropriatebehaviourinthevirtual,whiledifficultor

uncomfortableinthephysical.

93

Hybridspaceisspecificallyquestionedthroughre-performingthepractices,actions

andstructures,observedandextractedfromthevirtual,inaphysicalspacewithinvited

participants.Thepractice-ledresearchfirstattemptedtocriticallyquestionhybrid

spacebyblurringtheboundariesofphysical-virtualspaceinTheRomanticEncounter;a

speed-datingeventbetweenavatarssituatedinarealandvirtualcafésimultaneously

and“Let’sDanceSugarLips”;aparticipatoryworkshopchoreographingmovementin

thevirtualtore-performinthephysical,resultinginasplitscreenvideoofvirtual-

physicalperformance.ThisledtoMariela:cmd,click,control;aperformance

interventioninacaféwherecustomerscouldordergesturesfromamenuextracted

fromSecondLife,tobeperformedlivebymyselfasMarielaandMarielaHosomaki,a

one-to-oneperformancewhichfurtheredtheembodimentofmydigitalavatarand

closelyexaminedtheroles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesbetweenartistand

participantinparticipatoryperformance.Itisthroughthelattertwoworks,inwhich

thetechnologywasremoved,thathybridspacewasachieved.Theseworkscritically

questionedthespacebetweenphysicalandvirtualthroughtheliveperformanceofa

digitalavatar.

Ineachpieceofparticipatoryperformancewithinthispractice-ledresearch,Mariela

becamemoreprominentandforefrontasthetechnologywasgraduallyleftbehindand

shebegantoexistoutsideofthevirtualspaceinwhichsheoriginated.Withthefirst

twopieces,TheRomanticEncounterandLet’sDanceSugarLipsthepiecesquestioned

thevirtual(space,etiquettes,communication)throughtheattemptofblurringitwith

thephysical;throughlivemulti-mediaperformancesandsplit-screenvideosof

mirroredspacesandgestures.ThischangedintheMariela:cmd,click,control,when

theperformanceofMarielatookplacewithoutanydigitaltechnologypresent.Instead

thegesturesmenufromthevirtualspacewasextractedandpresentedtoanaudience,

situatedinacafé,asaprintedmenufromwhichtheycouldorderMariela(physically

performedbymyself)toperformthesamegesturesliveattheirtable.Thesubsequent

realisationofthiswasthatnotechnologyneededtobepresenttobeabletoquestion

thevirtual;itwaspresentintheparticipatoryperformanceofdigitallanguage,

movementandgesture.Therefore,inthefinalpieceMarielaHosomaki,theavatarwas

embodiedthroughtheadvancedhybrid-bodyofthesculpturalgarmentwornforthe

94

gastronomicparticipatoryperformance.Throughreflectionontheencounters

experiencedwhenperformingasMarielainparticipatoryperformancesphysicalspace,

particularlyinMarielaHosomaki,Inotedsignificantsimilaritiestotheencounters

experiencedasanavatarwithinthevirtualspaceofSecondLife.

Throughactionandreflectionontheroles,relationshipsandresponsibilitiesbetween

theartistandtheparticipant,Irecognisedthattheartistactivatesandfacilitates

audiencesinparticipatoryperformance.Intheanalysisofmyownprocessand

principlesofParticipatoryPerformanceIacknowledgedtheappropriatenessinthe

languageandmethodsofhospitalitytodemonstratemymethodology.Itisthrough

reflectionsontherolesoftheartistandtheparticipantthatIacknowledgedthe

methodologicalprocessandprinciplesto‘hospitality’.Inthiscontexttheroleofthe

artistsharessimilaritiestothatof‘host’,whosetstherulesandinvitesparticipation.

Thewillingaudience-participantbecomesthe‘guest’andentersintoareciprocal

relationshipwithlevelsofresponsibility,control,trustandvulnerability.Thelanguage

ofhospitalityisreflectedinthemethodsor‘tactics’usedinthepractice,includingthe

ingredients,recipes,invitation,rules,instrumentsandduration.Thesedifferineach

pieceofworkdependingonthecontext,questioningandstructureforparticipation.

Forexample:thepublicinvitationandfacilitationof36participantsoveratwo-hour

publiceventinTheRomanticEncounter;theinvitationandcollaborationwithsix

participantsinthefive-hourworkshop“Let’sDanceSugarLips”;themenuof

instructionswithapublicaudienceinthelive,one-hourperformativeinterventionof

Mariela:cmd,click,control;andfinallytheinvitationandlevelsofchoiceinthethree-

hourstructuredone-to-oneperformanceofMarielaHosomaki.

95

ThePracticeofEveryday(Virtual)Life

Aparticipatoryandperformativeartisticenquiry

Contributionstoknowledge

Thisisanembodiedpractice,inwhichthecontributionstoknowledgearegained

throughtheactionandreflectionofparticipatoryperformance;eachraisingnew

criticalquestioningandanembodiedunderstandingofthecritiqueofeveryday

(virtual)life:specificallythecommunicationpracticesandhumanbehaviourspresent

inthedigital,whicharebroughttotheforegroundthroughtheirre-framingandre-

performanceinaphysicalspace.

Thiscritiqueofthepracticeofeveryday(virtual)liferevealstheproblematicsinthe

increasingfamiliarityof‘hybridspace’inwhichweinhabitandperformasdigital

avatarsofourselves.Thisspecificallyillustratescontemporaryissuesinhuman

communication,thatis,theperceivedanonymitythatvirtualinteractionandthedigital

screencreate,andtheinherentrule-basedstructureswhichpromptlearned

behaviours,bothofwhichcancreateavulnerablespace.

Thisraisesnewquestionstowherethisdigitaltechnologywillcontinue,inparticular

withnew‘borndigital’generations,whommaynaturallyembodyhybridspacewithout

question.

Thispractice-ledenquiryisongoing,andintendstoapplythesametacticsof

observationandparticipatoryperformancetoquestionandrevealtheproblematicsof

othereverydayvirtualspaces,suchastheonlinecommunicationpracticespresentin

spaceslikeInstagram7,wherethedigitalavatarisperhapsmorecomplex;embodiedin

theperformanceofself,througheditedimageryandhighlyconstructedidentities.

7Instagramisanonlineplatformforsharingimagespublicallyorwithinasocialnetwork.ThisspaceispredominantlyusedbyayoungergenerationandisbeginningtogaincriticalattentionforthegrowingnarcissisticbehaviourofInstagramusers.

96

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ABRAMOVIC,M.,2014.AboutMarinaAbramovicInstitute(MAI)[online].Availableat:

http://www.immaterial.org/about-mai.[Accessed20November2014].

ALTRICHTER,H.,etal.,2002.Theconceptofactionresearch.TheLearning

Organisation,9(3),pp.125-131.

ALYS,F.,2010.AStoryofDeception[online;exhibitionatTateModern].Availableat:

http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-modern/exhibition/francis-alys[Accessed21st

April2013].

ARTSANDHUMANITIESRESEARCHCOUNCIL[nodate].TheArtsandHumanities

ResearchLandscape[online].Availableat:http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/News-and-

Events/Publications/Documents/Arts-and-Humanities-Research-Landscape.pdf

[accessed20December2014].

AUGE,M.,1995.Non-places:IntroductiontoanAnthropologyofSupermodernity.2nded.

London:VersoBooks.

AUSLANDER,P.,2008.Liveness:PerformanceinaMediatizedCulture.2nded.Oxon:

Routledge.

BACHELARD,G.,1994.Thepoeticsofspace.2nded.Boston:BeaconPress.

BALLANTYNE,A.,2007.DeleuzeandGuittari:forArchitects.London:Routledge.

BARTHES,R.,1968.TheDeathoftheAuthor[LaMortdeL'auteur].Translatedfromthe

FrenchbyStephenHeath.In:R.Barthes,Image-Music-Text.NewYork:HillandWang,

1978,pp.142-148

BENNETT,S.,1997.TheatreAudiences:Atheoryofproductionandreception.Oxon:

Routledge

97

BISHOP,C.,2004.AntagonismandRelationalAesthetics,110(October),pp.51-79.

BISHOP,C.,2005.Installationart:acriticalhistory.London:TatePublishing.

BISHOP,C.,ed.,2006.Participation:DocumentsofContemporaryArt.London:

WhitechapelandtheMITPress.

BISHOP,C.,ed.,2008.DoubleAgent.London:ICA.

BISHOP,C.,2012.ArtificialHells:ParticipatoryArtandthePoliticsofSpectatorship.

London:Verso.

BORGDORFF,H.,2006.Thedebateonresearchinthearts,AmsterdamSchooloftheArts

[online].Availableat:

http://www.ips.gu.se/digitalAssets/1322/1322713_the_debate_on_research_in_the_art

s.pdf[accessed2June2012].

BOURRIAUD,N.,2001.BerlinLetteraboutRelationalAesthetics.In:C.Doherty,ed.,

ContemporaryArt:FromStudiotoSituation.London:BlackDogPublishing(2004),pp.

43–9.

BOURRIAUD,N.,2002.Postproduction:CultureasScreenplay:HowArtReprogramsthe

World.NewYork:Lucas&Sternberg.

BOURRIAUD,N.,2002.RelationalAesthetics.2nded.TranslatedfromtheFrenchby

SimonPleasance&FronzaWoods.Paris:LesPressesDuReel.

BOURRIAUD,N.,2009.Altermodern:TateTriennial.London:TatePublishing.

BRECHT,G.,1966.ChanceImagery[online].NewYork:AGreatBearPamphlet.

AvailableatUBUClassics(2004):

http://www.ubu.com/historical/gb/brecht_chance.pdf[Accessed10thJanuary2012].

98

BRINE,D.andKEIDAN,L.,eds.,2007.Programmenotes:casestudiesforlocating

experimentaltheatre.London:LiveDevelopmentAgency.

BROADHURST,S.,2006.Digitalpractices:Anaestheticandneuroestheticapproachto

virtualityandembodiment.PerformanceResearch,11(4),pp.137-147

BROOKS,M.,2010.CreatingNewSpaces:DancinginaTelematicWorld.International

JournalofPerformanceArtsandDigitalMedia,6(1),pp.49-60.

CALLE,S.,2007.DoubleGame.2nded.London:VioletteEditions.

CARLSON,M.,1996.Performance:ACriticalIntroduction.London:Routledge.

CLARK,L.,1986.InFrieling,R.andGroys,B.(2008)TheArtofParticipation:1950to

Now.London,Thames&Hudson.

CLOUGH,P.andNUTBROWN,N.,2007.Astudent’sguidetomethodology.London:SAGE.

COHENetal.,2000.Researchmethodsineducation.London:Routledge

COLES,A.,ed.,2001.Site-SpecificityinArt:theEthnographicTurn:4.London:BlackDog

PublishingLimited

COVERLEY,M.,2010.Psychogeography.Harpenden:PocketEssentials.

DEAN,T.andMILLAR,J.,2005.Place.London:Thames&Hudson.

DEBORD,G.,1969.TheBeginningofanEra[online].Availablefrom:

http://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/beginning.html[Accessed10thJanuary2012].

DEBORD,G.,1957.RevolutionandtheCounter-RevolutioninModernCulture.In:G.

DEBORD,ReportontheConstructionofSituationsandontheInternationalSituationist

Tendency’sConditionsofOrganizationandAction

99

[online].Availableat:http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/report.htm[Accessed20th

December2014].

DEBORD,G.,1957.TowardaSituationistInternational.In:G.DEBORD,Reportonthe

ConstructionofSituationsandontheInternationalSituationistTendency’sConditionsof

OrganizationandAction[online].Availableat:

http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/report.htm[Accessed20thDecember2014].

DEBORD,G.,1992.SocietyoftheSpectacle.2nded.London:RebelPress.

DEBORD,G.,1998.CommentsontheSocietyoftheSpectacle.2nded.London:Verso

Books.

DECERTEAU,M.,1984.ThePracticeofEverydayLife.Berkeley,UniversityofCalifornia

Press.

DECERTEAU,M.,GIARD,L.,andMAYOL,P.,1998.ThePracticeofEverydayLife,Volume

2:LivingandCooking[L'Inventionauquotidien,tome2:Habiter,cuisiner].Translated

fromtheFrenchbyTimothyJ.Tomasik.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

DERRIDA,J.,2000.OfHospitality.TranslatedfromtheFrenchbyRachelBowlby.

Stanford,California:StanfordUniversityPress.

DOHERTY,C.,2004.ContemporaryArt:FromStudiotoSituation.London:BlackDog

Publishing.

DOHERTY,C.,2004.Location,Location[online].Availableat:

http://www.publicart.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Writings/locationlocation.pdf

[Accessed20thDecember2014]

ECO,U.,1989.TheOpenWork[OperaAperta].TranslatedfromtheItalianbyAnna

Cancogni.Cambridge,Massachusettes:HarvardUniversityPress.

FISCHER-LICHTE,E.,2008.TheTransformativePowerofPerformance:ANewAesthetics

100

[ÄsthetikdesPerformativen].TranslatedfromtheGermanbySaskyaIrisJain.London:

Routledge.

FOSTERH.,1996.“TheArtistasEthnographer”.In:H.Foster,TheReturnoftheReal.

Cambridge:TheMITPress(1996).

FOSTER,H.,1996.TheReturnoftheReal:ArtandTheoryattheEndoftheCentury.

London:MITPress.

FRAYLING,C.,1993.Researchinartanddesign.RoyalCollegeofArtResearchPapers,

1(1),pp.1-5.

FRIELING,R.etal.,2008.TheArtofParticipation:1950tonow.London:Thamesand

Hudson.

GAMBLE,R.,2011.Theartistashost:participatoryperformanceinhybridspace.RPC

(ResearchPracticeCourse):ProceedingsCreativeConnections.NottinghamTrent

University

GARCIA,D.,2011.TheInadequate[online].Availableat:http://theinadequate.net/wp-

content/uploads/2011/05/guia.pdf[Accessed21stApril2013].

GERE,C.,2006.Art,TimeandTechnology.Oxford:Berg.

GIANNACHI,G.,KAYE,N.,andSHANKS,M.,eds.,2012.ArchaeologiesofPresence.Oxon:

Routledge.

GILLICK,L.,2006.ContingentFactors:AResponsetoClaireBishop’s“Antagonismand

RelationalAesthetics”[online].Availableat:http://www.practiceincontext.net/wp-

content/uploads/04_gillick_responds_to_bishop.pdf[Accessed20thDecember2014]

GOFFMAN,E.,1961.Encounters:twostudiesinthesociologyofinteraction,

Indianapolis:Bobbs-Merrill

101

GOFFMAN,E.,1961.StrategicInteraction.Oxford:BasilBlackwell

GOLDBERG,R.,1988.PerformanceArt:FromFuturismtothePresent.2nded.London:

ThamesandHudson.

GRAHAM,S.,2004.TheCybercitiesReader.London:Routledge

GRAY,C.andMALINS,J.,2004.VisualizingResearch:AGuidetotheResearchProcessin

ArtandDesign.Aldershot:Ashgate.

GREEN,L.,2012.TheInternet;AnintroductiontoNewMedia.Oxford:Berg.

GREENE,R.,2004.InternetArt.London:ThamesandHudson.

GREENWOOD,D.andLEVIN,M.,1998.IntroductiontoActionResearch:SocialResearch

forSocialChange.ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublishing.

GROYS,B.,2008.TheGenealogyOfParticipation.In:R.Atkinsetal.InTheArtof

Participation:1950toNow.London:Thames&Hudson,2008.

HIGGINS,H.,2002.FluxusExperience.London:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

HIGHMORE,B.,2002.EverydayLifeandCulturalTheory,AnIntroduction.London:

Routledge.

HIGHMORE,B.ed.,2002.TheEverydayLifeReader.London:Routledge.

HOOKS,B.,1990.ChoosingtheMarginasaSpaceofRadicalOpenness.In:Yearnings,

Race,Gender,andCulturalPolitics.Boston:SouthEndPress,1999,pp.203-209

HOWELL,A.,1999.Theanalysisofperformanceart:Aguidetoitstheoryandpractice.

Amsterdam:HarwoodAcademic.

102

IRWIN,R.etal.,2009.TheCityofRichgate:A/r/tographicCartographyasPublic

Pedagogy[online].Availableat

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/227693836_The_City_of_Richgate_Artograp

hic_Cartography_as_Public_Pedagogy[Accessed20thDecember2014]

JOHNSTONE,S.,ed.,2008.TheEveryday.London:WhitechapelandTheMITPress.

KAPROW,A.andKELLY,J.,2003.Essaysontheblurringofartandlife.London:

UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

KESTER,G.,2011.TheOneandtheMany:ContemporaryCollaborativeArtinaGlobal

Context.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.

KESTER,G.H.,2004.ConversationPieces:CommunityandCommunicationinModernArt.

Berkley,California:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

KLUITENBERG,E.,2006.TheNetworkofWaves;LivingandActinginaHybridSpace

[online].Availableathttp://socialbits.org/_data/papers/Kluitenberg%20-

%20The%20Network%20of%20Waves.pdf.[Accessed20thDecember2014]

KOLB,D.,1984.Experientiallearning:experienceasthesourceoflearningand

development.London:Prentice-Hall

KOSEPH,J.,1975.TheArtistasAnthropologist.In:S.JOHNSTONE,ed.TheEveryday,

DocumentsinContemporaryArt.London:WhitechapelandTheMITPress(2008),pp.

182-184

KOTZ,L.,2001.Post-CageanAestheticsandthe“Event”Score[online].Availableat:

https://kirkbrideplan.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/event-scores-fluxus.pdf[Accessed

20thDecember2014]

KRAAN,A.,2006.ToActinPublicthroughGeo-Annotation,SocialEncountersthrough

LocativeMediaArt.Open,11,pp.38–49.

103

KWON,M.,2004.OnePlaceAfterAnother:Site-specificArtandLocationalIdentity.

London:MITPress.

LATOUR,B.,2005.ReassemblingtheSocial.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress

LEFEBVRE,H.,1961.ClearingtheGround.In:S.Johnstone,ed.TheEveryday,Documents

inContemporaryArt.London:WhitechapelandTheMITPress,2008.

LEFEBVRE,H.,1971.EverydayLifeintheModernWorld[La vie quotidienne dans le

monde moderne].TranslatedfromtheFrenchbySachaRabinovitch.London:

Continuum.

LEFEBVRE,H.,1991.TheProductionofSpace.TranslatedfromtheFrenchbyDonald

Nicholson-Smith.Oxford:Blackwellpublishers.

LUSHETICH,M.,2012.TheEventScoreAsaPerpetuumMobile.TextandPerformance

Quarterly,32(1),pp.1-19

LYNCH,P.,etal.,2011.TheorizingHospitality.Hospitality&Society,1(1)pp.3-24.

MACFARLANE,R.,2005.ARoadofOne’sOwn.In:M.Coverley,Psychogeography.

Harpenden:PocketEssentials(2010).

MACLEOD,K.,2000.Thefunctionsofthewrittentextinpractice-basedPhDsubmissions.

WorkingPapersinArtandDesign1[online].Availablefrom:

http://www.herts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/12289/WPIAAD_vol1_macleod.p

df[Accessed20thDecember2014].

MAGID,J.,2009.AnInterviewwithSophieCalle.In:S.Calle,TheReader.London,

Whitechapel,2009.

MANOVIC,L.,1995.TheAestheticsofVirtualWorlds:ReportfromLosAngeles[online].

104

Availableat:http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=34[Accessed20December

2014]

MANOVICH,L.,2001.TheLanguageofNewMedia.London:MIT.

MANOVIC,L.,2005.ThePoeticsofAugmentedSpace[online].Availableat:

http://artandresearch.nl/ar_wiki2008/uploads/Intern/Augmented_Space.pdf

[Accessed20December2014].

MANOVIC,L.,2008.ThePracticeofEveryday(Media)Life:FromMassConsumptionto

MassCulturalProduction?CriticalInquiry,35(2),pp.319-331

MASON,C.,2008.AComputerintheArtRoom:TheOriginsofBritishComputerArts

1950-1980.Shrewsbury:QuillerPress.

MASON,J.,2002.QualitativeResearching.2nded.London:SagePublishing.

MCKENZIE,J.,1998.Gendertrouble:(The)Butlerdidit.In:P.PHELAN&J.LANE,eds.

Theendsofperformance.NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress,1998,pp.217-235

MCNIFF,J.andWHITEHEAD,J.(2009)Doingandwritingactionresearch.London:SAGE.

MEIKLE,G.andYOUNG,S.,2012.MediaConvergence:NetworkedDigitalMediain

EverydayLife.London,PalgraveMacmillan.

MESSAGER,A.,2006.WordforWord.In:S.Johnstone,ed.TheEveryday,Documentsin

ContemporaryArt.London:WhitechapelandTheMITPress(2008).

MOURE,G.2009.MarcelDuchamp:works,writingsandinterviews.Barcelona:Ediciones

Polígrafa.

NETBEHAVIOUR,2007.DIWOExhibition[online].Availableat:

http://www.netbehaviour.org/DIWO.htm[Accessed20thDecember2014]

105

NEWLING,J.,2010SingingUncertainty[online].Availablefrom:http://www.john-

newling.com/blog/2010/11/singing-uncertainty

[Accessed20thDecember2014]

NGUYEN-HATSUSHIBA,J.,2001.MemorialProjectNhaTrang,Vietnam:Towardsthe

Complex—FortheCourageous,theCurious,andtheCowards[videoprojection].New

York:AsiaSociety.

ODDEY,A.,2007.Re-FramingtheTheatrical:InterdisciplinaryLandscapesfor

Performance.Basingstoke:PalgraveMacmillan.

ODDEY,A.andWHITE,C.,eds.,2009.ModesofSpectating.Bristol:IntellectBooks.

OSBORNE,P.,2011.Conceptualart:ThemesandMovements.London,NewYork:

Phaidon.

OSTHOFF,S.,1997.LygiaClarkandHelioOiticica.AlegacyofInteractivityand

Participation.Leonardo.[Online],30,(4).Availablevia:Leonardoon-line.[Accessed6

May2014].

OUZOUNIAN,J.,2011.TheuncertaintyofExperience:OnGeorgeBrecht'sEventScores.

JournalofVisualCulture,2(10),p.200.

PAIN,R.etal.,2001.IntroducingSocialGeographies,London,NewYork:Routledge.

PEREC,G.,1974.SpeciesofSpacesandOtherPieces.TranslatedfromtheFrenchby

JohnSturrock.London:PenguinBooks.

PHILLIPS,E.M.andPUGH,D.S.,2010.HowToGetaPhD:Ahandbookforsupervisorsand

theirsupervisors.2nded.Berkshire:OpenUniversityPress.

POSTER,M.,2002.Everyday(Virtual)Life.NewLiteraryHistory,4(33),pp.743-760

106

RODENBECK,J.,2011.RadicalPrototypes:AllanKaprowandtheInventionof

Happenings.Cambridge:MITPress.

ROTHENBERG,J.,1977.NewModels,NewVisions:SomeNotesTowardaPoeticsof

Performance.In:M.BENAMOUandC.CARMELLO,ed.PerformanceinPostmodern

Culture(TheoriesofContemporaryCulture,Volume1).Madison:CodaPressInc,1983,

pp.11-18

RUBIN,J.andRUBIN,S.,2005.QualitativeInterviewing.2nded.London:Sage

Publishing.

SALTER,C.,2010.Entangled:technologyandthetransformationofperformance.

Cambridge:MITPress.

SASSEN,S.,2006.PublicInterventions:TheShiftingofMeaningoftheUrbanCondition.

Open:HybridSpace-HowWirelessMediaMobilisePublicSpace,11,pp.18-26.

SCHON,D.,1983.TheReflectivePractitioner:HowProfessionalsThinkinAction.New

York:BasicBooks.

SMARTMUSEUMOFART,2012.Feast:RadicalHospitalityinContemporaryArt[online].

UniversityofChicago.Availableat:

http://smartmuseum.uchicago.edu/exhibitions/feast.[Accessed18November2014].

SMITH,S.,1999.In:R.PAIN.Etal.2001.IntroducingSocialGeographies.London:

Arnold.

SOMEKH,B.,2006.ActionResearch:AMethodologyforChangeandDevelopment.

Maidenhead:OpenUniversityPress.

SULLIVAN,G.,2009.MakingSpace:ThePurposeandPlaceofPractice-LedResearch.In:

H.SMITHandR.T.DEAN,eds.Practice-ledResearch,Research-ledPracticeinthe

CreativeArts(ResearchMethodsfortheArtsandHumanities).Edinburgh,UK:Edinburgh

UniversityPress,2009,pp.41-65.

107

SULLIVAN,G.,2010.ArtPracticeasResearch:InquiryintheVisualArts.2nded.Thousand

Oaks,CA:Sage.

SWANN,C.,2002.ActionResearchandthePracticeofDesign.DesignIssues,18(1)

pp.49-61.

TRIBE,M.,andREESE,J.,2006.NewMediaArt.London:Taschen.

TURNER,V.,1986.TheAnthropologyofPerformance.NewYork:PAJPublications.

TURNER,V.,andTURNER,E.,1982.PerformingEthnography.TheDramaReview,26(2)

pp.33-50.

WANDS,B.,2007.ArtoftheDigitalAge.London:ThamesandHudson.

WESSELING,J.,ed.,2011.SeeitAgain,SayitAgain.TheArtistasResearcher.

Netherlands:Valiz.

WHITE,G.,2013.AudienceParticipationinTheatre:AestheticsoftheInvitation.

Basingstoke:PalgraveMacmillan.

WHITTY,M.andCARR,A.,2006.CyberspaceRomance:ThePsychologyofOnline

Relationships.Hampshire:PalgraveMacmillan.

ZE’EV,A.,2004.LoveOnline:EmotionsontheInternet.Cambridge:Cambridge

UniversityPress.

ZIMBARDO,T.,2008.FrancisAlÿs.In:R.FrielingandB.Groys,TheArtofParticipation:

1950toNow.London,Thames&Hudson,2008.