Emily Buzzo MGRA501.1 - November/December 2011.
Essay Question 4. Just Whistle
Word Count : 2002
Rafael Lozano-Hemmer's 'Body Movies' installation was showcased in multiple European cities throughout the early 2000's. Lozano-Hemmer fuses the together a combination of previously taken photographs, from the streets of each host city and live action silhouettes cast by the passers-by as they cross into the installation space, to make the interactive projection 'Body Movies'. These photographs are projected onto large outdoor screens in widely used public spaces.
Located within the space are high power light sources situated close to the ground so that when passers-by cross in front of them their shadows are cast into the same space as the projections, adding another layer on top of the photographs. This multi-layer piece is broken down into three sections, the base layer onto which the images are projected, followed by two incredibly powerful light sources to wash out these photographs then a third layer of shadow is cast over the top of that. Once the shadows are cast they reveal the portraits beneath. "A video surveillance tracking system triggers new portraits when all the existing ones have been revealed, inviting the public to occupy new narratives of representation." (Lozano-Hemmer, 2001)
There is a huge amount of information gathered and distributed in this particular piece and some intriguing ideas that it addresses. I hope to cover these issues in this essay, shining some light upon its underlying foundations and discovering what the true message of Body Movies is, if one exists.
Lozano-Hemmer names Dutch artist Samuel Van Hoogstraten's as his main source of inspiration for Body Movies, in particular the 1675 engraving entitled The Shadow Dance, which appears in his Inleiding tot de Hogeschool der Schilderkunst. The engraving depicts a theatre or stage of some kind where actors perform in front of a light source, which is placed at ground level. "The shadows of actors taking on angelic or demonic characteristics depending on their size" (Lozano-Hemmer, 2001)
Lozano-Hemmer skilfully creates a modern day adaption of this technique in Body Movies but with a completely disparate concept and idea behind it. Lozano-Hemmer explains that in contrast to Hoogstraten's engraving "Body Movies attempts to misuse technologies of the spectacular so they can evoke a sense of intimacy and complicity instead of provoking distance, euphoria, catharsis, obedience or awe." (Lozano-Hemmer, 2001)
Throughout history shadows have long been associated with the notions of fear, superstition and evil especially in art and performance. An example of this would be in the 1922 silent film Nosferatu - A Symphony of Horror Directed by Fredrich Wilhelm Murnau, where the use of shadows relies on this very association. The imagination of the viewer is left to run wild and conjure up it's own version of the horrors that lie in the darkness. Lozano-Hemmer however wishes to evoke a completely different reaction within his audience. With his installation he allows the space for playful interaction between the larger and smaller shadows, encouraging communication between the different participants and removing the stereotypical evil/angelic associations with the shadows. This playfulness can be seen in the videos made of the installation in action, where complete strangers interact with a childish innocence. His audience appear to thoroughly immerse themselves within the installation by generally becoming completely spontaneous performers by pretending to chase, tickle or fight each other, for example.
"Many interactive pieces can hardly be said to contain a message at all, at least not in the form of a proposition or statement. Rather they involve the audience within a situation which they are invited to explore, or they offer the audience a game or toy with which they are invited to play. The meaning of the experience becomes the experience itself" (Cameron, 2004, p5) A point that Andy Cameron explains perfectly that truly resonates with Body Movies, is "the meaning of the experience becomes the experience itself" (Cameron, 2004, p5) Those participants who accepted the situation they were in, for what it really was, seemed to get the most out it. The question of what the outcome of this piece is however proves hard to answer. Reactions from the public expressing their views following their experience with the installation all seem to speak of enjoyment. In one instance an Amsterdam resident explains how the people were interacting with each other in a "like children." (Cameron, 2004, p5)
One of the main components in the installation is the projections and the powerful dynamic that they bring to the table. Modern day use of projectors is mainly seen within the realms of classrooms, board meetings and weddings. The projector itself has so much potential that Lozano-Hemmer manages to utilize so effectively, without cheapening the installation. Body Movies does not look like a slideshow or an advertisement, even though he is employing the exact same tools as these lesser forms of communication. Strip away the careful considerations of purpose and place then remove the shadow-play and xenon lights that mute the thousands of photographs and Body Movies would sit quite comfortably in the category reserved for large overwhelming billboard advertisements and commercial businesses.
The interesting thing about Body Movies is the location, not specific cities or buildings but the simple fact that it is an outdoor spectacular projected onto the existing urban environment. The entirety of the works are projected onto landmarks in public spaces. The buildings are integrated seamlessly as the underlying foundations, even though they are covered in screens for the projection to be seen more clearly. In footage of Body Movies, Lozano-Hemmer can be heard talking of the overpowering advertisements and corporate identities that intrude on these public spaces. He is interested in the connection or supposed disconnection that people have with architecture. In 1994 he even coined the term 'relational architecture' and explains that "the real motivation behind relational architecture is the modification of existing behaviour: the artist creates a situation where the building, the urban context and participants relate in new, 'alien' ways." (Lozano-Hemmer, 1998)
Body Movies makes grand use of the public spaces and successfully addresses the issues that Lozano-Hemmer puts forward. In this piece the new "alien ways" which he discusses are the complete reversal of fear of shadows and the single-mindedness of the public. The outcome instead is individuals working together in small or large groups acting as a unit or a team. A collective community, that can create more interesting things if they work together. Allowing them to change their own perspectives within the playground he has created for them.
The layers that Lozano-Hemmer visualises can be seen as a medley of new and old media with the shadow play being the traditional route, mixed with the new technologies of projection and computer tracking. Does he fall foul of the new technology trap, Or does he use just enough to get his message across? "The combination of interactive media and architecture can create what Lev Manovich has called 'augmented space', a real space overlaid with another, virtual layer of responsiveness." (Cameron, 2004, p7)
A 'virtual layer of responsiveness' is a fantastic description which can be readily applied to Body Movies, which can easily be seen as an 'augmented space'. A video projection of a computer interface was shown in the piece, acting as guidelines, so that people were aware of the artists intentions for them. How they should conduct themselves according to his ideas. These were set off to one side of the main projection so that it was easily accessible to the public. Lozano-Hemmer (2007) explains, "Providing public access to the interface was a crucial part of the project" Even though he believes that the guidelines were a crucial part, the participants who disregarded his intentions and were purely spontaneous generated the most aesthetically pleasing and amusing results.
The images are generated for public viewing by the public themselves and the installation relies on the audience changing role from spectator to participant. From here we can begin to understand in more depth the underlying ingredients that Lozano-Hemmer truly has faith in for the piece to be a success. If Lozano-Hemmer didn't believe that people could let-loose and react with his installation then there would be no installation at all. One could then look towards the 'Creative Act' by Marcel Duchamp (1959) which asks us to "consider two important factors, the two poles of the creation of art: the artist on the one hand, and on the other the spectator who later becomes the posterity"
The creation of the art is the installation itself and the spectator who becomes the posterity i.e. the next generation of the installation is the audience. The next logical direction for the piece to progress in would be in the hands of the audience, who continuously change from active engagement to passive observation. "Asking the participant to 'suspend disbelief' and 'play along' with the environment" (Lozano-Hemmer, 1998)
It is this audience shift from passive to active, which brings the project to life and begins the performance cycle that truly completes the piece. The performance cycle begins first with the spectator who then chooses to either engage with the piece or to continue to exist as an audience member. If one were to choose to engage with the piece this would act as a trigger that would spur on the cycle, completely changing the dynamic of the entire piece. There would then be two completely separate entities acting in sync whether they were conscious of the roles they are playing or not.
"Relational architecture distances itself from the notion of Art in 'public space' proposing instead art in 'relational space' where the public becomes an actor, in the theatrical sense and in the sense of "taking action." (Lozano-Hemmer, 1998) Does this mean that the piece of work is constantly in a state of progression, that the work is imperfect, and cannot be completed? There is no set outcome or finished product that can be achieved. The work is in a continuous state of flux as new viewers become participants and take their part in the never-ending cycle. The work is not in the hands of the artist, which must be quite refreshing yet, stressful at the same time. For the artist it must be great to see people interacting with the piece in their own way, regardless of the guidelines set out or suggestions that he has left in place. The same disregard could be frustrating if his creative vision seems left behind and gets completely replaced by the new ideas of the participants because they as the audience have such a large amount of creative control within the piece.
It's hard to define the exact message because I believe that to fully understand I would have to experience the installation first-hand. However it is clear to see that the piece is a success, in the very way that the artists himself defines. "The piece can be considered successful if the artist’s intervention actively modifies the point of dynamic equilibrium between the public's actions and the buildings reactions, and vice versa." (Lozano-Hemmer, 1998)
He creates a unique experience that connects with the public and alters their reality, even if only for a brief period of time. I feel that the true success of Body Movies is the spontaneity that it draws from people and the connections that they make with each other. Interaction is the key word and is exactly what can be seen in such a basic form. The overall installation is thoughtful and enticing without being forceful. The subtleties of Body Movies and it’s open nature allow people to be involved as little of as much as they wish. I feel that the guidelines were unnecessary and that the piece would have worked just as well if not better without them. "The uncertainty of the outcome is one of the main motivations for doing such a piece" (Lozano-Hemmer, 1998) It's refreshing to hear the artist's own concerns about his project, and this really shows that it is a learning curve and one is never really sure of what the final outcome will be. Interaction design still in it's relatively early days, who knows what the future holds.