Dimensions of interaction


Spuren // Traces


artwork upholds the false impression that the traces of an interactive art work are in fact the work itself. An interactive work may have important physical aspects, but its esthetics also exists in other dimensions.
How then can interactive art works be documented ? Next to documenting the execution and the physical traces of the work, it could be argued that the subjective experience of the different kinds of others are the most critical traces to be documented. This can obviously only be done by somebody present at the execution of the work: a participant or an onlooker. All of the distinctive and relevant time frames after the publication of the work(process) should be documented. In relation to these, the typical roles of the makers, different kinds of participants and witnesses-of-traces in these different timeframes should be documented.
This issue borders on the issue of presenting interactive artworks in musea. As is it often the case that the critical esthetic dimensions of a work are to be found in the execution of the work by engaging participants, it is these aspects that should be represented in the context of the museum. A curator has of course the freedom to display other physical traces of the work, and to investigate their aesthetic and meaningful dimensions, but they should not be confused with the work itself.


Spurensorten // types of traces

evidences that have a discrete form, and more expreriental kinds of evidence, of which the form is harder to specify. Of course, traces of the first kind are always accompanied by traces of the second kind.
Material evidence
*sculptures, prints, video's, soundrecordings etcetera.
Immaterial evidence
*stories, memories, changes of opinion, etcetera.
It seems very possible a work is able to leave traces that are completed


Kinds of processesconstructing

(to be added to)





(c) Interaktionslabor & Architecture of Interaction 2008