>Your emphasis here on the production of live events via web collaboration is
I agree with Scott here. Our modest piece called Yearbody presents 365
frames of a dance over the course of a year, but ends in a live
performance. To have simply followed through this idea of super-slow-motion
presentation via the web would have held less meaning for us without the
finality of having to present the work in some kind of live performance
Stephen, I have a couple of questions that I would like to ask of you.
- Do you have plans to present the final outcome to the web audience in
some way? When we did live performance interaction via the web in our piece
"The Electronic Disturbance" one of the valid complaints I heard was, "I am
contributing, but have no idea what is going on at the other end." It seems
important to give the contributor the opportunity to see/experience in some
way what it is that they helped to create.
- Will there be any live interaction via the web? It doesn't seem that way,
and I don't think that kind of interaction is really your point, but I am
endlessly curious about such things.
- Do you have any system for choosing the material sent to you? Or, as
creator, do you simply get to choose the stuff that you like? It seems that
one narrative I can invent for this piece is that there is this model of
democracy going on, a gathering of materials from the increasingly diverse
membership of the web. The feeling of my invented narrative would
certainly be lessened if the final materials were determined by a yourself,
being a sort of monarchy ;-) Really though, how do you plan to choose? Is
there a subtext to this ability for many to submit their ideas?
Mark Coniglio, Artistic Co-Director | firstname.lastname@example.org
Troika Ranch | http://www.art.net/~troika