Philosophy and Technology Writing Project: "Virtual Reality Asserts Itself as an Art Form in Its Own Right"

in philosophy •  7 years ago  (edited)

Screen Shot 2018-05-02 at 10.59.12 AM.png

Virtual Reality Asserts Itself as an Art Form in Its Own Right


This article seems to be a report on what is going on in the art world vis a vis the use of virtual reality and or augmented reality to produce artistic experiences for an audience. For example, Berlin-based artist Olafur Eliasson created a rainbow in a rain shower that can be experienced through VR googles.


Screen Shot 2018-05-02 at 11.31.07 AM.png

“You can put your hand in the rain and swish the drops around,” he said. “It has been a challenge to give it an ephemeral quality, but I am very excited about the result.”


There are also some institutions popping up to house and promote these works, including Khora Contemporary [1] and an online platform named Acute Art, and some discussion about the growth of this new art market.

There isn't much that is explicitly philosophical about the piece - it is more of a resume of, rather than an engagement with, these works. But thinking about this through a philosophical lens, a few questions emerge:

  1. Why or how is the re-creation of experiences in a virtual realm interesting? Interesting to artists and to art audiences? Is it that you could go to a given place (and art museum, or an online platform) and experience something magical on demand (a rain fall with rainbow) that would only otherwise happen by chance? Is it be able to control and enhance (artistically, to make it more beautiful) human experiences? I also wonder if there are different reasons for different artists to work in this new medium.
  2. Arguably, the world already gives us (for free, without the use of goggles) a lot of experiences that go right over our heads. We will likely miss the next rainbow in the sky while looking at our phones. I wonder if this will help us to better appreciate what is already there right in front of our noses....
  3. Is the human control of experiences for explicit consumption dangerous? I mean, imagine that a coalition of evil artists take over the virtual experience medium and regulate who can experience what based on whatever criteria, probably money or class.
  4. Something I'm curious about is a re-naming that is happening in this field. What was "virtual reality" in the 80's and 90's is not being referred to as "augmented reality" (pokemon). Also, artificial intelligence is now referred to in terms of machine learning. Is there a difference between these two terms? Something is up with this.
  5. The article did create a desire in me to want to experience some of these works - I wonder where that desire comes from? Art has always been a way to re-present the world to help up to see it framed in aesthetic terms. I may not at all be opposed to letting the artists remake our reality to be more beautiful or poignant. Already I prefer to be indoors on my computer than to step outside and experience things that I don't know what they will be - it takes some coaxing to get me out the door since I work wherever I find myself. I wonder if someday we'll not need the world "out there," and maybe this is part of what is fueling the desire to create and experience these works.

Screen Shot 2018-05-02 at 11.31.25 AM.png


[1] "Khora Contemporary was founded, however, with the main objective of helping established and young artists translate their work into the realm of virtual reality. The company was inaugurated at last year’s Venice Biennale with commissioned works by Paul McCarthy and Christian Lemmerz."


All quotes and quotes and images come from the article linked to above: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/01/arts/art-leaders-network-berlin-vr-virtual-reality.html?smid=tw-share.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!