Cross-posted at smARThistory
This week, the Brooklyn is Watching podcast focused on a number of works, including Selavy Oh’s conceptual “Attractive Art.” smARThistory’s video podcast took up that work (literally a tractor beam pulling us to an underwater corner of the sim), and expanded the discussion a bit more, tying it to issues Jay raised about attention at Brooklyn is Watching — which is, after all, an un-curated space where all the art left there by its creators vies for our attention both in Second Life, and in an art gallery (Jack the Pelican Presents) in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. Selavy Oh’s work also seems to comment on the “attention economy.” New questions arise like, what, if any, differences arise in the “attention economy” inside virtual worlds?
Oh, and of course Selavy Oh’s name recalls Duchamp’s female alter-ego, Rose Selavy.
From The Economy of Attention by Georg Franck:
The economy of attention not only looks back on an ancient pre-history, it also has a long industrial history. It was pre-industrial as long as publication technologies were either of the handicraft type or, respectively, had not yet permeated the entire economy. Attention economy reached its early industrial phase when the first, relatively simple information and communication technologies developed. The technology of printing, radio broadcasting and sound film for the first time assembled critical amounts of anonymously donated attention, turning the star cult into a mass phenomenon. It was then that the business of attraction became professionalised, that deliberate eye-catching became industrial in advertising. We may speak of a phase of full industrialisation since the advent of television. There, the secondary, i.e. the viewers’ aspect of reality specially created to attract attention, is beginning to compete with the primary aspect, directly perceived reality. During this last phase, most of the freely disposable, i.e. consuming attention passes through the various media; popularisation, i.e. mass production of prominence, arises. And during this phase there are also first indications that attention income is beginning to have greater weight than money income.
For attentive beings like us, only that which retains our attention is real. This in turn does not mean that everything we imagine or think of is real for us. We are very well able to distinguish between perception, recollection and imagination. But we are not as easily able to stop some recollection acting like a real event, or to prevent an idea from exerting real power.
There is nothing more real than images which stick to the mind. Nothing exerts greater power over us than that which forces us to take attentive note. Everything to which we inadvertently pay attention, inadvertently exerts some effect on us. And everything that captures our attention is real to a higher degree than the background. To be sure, there is little in the media which sticks to the mind. Luckily, there is no obligation to pay attention, either. But there is enough which attracts, which caters to laziness, which may be taken in on the side. And everything in which attention gets entangled becomes, first of all, real in a subjective sense.
From Wikipedia:
Herbert Simon was perhaps the first person to articulate the concept of attention economics when he wrote:
…in an information-rich world, the wealth of information means a dearth of something else: a scarcity of whatever it is that information consumes. What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention and a need to allocate that attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that might consume it” (Simon 1971, p. 40-41).
Is there also some homage here (in Selavy Oh’s small cube at the end of the tractor beam which says “Look at This”) to the famous imperative “Drink Me” in Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland? And should we be worried, as Alice was?
There seemed to be no use in waiting by the little door, so she went back to the table, half hoping she might find another key on it, or at any rate a book of rules for shutting people up like telescopes: this time she found a little bottle on it, (`which certainly was not here before,’ said Alice,) and round the neck of the bottle was a paper label, with the words `DRINK ME’ beautifully printed on it in large letters.
It was all very well to say `Drink me,’ but the wise little Alice was not going to do THAT in a hurry. `No, I’ll look first,’ she said, `and see whether it’s marked “poison” or not’; for she had read several nice little histories about children who had got burnt, and eaten up by wild beasts and other unpleasant things, all because they WOULD not remember the simple rules their friends had taught them: such as, that a red-hot poker will burn you if your hold it too long; and that if you cut your finger VERY deeply with a knife, it usually bleeds; and she had never forgotten that, if you drink much from a bottle marked `poison,’ it is almost certain to disagree with you, sooner or later.
The Attraction Economy and “Attractive Art” by Selavy Oh from Beth Harris on Vimeo.
Watch the smARThistory video here.
Uncategorized, Virtual Worlds | No Comments »
