The obsession with sitting on everything in SL does irritate me, it’s not a problem if the artist can control the pose and level of interactivity, it’s just the hideous default sit pose that looks so imbecilic and consequently cheapens any art that gets sat upon. We used to have an amusing notice in the Arthole gallery lobby reminding folks about our policy on sitting on the art.

“SL artists” are just artists using this virtual world as a creative tool, many of us use other mediums. SL art becomes really compelling, for me at least, when the artist injects their personality and experience into what could otherwise be a deeply sterile and uninteresting place.

And you’re right Dekka, I would never, ever say fcuk.

I think this area between how an artist wants their work to be viewed, and how it is viewed/experienced/interpreted, and the ways that SL allows your art to be experienced “freely” is very fertile. Also, allowing the boundaries to bleed a bit between SL and RL art is another interesting area of investigation (imagination blowing!), or the translation of works from SL to RL and back again. Or as we had in the JTP show, the mixed-reality project.

I appreciate the comments on my “10,000 Light Years” thing. They were insightful and and also sparked some ideas for my next attempt. (back to the workshop…..) I need to remember to be very specific about what I’m trying to communicate.

Questions:
“What makes this good?”
“What makes this bad?”
“Why does this matter?”
Also:
“Why am I doing this?”

I don’t have much in the way of answers but these look like a good mental checklist to keep handy. And if I had been in the habit of asking myself these, especially the last one, when I was in my 20s I might have avoided any number of ill-considered decisions.

(but probably not)

“I stopped doing ‘art’ in real life some time ago, although I do contribute ideas about art to working RL artists. But this makes me wonder, does being an artist in SL make me an artist in RL,…” (Dekka Raymaker)

Yes. Next question.
Seriously, I don’t see that it makes a difference. Art is art, regardless of the medium. You can’t get any more real than creating something that attracts and affects people.

I tend to think of SL as a mis-named communication tool most of the time- that is, I don’t think of it as a “second life” at all- but an extension of my first life. Because of that i would say Arahan Dekka, or rather the man behind Arahan Dekka is absolutely an an artist in RL (even if all his art is in SL) He’s an RL artist who uses the medium of SL to for his art, and that art includes the avatar and everything the avatar does and says.

I like that George asked that question “why does this matter?” and I really hope he’ll be on future podcasts -

I think that’s a good question to ask, and “Light Traffic” has a good answer which might be that its dignified whimsy projects a light touch and playful-yet sophisticated attitude toward the environment of SL (and, by extension to everything) that is life-affirming in its charm.

This is not true of a great deal of art both in SL and in RL and I think asking why it matters is both a good way to help encourage better art and a fun way to start an argument. Hopefully an interesting one.

Actually talking about why art that sucks sucks and why art that is good is good, I think is interesting to me and its the kind of conversation that doesn’t happen so much in a traditional art gallery where everything is assumed to be “good” to even be there – I’d rather have the question of weather its worth talking about be something that is explicitly argued over rather than being assumed.. well not always…

sometimes you want a pre-selected group of works to look at, but there are plenty of galleries like that, and BIW is this other thing.

On the question of what SL art could or should be about- i like what Sowa said “anything is fodder”…

I think even art that is mostly about SL in-world concerns (like the technical limitations of the medium) can be (doesn’t have to be but can be) about RL issues too– through metaphor. Using SL as the metaphor limits the audience to people who get the reference but that’s ok. I think art that is made for a very small audience is still perfectly valid art.

I have to believe that art can use issues related to its intrinsic properties as a metaphor for communicating about larger issues… I’m a painter. Of course some painters would yell at me for saying that…

Avatars are more likely to play, behind the mask of their computers. More likely but not always. Take the Eva and Franco Mattes piece today. It was all fun and games till we were asked to undress and get in to sex positions. It was ok watching them naked but not me I was not taking of my pants. I didn’t have my genitals!! all of a sudden the avatar was me and not a tool.

When IS it appropriate to bring RL issues into SL?

always, we are hybrid human avatar constructions we cant deny first life

what if the SL artist’s work is about issues in SL rather than RL? Would that satisfy anyone’s rubric of “meaningful?”

an avatars rubric for sure probably not a peoples who has no avatar or is just renting one for a time

L1 is currently a minotaur and sometimes I’m a magpie. Where do RL issues of race, class, gender, nationality, etc. fit into that construct?

those issues are the field in which we play

Occasionally, we have “races for life” and “art auctions for cancer survivors” and “concerts for autism” – but these things don’t exist in SL, so why do we feel compelled to bring these (real) RL concerns into our “second” life?

social concerns are at the top of the list after personal comfort and are directly related. Causes adjust others perception of us to make us more acceptable and likely to be sided with in a conflict. Thats what the MFSOB donation jar is about at the entrance to BiW.

those of us who make things are faced with real concerns about LSL shortcomings, Mono bugs, prim counts, encroachment with megaprims, lag, etc, etc. Are these SL “issues” appropriate fodder for art?

anything is fodder

are we trying to fashion a “second life?” Or ultimately, is it just US, dressed in funny minotaur and bird costumes pretending like we’re having a good time?

Its got to be us dressed up, finding ourselves sucked in to fashioning a second life despite our attempts to remain detached.

thanks for the great questions now go out and get a slice for me

Second, it was interesting to hear Georg’s comment about so much of SL art not “meaning” anything. That comment raises so many questions, not only about art in SL – which we’re still trying to figure out – but also about the relationship between RL issues and concerns and SL living overall. When IS it appropriate to bring RL issues into SL? And what if the SL artist’s work is about issues in SL rather than RL? Would that satisfy anyone’s rubric of “meaningful?”

As an example, L1 is currently a minotaur and sometimes I’m a magpie. Where do RL issues of race, class, gender, nationality, etc. fit into that construct? Occasionally, we have “races for life” and “art auctions for cancer survivors” and “concerts for autism” – but these things don’t exist in SL, so why do we feel compelled to bring these (real) RL concerns into our “second” life?

On the other hand, those of us who make things are faced with real concerns about LSL shortcomings, Mono bugs, prim counts, encroachment with megaprims, lag, etc, etc. Are these SL “issues” appropriate fodder for art?

Finally, the question we all have to face is this: are we trying to fashion a “sceond life?” Or ultimately, is it just US, dressed in funny minotaur and bird costumes pretending like we’re having a good time?