Advertisement

Dramaturgy in Building Multimedia Performances: Devising and Analysing

  • Torunn Kjølner
  • Janek Szatkowski

Abstract

It is often believed that art can challenge technology because artists ask questions that scientists do not ask or anticipate. Likewise, there is a belief that technology — that is, digital technologies — challenge art because the program developer can provide the artist with means of creating completely new forms of art. We have met many myths and thinking habits that indicate the general idea that art and science are each other’s counterparts, that there is a scientific way of doing things on the one hand and an artistic one on the other. The point, the problem and in fact, the real challenge, is that there are many scientific and many artistic ways of doing things, or creating things, which is what we will deal with in this chapter. If we try leaving the idea that scientific or artistic activity is directed towards discovering universal laws and elucidating things that bring us doser to the truth, we might end up supporting the American neo-pragmatist Richard Rorty. He argues that it is a better idea to stop asking whether we have come doser to truth, and rather ask: “Are there ways of talking and acting that we have not yet explored?” (Rorty, 1989). Then the will to create new vocabularies could bring art and science into an interesting dialogue and make us question general and conventional ideas, such as whether art has an antagonist in science. From our experience, we would tend to agree with Rorty, however, when he suggests rather that both art and science have an enemy in common sense. Common sense often relies upon simplified, down-to-earth thinking that easily kills a creative process by asking questions already formulated.

Keywords

Aesthetic Judgment Artistic Restriction Multimedia Product Aesthetic Ideal Interactive Installation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aristotle (1968). Poetics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  2. Artaud, A (1956-94). Oeuvres Completes, T5: Autour du Théâtre et son double et des Cenci. Paris: Galimard.Google Scholar
  3. Bauerlein, M (1997). The Pragmatic Mind. London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brecht, B (1967). Gesammelte Werke, vol 117. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
  5. Kyndrup, M (1999). “Bodybuilding. A Short Analysis:” http://www.daimi.au.dk/~sdela/dte/kyndrup.html.Google Scholar
  6. Luhmann, N (1968). Vertrauen: Ein Mechanismus der Reduktion der sozialer Komplexität. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke.Google Scholar
  7. Phillips, A (1994). On Flirtation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Rorty, R (1989). Contingency, Irony and Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Torunn Kjølner
  • Janek Szatkowski

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations