Navigable Space and the Changes of Aesthetics

From the beginnings of cyberspace thought and conceptualization in the 1980s to the age of new media in the 90’s, every aspect of new media has progressed in some form or another. It has, as Lev Manovich describes in his work “ ‘Navigable Space’ The Language of New Media”, the potential to “give rise to genuinely original and historically unprecedented aesthetic forms” such as games. From this the reader infers to the point of comprehension the progression of time and progression of new media, as the rise of these forms is stuck in its potential; it is yet to come. Yet, the key difference in our relation to space and its change through time is not based in the act of navigation or forms of interaction, per se, -as new media spaces are always spaces of navigation- but the aesthetics of navigable space, moving from the 80’s game phenomenon and virtual reality to modern art installation. It is like a river, constantly moving, constantly flowing, yet with some consistency, thus making the human user less of “data cowboy”- as Gibson would say- than a data captain, navigating or rather steering through the medium. As we shall see navigable space represents a larger cultural form, one that transcends computer games and extends further into new media.

Manovich explores through his analysis of Doom and Myst the concept of movement through space, or navigation, from a first person perspective, as he says, “if a player does nothing, the narrative stops,” similarly in Second Life if the visitor does nothing there is no interaction, there is no purpose for the avatar. In other words, “movement through space allows the player to progress through the narrative… it is a way for the player to explore the environment.” The interesting notion between Second Life and a game like Myst is that Second Life is not considered a game, but a world. Yet this begs the question, “where is the line?” Is it in the interaction with other characters that no longer makes first-person-simulation-navigation a game? If so, than how do we process the development of Halo or World of Warcraft? To give them dual citizenship, so to speak, is perfectly reasonable considering the transformations that navigable space undertakes, in particular the ever-changing aesthetics in terms of open space or closed containment and the relation to genre (the type of space, its purpose, and thus its restriction or lack thereof).

If navigable space is, in fact, a subjective space there is only room for a first-person account, yet the true navigable space that cyberspace was supposed to have does not yet exist, with the closest forms of it being games, avatar/social networks like Second Life and different forms of virtual reality. The problem with Second Life in the navigable space discussion is the unimportance of moving around, or more specifically actually being a part of navigable space, since it is a social networking environment a “visitor” needn’t move in order to find conversation or a friend if others are doing it for them. For example, if half the Second Life users did nothing but stand in the environment they were transported to, they would be bound the meet some percentage of the other half who are the aggressors and the ones actually navigating through the space. Does it help the lazy users, or for that matter, actually do anything for them? No. But the problem still rests that navigation is not always necessary in the navigable space.

However, the forms of navigable space do not end in virtual reality or even cyberspace for that matter, for one must consider that art of installations, many of which can be thought of as dense multimedia information spaces, combing texts, video, graphics, images and 3-D elements with a spatial layout. The space in the installation becomes a media type, and like other media types, it can be transmitted, stored and retrieved. If navigable space is in a constant maneuver or state of change, than the form of installation will not be the last, nor will it come close, since even if there was a form of navigable space as it was originally imagined/intended, there would always be updates, improvements and changes for it is the cycle of obsolescence. Yet, it is this very cycle that adds to the aesthetics of the space: its temporality gives it new and intriguing beauty.

The Obsession

“The great obsession of the nineteenth century was, as we know, history: with its themes of development and of suspension, of crisis, and cycle, themes of the ever-accumulating past, with its real preponderance of dead men, and the menacing glaciation of the world... The present epoch will perhaps be above all the epoch of space.”

- O * It wasn't a fascination or an interest but an obsession, an obsession, a stalking- in this case of the past. What comes to mind is the extensive knowledge that came in the twentieth century-with the continuation of the obsession-specifically following the decoding of the Rosetta Stone, Howard Carter's famous exploration, and this fascination with the past is all too familiar to the heterotopia of the cinema (though in this case there is an interesting compilation/juxtaposition of the imagination of the film industry and the "literal" type of exploration/adventure that would take place). In this time the ArchaeoAnthrological-Historian was the master of the sphere of knowledge. What knowledge couldn't be obtained through history? What could it predict about the future? Does history, in fact, repeat itself? This question has carried far beyond the obsession of the nineteenth century for it is still a question we look to today. **Here there are questions of the space/time conundrum, moving linearly through time, while looking back at different times in order to make up for current predicaments. At a time when it seemed as though all history had been recounted and the burning desire of the honeymoon period burnt itself out, the world looked to the elements of space and the future; never a focus on the present. We use the code of actions (specifically of those discussed above), logic (that follows the linear perspective), and new code (my own "creation") of historical perspective and linear-flow to designate the beginnings of the obsession and the interests/importance of the heterotopias to designate the in-betweens, the places of time of the past, and space of the future.

Death, Data, Entry, Encoded arc, our Common cause

“We are in the epoch of simultaneity: we are in the epoch of juxtaposition, the epoch of the near and far, of the side-by-side, of the dispersed. We are at a moment. I believe, when our experience of the world is less that of a long life developing through time that that of a network that connects points and intersects with its own skein.”

* We have a constant connection with time, we are in a period of time where everything is instant, where everything and nothing are happening at the same time. We live during the time where virtually any question has the potential of being answered with the click of a button. The commentary here has already started in the passage being presented; the idea of simultaneity and juxtaposition of time that are so heavily present in both Foucault and Time Code, where the lives of everyone intersect at random intervals and random vectors like in an online social network. A time where all things are happening at once, and people are aware of their happenings, perhaps not the individual incidents, but the knowledge that they are, somewhere occuring: death, disease, birth, sex, walking, talking, laughing, reading, crying-the endless possibilities of the human condition that have become linked together across countries, continents, and cultures; which until recently has not been possible. Attempt to transcend what is and what has been. No satisfaction with the past or the incompetency of the present. ** (Actions of the human condition; historical hermeneutic ideas)

http://www.dancethroughthepoppies.blogspot.com

Universal Forms

(And back from the "Dance," as reconnection into the "real").

“There is probably not a single culture in the world that fails to constitute heterotopias. That is a constant of every human group. But the heterotopias obviously take quite varied forms, and perhaps no one absolutely universal form of heterotopia would be found."

* Do they exist? Do Universal Heterotopias actually exist, and furthermore are there really heterotopias available in every culture? Probably gives the connotation of possibility in either direction; by saying that there are probably heterotopias everywhere, gives rise to the possibility that there are a few that don't have any. Though, where they might be found, I have no idea, perhaps in normadic tribes of daoists, living in the moment and living their lives, not thinking about the future or the past? Could there be sub-heterotopias? As in not the deviant or the distress but the natural- like language. Granted language could never constitute a physical place, but wouldn't that make it a perfect example of a sub-heterotopia, a place beyond place, a place that can take you places or bring you ideas and the possibilities of furthering the "actual" heterotopias, to open the cabinet and pull back the heterotopiatic mirror that displays society in its very foundations? Perhaps grants the same connotation as probably, giving room for chance. If such sub-heterotopias were to exist, such as language, could that not be a universal heterotopia, as the same could be said for emotion? Emotion is universal, people feel the same pain, sorrow, sadness, happiness, desire, and anger as everyone else, so then wouldn't this heterotopia (shall we say the heterotopia of the heart), or sub-heterotopia as it were, universal? It grants outstanding possibility: insight into the past of human society, insight into the present, and insight into the future- emotions are the one constant. How did I get here?

** The codes of illogical and transcendatory (own creation, uniqueness) thought. Code of action and possibility that grants insight throughout the passage.

Real inside of the Reel

“The heterotopia is capable of juxtaposing in a single real place several spaces,”.

* The real (heterotopia) can put several spaces in a single place, let's say for example, the idea of the cinema: a real place that combines the past (film was made in advance), the present (film appears to be taking place in real time, in the present moment), and the future (audience looking forward to the end and the whole story/experience) and portrays the 3-dimensional people on 2-dimensional places. But then I think is there a true "real" place, or space? And if the heterotopia is juxtaposing several spaces in a single real place, how many spaces can be juxtaposed? Is there a limit? What about a film, about a film? Or a film with a character watching a television show about people who are watching tv or a movie? How many spaces are in these spaces? How many levels are there and is there ever a limit to this connection and layered space if the "world is in a time of juxtaposition and simultaneity"? (Action of movie viewing and spaces; semes of the heterotopia).

Persistence of Memory

“Most often linked to slices in time”

- If *They are linked to time, and time fades and disappears just as fast as it arrives does this not mean that heterotopias are always moving, always changing? This could very well make it that there is never a constant heterotopia and never will be, and just as one can’t predict the future one can also not predict the next heterotopia, when it will arrive, when it will leave, how long we’ll remember it, ad infinatum. Take Salvidor Dali and his "Persistence of Memory," was he painting the wasteland of the lost heterotopias? Everything is connected through time, but are there specifics. There is later talk about the boarding schools of the 18th century or forced enlistment (the draft). Or could there even be a distinct heterotopia for every moment of time? And if so... would it not be possible that Dali meant for this to be part of the plurality of his painting? Even when using the archives of the museum or library there could be no way of remembering or processing every heterotopia. Which is even more interesting because these places that store the remnants of time itself, these heterotopias, can be used to look back and remember heterotopias, so can it not be said that these places can thus be consider hyperheterotopias?

(Possibilities/Actions of history and the intricacies of society, hermeunatic, logic)

(