::  Introduction  ::  

My  research-­‐intensive  artwork  is  a  collaboration  between  my  varying  fields  of  

interest:  Media/Communication  Studies,  Post-­‐Modern  Video  Art,  and  Philosophy.  

Taking  an  interdisciplinary  approach  to  understand  and  de-­‐construct  societal  

issues,  I  examined  modern  social  theories  and  applied  them  to  contemporary  art.    

My  research  this  summer  explores  three  major  social  theories,  including  the  

Spectacle,  the  Sublime,  and  Hyperreality.  Using  these  concepts  as  anchor  points,  I  

created  a  research-­‐based  video  art  piece  (“Welcome  to  Nowhere”),  in  which  I  

constructed  an  artificially  simulated,  hyperreal  digital  space.  My  work  aims  to  create  

further  discourse  on  our  current  condition,  question  our  contemporary  

consumption  of  images,  provoke  public  discussion  and  critical  analysis  of  our  

digitalized  mediascape,  and  interrogate  the  dissolved  line  between  reality  and  non-­‐

reality,  object  and  image,  and  image  and  the  imaginary.    

::  Hyperreality  ::  

Our  current  condition  is  one  of  the  hyperreal,  where  the  virtual  has  penetrated  the  

physical,  manifesting  itself  seamlessly  into  our  reality.  The  dissemination  of  the  

imaginary,  the  image,  and  the  object  prompts  what  art  historians  call  our  current  

state:  “Post-­‐Internet  Age”.  In  this  pivotal  age,  the  Internet  has  not  ceased  to  exist,  

but  ceased  to  be  detectable.  Its  involvement  in  our  everyday  lives  has  become  so  

prevalent  and  automatic  that  it  persists  unnoticeably.  “The  physical  assimilation  of  

the  virtual  has  become  normalized  action.  We  are  both  here  and  there,  in  the  

moment  of  time  and  place  with  our  bodies  in  a  physical  locale,  and  elsewhere  at  the  

exact  same  moment  of  time,  engaging  with  a  virtual  self  in  a  non-­‐physical  world  

beyond  time/place”  (Dikenson).  Essentially,  our  physical  reality  has  been  reduced  to  

images,  or  empty  signs  that,  according  to  French  sociologist  and  cultural  theorist  

Jean  Baudrillard,  look  “realer  than  reality”.  For  Baudrillard,  this  is  hyperreality.  We  

have  moved  toward  a  “society  of  image  producers  and  image  collectors  that  can  no  

longer  be  found  in  any  place  or  time  but  in  imagined  surfaces,  in  surfaces  that  

absorb  geography  and  history  (Flusser)”.    

::  The  Spectacle  ::  

Baudrillard’s  theories  on  our  hyperreal  state,  driven  by  the  exchange  of  empty  signs,  

is  directly  consonant  to  Guy  Debord’s  “society  of  the  spectacle”  (Mendoza).  Moving  

beyond  the  original  understanding  of  spectacle,  which  is  commonly  defined  as  a  

“person/thing  exhibited  to  or  set  before  the  public  gaze  as  an  object  either  of  

curiosity  or  of  marvel”  (U  of  Chicago),  Debord  redefined  spectacle  as  “not  a  

collection  of  images”  but  rather,  a  “social  relationship  between  people  that  is  

mediated  by  images”  (Debord).  Reality  has  been  replaced  and  surpassed  by  digital  

images,  and  our  society  is  now  driven  by  the  semiotics  of  these  images.  

Furthermore,  Debord  argues  that  “commercialism  is  the  materialization  of  ideology,  

in  the  form  of  spectacle”,  where  the  modern  spectacle  represents  the  propagation  of  

commercial  images  that  lack  content  (Debord.  1999,  150).  Thus,  individual  

subjectivity  diminishes  and  is  superseded  by  a  singular  commercial  consciousness.    

This  transformation  of  the  spectacle  was  prompted  by  the  development  and  

commodification  of  technology.  With  the  introduction  of  television,  film,  and  the  

Internet  came:  1)  a  temporal  and  spatial  severance  between  the  spectacle  and  the  

spectator  and  2)  the  dissolution  of  the  screen.  The  technological  apparatus,  or  the  

screen,  mediates  the  physical  disconnect  between  the  spectacle  and  the  spectator.  

Furthermore,  this  interface  is  becoming  increasingly  unnoticed,  inconspicuous,  and  

‘natural’.  Our  interactions  with  these  digital  interfaces  are  changing,  “with  

increasingly  complex  functions  facilitated  by  a  new  level  of  haptic  choreography,  the  

goal  being  to  integrate  seamlessly  sensation,  cognition,  and  computation”  

(Alexander  Provan).  The  result  is  a  passive  relationship  between  spectacle  and  

spectator,  where  the  latter  no  longer  recognizes  the  televised  screen  as  a  medium.  

Consequentially,  the  screen  is  dissolved  and  the  spectacle  is  diffracted  into  reality.  

This  then  blurs  the  line  between  the  image  and  the  object  it  supposedly  represents,  

making  our  modern  spectacular  space  one  of  the  hyperreal.      

::  The  Sublime  ::  

The  Sublime  is  routinely  coupled  with  the  term  ‘beautiful’;  however,  while  beauty  is  

connected  to  form  of  an  object,  sublimity  is  boundless  (Kant).  Thus,  the  sublime  as  it  

relates  to  aesthetics  is  rooted  in  its  unequivocal,  incomparable  grandeur.  Immanuel  

Kant,  aesthetic  theorist,  believed  that  the  ultimate  sublimity  could  be  found  only  in  

nature  because  it  is  removed  from  any  author/artists’  intention.  Thus,  the  notions  of  

beauty  and  sublimity  are  nestled  in  landscape  paintings,  such  as  Caspar  David  

Friedrich’s  “Wanderer  in  the  Sea  of  Fog”  (1817),  which  illustrates  the  epic  of  nature  

as  an  expression  of  the  sublime.  However,  the  problem  of  the  sublime  arises  with  

the  introduction  of  technology.  The  original  notion  of  sublimity  must  be  

reconsidered  now  that  our  current  society  is  embedded  in  a  highly  mediated,  

digitalized  environment  that  supersedes  even  nature.  The  contemporary  sublime  

must  acknowledge  the  proliferation  of  high-­‐tech  advances  and  mass  media.  Thus,  to  

conflate  the  original  definition  of  the  sublime  with  our  current  condition,  

technology,  not  nature,  is  the  only  means  of  expressing  contemporary  sublimity,  

since  the  former  is  virtually  limitless.    

::  Artists’  Response  ::  

Embedded  in  a  media-­‐saturated  society,  driven  by  visual  information  and  

economy,  post-­‐modern  artists  participate  in  this  image-­‐consuming,  meaning-­‐

making  process  in  order  to  renegotiate  our  role  in  this  digital/physical  realm.  

Artists  simultaneously  celebrate  and  criticize  the  embedment  and  ubiquity  of  the  

Internet,  “attempting  to  make  sense  of  the  anxiety  around  technology  and  the  self  

and  for  producing  new  artistic  concepts  around  these  wider  societal  issues”  

(Dickenson).  The  artists  that  I  took  interest  in  for  this  project  explored  virtual  space  

and  its  insufficiencies,  as  well  as  its  possibilities.  For  instance,  Tabor  Robak  touches  

the  concept  of  hyperreality  in  his  video  art  piece  “20xx”,  where  he  employs  

computer-­‐generated  images  to  create  a  virtual  world.  Similar  to  my  work,  he  utilizes  

the  digital  aesthetic  while  also  acknowledging  the  cyborg’s  isolation  from  reality.  

Thomas  Hirschhorn’s  “Touching  Reality”  also  examines  our  current  condition,  albeit  

more  critically.  In  this  video  piece,  he  conflates  seeing  and  touching  where  the  

manicured  hand  literally  touches  the  graphic  images  through  a  touch-­‐screen  tablet.  

By  doing  so,  he  depicts  the  dissonance  between  the  shocking  visuals  and  the  

indifferent  gestures,  thereby  critiquing  contemporary  image  consumption.  His  

commentary  on  interface  gestures  corresponds  to  the  eclipse  of  the  spectacle,  in  

which  the  spectacle  is  depressed  by  the  proliferation  of  digital  images.  I  also  looked  

at  photographer  Matt  Lips,  who  employs  similar  cut-­‐and-­‐paste  aesthetic  as  my  own  

work.  In  “The  Populist  Camera”  he  appropriates  images  of  “classic  beauty”  and  

juxtaposes  them,  so  that  the  mundane/bizarre,  manmade/natural  coexisted  in  the  

same  space.  This  juxtaposition  of  disparate  images  enables  the  viewer  to  fill  in  the  

blanks  with  his/her  imagination.  Lipp’s  aesthetic  decisions  are  an  example  of  post-­‐

modern  art’s  abandonment  of  traditional  aesthetic  values.    

::  Welcome  to  Nowhere  ::    The  title  of  my  piece,  “Welcome  to  Nowhere”,  is  a  play  on  the  word  “utopia”,  

deriving  from  the  Greek  work  “ou-­‐topos”,  which  means  “no  place”.  This  cyber  

utopia,  then,  parallels  hyperreality,  both  illusory  yet  corporeal.  In  regards  to  our  

current  society,  Flusser  held  that  “utopia  means  groundlessness,  the  absence  of  a  

point  of  reference.  We  face  the  immediate  future  directly,  unequivocally,  except  

inasmuch  as  we  cling  to  these  structures  generated  by  utopia  itself”  (Flusser  3).  Our  

current  society  subsists  in  a  virtual,  imaginary  cyberspace,  and  this  by  the  definition  

provided  above  means  that  our  current  condition  is  not  only  hyperreal  but  also  

utopian.    

Looking  at  themes  of  the  Sublime,  the  Spectacle,  and  Hyperreality,  I  

constructed  an  artificially  simulated  virtual  space  using  appropriated  images  from  

the  Internet.  Addressing  the  issues  of  the  modern  sublime,  I  chose  conventionally  

“sublime”  natural  landscapes,  and  I  de-­‐constructed  them.  Using  cut-­‐and-­‐paste  

aesthetic,  I  included  images  with  abrupt  rectangular  edges  in  order  to  remind  the  

spectator  of  the  material’s  original  form.  The  edges  counteract  the  expected  

seamlessness  found  in  modern  digital  spaces,  which  disrupts  the  viewers’  

expectation  while  challenging  them  to  think  critically  about  this  disruption.  I  also  

explored  themes  of  the  Spectacle,  using  both  manmade  and  natural  “spectacles”,  

such  as  atomic  explosions  and  auroras.  Furthermore,  by  presenting  a  stream  of  

hyperreal,  “natural”  landscape  stills  in  video  form,  I  turned  nature  into  a  spectacle  

through  its  mediation  through  a  televised  screen.  Thus,  the  viewer  is  presented  with  

spectacles  within  a  spectacle,  aimed  to  further  the  discourse  on  modern  image  

consumption.  I  also  employed  auditory  strategies  to  engage  the  viewer  into  this  

public  discourse.  During  moments  of  complete  silence/stillness,  the  expectation  of  

the  viewers  is  once  again  disrupted,  and  they  are  confronted  with  a  sudden  external  

consciousness  of  themselves  as  participants  in  the  visual  collaboration  between  

spectacle  and  spectator.    

 

 

 

   

 

Still  I/II:  Intended  to  run  on  a  loop,  the  last  frame  (below)  transforms  into  the  first  frame  (above)  by  the  end  of  the  5-­‐min.  video.  

“Welcome  to  Nowhere”  

   

Still  III:  The  disruption  of  the  horizon  line  an  example  of  the  sublime’s  deconstruction.  By  challenging  the  rules  of  perspective  and  continuity,  the  viewer  must  reconcile  his/her  expectations  of  aesthetics.    

Still  IV:  A  recurring  trend  in  the  video  is  the  balance  between  the  aesthetic  and  the  absurd.  The  playfulness  of  a  growing  mesa  changes  the  tone  of  the  piece.    

 

Still  V:  Intentional  moments  of  stillness,  which  were  interspersed  throughout  the  film,  are  aimed  to  disrupt  the  tone  and  cadence  of  the  film.    

Still  VI:  This  moment  1)  demonstrates  the  implicit  dystopia  beneath  the  simulated  utopia,  and  2)  comments  on  the  televised  spectacle  

 

Still  VIII:  Man-­‐made  (fireworks,  atomic  bombs)  and  natural  spectacles  (auroras)  coincide  with  one  another,  mirroring  today’s  leveled  spectacular  space    

Still  VII:  Immediately  following  the  dystopian  pause,  the  video  transforms  once  again  into  a  utopian  space.    

   

Still  IX:  Toward  the  end  of  the  piece,  a  new  landscape  is  introduced.  This  change  in  scenery  demonstrates  the  shallow  versatility  of  this  cyber-­‐utopic  space.      

Works  Cited  

Baudrillard,  Jean.  Simulacra  and  Simulation.  Ann  Arbor:  U  of  Michigan,  1994.  Print.  

Dickenson,  Sheilaa.  "Post  Physical:  Visual  Reaction  to  the  Post-­‐Internet  Age  at    

SooLocal."  Temporary  Art  Review.  The  Luminary,  25  July  2014.  Web.  11  Aug.  2014.  

Evans,  David.  Appropriation.  London:  Whitechapel  Gallery,  2012.  Print.  Documents  

of  Contemporary  Art.  

Hudek,  Antony.  The  Object.  London:  Whitechapel  Gallery,  2010.  Print.  Documents  of  

Contemporary  Art.  

Mendoza,  Daryl  Y.  "Commodity,  Sign,  and  the  Spectacle:  Retracing  Baudrillard's  

Hyperreality."  Kritike  4.2  (2010):  45-­‐59.  Web.  5  July  2014.  

Morley,  Simon.  The  Sublime.  London:  Whitechapel  Gallery,  2010.  Print.  Documents  

of  Contemporary  Art.  

Noble,  Richard.  Utopias.  London:  Whitechapel  Gallery,  2012.  Print.  Documents  of  

Contemporary  Art.  

Provan,  Alexander.  "Gestural  Abstractions."  Alexander  Provan.  Artforum,  1  Mar.  

2013.  Web.  13  July  2014.  

Steyerl,  Hito.  "Too  Much  World:  Is  the  Internet  Dead?"  E-­‐flux.  N.p.,  Nov.  2013.  Web.  

12  Aug.  2014.  

Toffoletti,  Kim.  Baudrillard  Reframed:  Interpreting  Key  Thinkers  for  the  Arts.  London:  

I.B.  Tauris,  2011.  Print.  

Vilém  Flusser.  and  Nancy  Ann  Roth.  Into  the  Universe  of  Technical  Images.  University  

of  Minnesota  Press,  2011.  Project  MUSE.  Web.  18  Aug.  2014.