mdm art book

roxelo babencovelazquez bonetto

Museo del Metaverso

MdM

This e-book is dedicated to

Giorgio Vasari (30 July 1511 – 27 June 1574)

museo del metaverso 5

A publication of the Museo del Metaverso and theArtspace Diabolus Cybernetic Art Research Project (CARP) 2010

copyrights: Museo del Metaverso

and Artspace Diabolus Cybernetic Art Research Project (CARP)

2010

Roxelo Babenco aka. Rosanna Galvani (Italy)Velazquez Bonetto aka. László Ördögh Diabolus (Stuttgart Germany)

Metaverse snapshots:Velazquez Bonetto

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in a form or by any means, without the prior permission in

writing of the copyright owners. This publication includes some words which have or are asserted to have

proprietary status as trademarks or otherwise. Their inclusion does not imply that they have acquired for a legal purposes a non-proprietary or general

significance nor any other judgement concerning their legal status.

6 museo del metaverso

Solkide Auer THE “M” OF THE METAVERSE


roxelo babencovelazquez bonetto

Museo del Metaverso

MdM


Contents

Prefazione Il Museo del Metaverso 11MDM 2D the virtual surface 19MdM 3D the virtual space 79MdM 4D hyperspace cinetic cybernetic 115MdM evewnts and performance 201


Artist index

1° PianoFRIEDA KORDA NUR MOOFOUR YIPMILLAMILLA NOELBRYN OHLOLLITO LARKHAMARTISTIDE DESPRESJOSINA BURGESSMASSIMO BLINKERSAVEME OHSANTI AMAT SARIMA GIHA DELFINA1982 CUTTITA

2° PianoCHRISTOWER DAEANTROPO MORTLOCKAKIM ALONZOREDMOON BALUT

3° PianoSOLKIDE AUER E SHELLINA WINKLERALOISIO CONGREJODACO MONDAYFRANSY LISLEGLEMAN JUNKICCA IGALYMARYVA MAYO LOOP LUOROSE BORCHOVSKISELAVY OH

PLACE 1 RUMEGUSC ALTAMURASCA SHILOVAEIFACHFILM VACIRCAWERNER KUROSAWAMERLINO MAYOFRIEDA KORDA E MAXXO KLAARSOLKIDE AUER

PLACE 2 NICOLA REINERMANVELAZQUEZ BONETTOLUCE LAVALJONATHAN KAZANPELI DIETERLEIAYA NISHI

PIATFORM OPENGARDEN (ALLESTIMENTO BY ARCO ROSCA)SELAVY OHDANCOYOTE ANTONELLIMILLAMILLA NOELMARCO MANRAYWERNER KUROSAWAMENCIUS WATTS & TAGGERT ALSOP

RED PLATFORMLUCIAN IWISH SFERE DI LUCIAN IWISHCUBI DI ARCO ROSCA

BEACHGLYPH GRAVES ASIAN LEDNEV LUCIAN IWISH ABDULLAH YAZIMOT


Picture 1:


Prefazione

Il Museo del Metaverso

Roxelo Babenco aka Rosanna Galvani

Il Museo del Metaverso è un progetto nato in Second Life nel 2007 per la valorizzazione del patrimonio ar-tistico creato nel mondo virtuale, di cui è proprietaria la società americana Linden Lab.

Il Museo è anche spazio espressivo che si caratter-izza come “luogo antropologico in continua evoluzi-one”, concetto al quale si ispira l ‘architettura del suo edificio digitale, sia nella prima che nella attuale versione.

L ‘odierna struttura è stata pensata e realizzata in Opensim da Nicola Reinerman aka Nicolas Sack.Nicola, avendo in mente la prima costruzione del museo, ne ha conservato la composizione modu-lare, funzionale alle esigenze di continua evoluzione


architettonica e artistico-culturale di MdM.Il risultato ci mostra una struttura che sembra fondersi con le opere stesse, fino a fare sì che il museo si configuri come una complessa opera concettuale, rappresentata dagli artisti, dalle loro opere, dai visitatori, dall’owner, dall’officer, da tutta la comunità che si è creata e orbita intorno al museo, nonché dalle storie umane, artistiche e culturali che crescono e si intrecciano nel Museo del Metaverso.

MdM, da un anno, ha una forte presenza in Open-sim-Cyberlandia, dove continua la sua mission di promozione dell’arte digitale, con particolare atten-zione ai mondi virtuali di Second Life e Opensim.Il progetto che nasce e si sviluppa in Second Life e Opensim, ha una sua forte esposizione nel Web con il sito ad esso dedicato, www.museodelmeta-verso.it, con i gruppi in Flickr e in Facebook, con l’affiliazione a 2Lifecast, la cui collaborazione ci permette di esportare in tempo reale contenuti me-dia streaming da Second Life al Web.

Questo art book che ci apprestiamo a pubblicare, grazie al talento e alla straordinaria dedizione del Maestro Laszlo Oerdoegh Diabolus aka Velazquez Bonetto, vuole rappresentare la testimonianza “tangibile” della creatività espressa nelle opere esposte al Museo del Metaverso, nonché della bellezza e dell’importanza di un fenomeno troppo spesso sottovalutato, se non snobbato, dal mondo dell’arte reale.

Gli artisti che espongono le loro creazioni al Museo del Metaverso sono tra i migliori del panorama ar-tistico di Second Life e non solo, poiché molti di loro provengono da esperienze artistiche reali; tutti hanno maturato una grande perizia tecnica, affinando capacità creative che non sapevano di possedere (mi riferisco ai nativi), ma che evidente-mente ciascuno di noi ha dentro di sé ed emergono

Picture 2-3:


Picture 4-5:

soltanto se ben stimolate.Io credo che i lavori mostrati nel book abbiano dig-nità per essere presi in considerazione, non come oggetti virtuali, ma come vere e proprie opere digi-tali.

Se non sono ascrivibili alla categoria di “creazioni artistiche” tout court, ritengo tuttavia che debbano essere almeno considerate, osservate, comprese nella loro complessa composizione che prevede molto spesso l’utilizzo di una tecnologia sofisticata di linguaggi di programmazione.Second Life ha visto in questi anni crescere e af-fermarsi una forte componente creativa, favorita sia dalla peculiarità dello strumento tecnologico che Linden ha messo a disposizione degli utenti sia dall’elemento sociale insito in un social network come Second Life.

Si è parlato a tal proposito di creatività con una forte componente sociale, quasi che la socialità favorisse in qualche modo la creatività e questo aspetto ha suscitato l’interesse di molti osservatori che, tuttavia, si sono soffermati a studiare il fenom-eno più dal punto di vista sociologico e della comu-nicazione che sotto il profilo della creatività.Io mi auguro che la bellezza di questo artbook pos-sa suscitare curiosità in chi ha sempre guardato a questi lavori con molta sufficienza e con poco senso della contemporaneità, se non del futuro.

Come ho già avuto modo di affermare, non penso in alcun modo che tutto quello che si crea in Sec-ond Life o in Opensim sia arte, credo tuttavia che sia in atto un fenomeno da non trascurare, come espressione dei tempi in cui viviamo, dove la cre-atività risulta sempre più compressa da ritmi di vita estenuanti e dai mancati stimoli di un mondo dove la fantasia è negata.

Probabilmente capita che all’interno della Secon-


da Vita, lontani dal frastuono del mondo e spogliati dalle angosce della quotidianità, la fantasia si ris-vegli, dando luogo ad una creatività che nessuno credeva di possedere, ma che era lì latente dentro di noi, in attesa soltanto di trovare una via di uscita.L’uomo contemporaneo trova così un rimedio per recuperare la creatività, che in passato si espli-cava nella maggior parte dei lavori: pensate al lavoro nei campi, nelle botteghe degli artigiani o nelle fucine dei fabbri o dei vetrai, alle tessiture, ai ricami e a tanti altri mestieri che contemplavano la creatività. Lavori per la maggior parte scomparsi a causa della produzione industriale delle merci, con conseguente alienazione dei lavoratori che, nella società industriale, diventavano addetti alle mac-chine o alle catene di montaggio.

Viviamo immersi nella contemporaneità anche gra-zie alla connessione globale, tuttavia sembra quasi che non si voglia prendere atto dei cambiamenti prodotti dalle tecnologie e dalla rete.

L’artista non è più rappresentato come l’uomo solo nel suo atelier, alle prese con tele e colori, l’artista contemporaneo è interconnesso con il mondo glo-bale, la sua creatività si esplica mediante la tecno-logia e i contenuti sono condivisi nei social media. L’arte quindi diventa una manifestazione sociale e globale. Testimonianza ne sono i contenuti condi-visi in Flickr, in Facebook, in Koinup, Youtube, Vimeo, in Second Life e in altri media sociali.

Se l’assunto è accettato, non si può non guardare con curiosità e attenzione questo meraviglioso art book e chissà, magari a qualcuno verrà anche il desiderio di entrare in Second Life a vedere da vi-cino le creazioni pubblicate, di cui molte sono ri-producibili fisicamente con materiali idonei, mentre altre, soprattutto quelle in movimento e interattive, potranno essere esportate nei luoghi fisici soltanto mediante riprese video.

Picture 6-7:

Velazquez Bonetto

Vorwort:

Die wahre Kunst erzählt immer etwas über die Zukunft von der Menschheit. Die Kunst versucht die Wahrheit zu exrtrapolieren in der Richtung von Wünsche und Treume. Die Kunst hilft die probleme zu entdecken, die Ungleichgewicht zwischen Reale Albträume und das gewünschte Leben. Die Kunst ist in der Lage kritisch darstellen was unsere leben auf die Erde gefärdet. Aber es ist nicht genügend. Wir müssen darstellen können welche Visionen si-chern langfristig das Leben von die nächste Gen-erationen. Hast du Kindern? Dann verstehst du was ich meine.

Wenn wir haben keine Visionen, haben wir auch keine Zukunft und wir hinterlassen für unsere Kindern eine änlich schlecht funktionierende Welt was wir von unsere Vorvarten geerbt haben. Un-sere Ziel ist: Zeigen wie die Künstlern von heute die Morgen und Übermorgen vorstellen. Es geht um wahre strategische Visionen. Für diese Mission wählen wir eine moderne Mediator: der weltweit ohne grenzen funktionierende Visions Machiene der Metaverse Infrastruktur. Der hilft uns unsere Ideen weltweit zu verbreiten, für andere Menschen deutlich machen welche unglaubliche Möglich-keiten haben wir. Die wahre Visionen beginnen im-mer mit die richtige Fragen.


Ringrazio di cuore il Maestro Laszlo Oerdoegh aka Velazquez Bonetto per questo prezioso regalo che ha fatto a me e agli artisti del Museo del Metaverso.Ringrazio gli artisti e tutte le persone che mi sono state vicine in questi anni e hanno condiviso con me un tratto di strada nella realizzazione di un pro-getto entusiasmante e rivolto al futuro.

Picture 9-10:


Picture 11:


MdM 2Dthe virtual surface

Picture 13: MillaMilla Noel


Picture 18: Four Yip


Picture 22: Frieda Korda


Picture 23; Frieda Korda


Picture 25: Nur Moo


Picture 26: Nur Moo


Picture 27: Redmoon Balut


Picture 28: Akim Alonzo


Picture 35: Santi Amat


Picture 38: Ramoon Balut, Akim Alonzo


Picture 41: Delfina1982 Cuttita


Picture 42: Sarima Giha La Città Blog


Picture 43: Sarima Giha Landscape per l’allestimento di Velazquez Bonetto


Picture 44: OPENGARDEN (ALLESTIMENTO BY ARCO ROSCA)


Picture 45: Marco Manray


Bryn Oh“The visual artist essentially has one main purpose, to make the viewer look at or interact with their creation for as long as possible. When the viewer has moved away then you may have lost them so essentially don’t let them leave. A good artist will subtly employ different techniques to keep the eye of the viewer traveling within the piece. For exam-ple, generally (and all art “rules” are general) the viewer’s eye will enter a painting starting in the bot-tom right hand side. The eye tends to travel counter clockwise in a circular manner moving from focal point to focal point. The artist will then try to lead the eye to areas of importance. This can be done through colour theory, composition or a multitude

of other methods. The artist wants to capture the viewer and suspend their disbelief. Make them feel like they are within the painting. I like to work on large paintings to block out the viewer’s peripheral vision. Don’t let them see a light switch or another painting or even another person in their peripheral because that only anchors them to the knowledge that they are in fact within a gallery setting looking at a 2D image. Those elements prevent the viewer from becoming fully immersed. And this is where Second Life comes in.

I believe the next big art movement will be im-mersive art, and I think second life is the start to this. We still look at a computer screen and can be distracted by our peripheral, by the need to use a keyboard, by our cat or by the phone ring-ing. But we have taken the step to be immersed in a 3D environment rather than viewing a 2D im-age. When space is available I create a story to catch the viewers attention. I create mysteries or environments for participation, and I am constantly trying to think of other ways to further immerse the viewer. We are at the beginnings now but I imagine the art of the future to be when someone comes home from work and plugs into an environment. They might be transported to a canoe on a lake with calling loons or their grandmothers’ kitchen. But perhaps the real test of an artist will be drawing out the shiver one feels when their virtual lover ca-resses their cheek. The feeling of love for an entity that does not exist in the real world, but was able to draw forth such an emotion due to the viewer’s full immersion into a storied environment.”

MdM 3dthe virtual space


Picture 3: Bryn OhPicture 1: Bryn Oh

Picture 2: Bryn Oh


Picture 4: Bryn Oh


Picture 5: Bryn Oh


Picture 6: Massimo Blinker


Picture 5: Picture 7: Sca Shilova


Picture 8: Artistide Despres


Picture 9: Kicca Igaly


Picture 10: Lollito Larkham


Picture 14: Daco Monday


Picture 15: Daco Monday


Picture 16: Aloisio Congrejo


Picture 19: Iaya Nishi


Picture 21: Maxxo Klaar


Picture 22: Asian Lednev


Picture 23: Asian Lednev


Picture 24: Abdullah Yazimot


Picture 25: Peli Dieterle


Picture 26: Peli Dieterle


Picture 27: Solkide Auer THE HAT OF ROXELO


Picture 28: Solkide Auer THE HAT OF ROXELO


mid riff note 11. 05. 2009

“Roy Ascott is prophetic. To say the least this es-say written in 1966-67 reminds of visions foretold by Vannaver Bush in As We May Think, although with the exception of focusing on the work of art and incredible accuracy to what our current rela-tions to the computer and art have become. This is to say that at the time which he wrote this essay, hardly anyone outside of the scientific or academic world had ever touched a computer, let alone could could afford one or had any use either. The pros-pects of computer aided art are just now becoming realized as well and the likeness to Ascott’s beliefs is uncanny. The prospects of the participative form of art are not new to us now, but were just com-

ing into existence, when Ascott was writing, across the Atlantic through Dick Higgins and the Fluxus movements Happenings. These pale by compari-son with what may be possible today but we are really just scratching the surface on the possibili-ties foretold by Ascott.

His characterizations of the art world and its his-tory are incredible and accurate to us today, and his interest in gaming as a form of participative art. To me he may put the prospects of gaming art to high though as it is only a factor of the possibilities we possess today, although undeniably a strong force in the motivation behind participative art. The real characteristic behind gaming art is more so the altered environment presented to the viewer and their ability to change it. This is to say that what may be grander than people interacting within a work of art is peoples environment being changed by their interactions (ie. body temperature, move-ment, sound). This context may have more poten-tial to the grandeur of participative art and include the behavioural prospects Ascott hopes for within the arts without constriction. It may be gaming, it may be installation, it may be hanging on a wall, or it may be web art.

I don’t believe by the word ‘play,’ Ascott is refer-ring to the idea of gaming but rather the larger con-text of interaction. From which, he is saying that computer aided works of art should strive to utilize such processor power and interact with their view-ers. We are really only scratching on the surface though as programs such as Quartz or Processing become more widely known and possibilities via the internet increase exponentially. This is coupled by a fear in the public of art done with computers due to their lack of understanding, but as every generation becomes more cpu savvy we are sure

MdM 4D

Roy Ascott:art and the

cybernetic vision1966-67

edited by velazquez bonetto


to see a huge increase in acceptance on the levels of fine art.”

Roy Ascott: Behaviourist Art and the Cybernetic Vi-sion. New York, London: W. W. Norton & Company 2002, pp. 104-120.

« Since the 1960s, the British educator, artist, and theoretician Roy Ascott has been one of Europe’s most active and outspoken practitioners of interac-tive computer art Ten years before the personal computer came into existence, Ascott saw that in-teractivity in computer-based forms of expression would be an emerging issue in the arts. Intrigued by the possibilities, he built a theoretical framework for approaching interactive artworks, which brought together certain characteristics of the avant-garde (Dada, surrealism, Fluxus, Happenings, and pop art, in particular) with the science of cybernetics championed by Norbert Wiener.

Ascott’s thesis on cybernetic vision in the arts be-gins with the premise that interactive art must free itself from the modernist ideal of the “perfect ob-ject” Like John Cage, he proposes that the artwork be responsive to the viewer, rather than fixed and static. But Ascott expands on Cage’s premise in the realm of computer-based art, suggesting that the “spirit of cybernetics” offers the most effective means for achieving a two-way exchange between the artwork and its audience.

Ascott challenges artists to acknowledge informa-tion technology as the most significant tool of the age, and insists that it is the artist’s obligation to use this technology. Yet, unlike Nam June Paik’s vision, Ascott’s is not ironic; rather, it is utopian in

Picture 3: luce LavalPicture 1: luce Laval

Picture 2: luce Laval


its embrace of a new medium, excited by the potential of a thriving, dynamic exchange between technology and art to empower the spectator and deepen his or her experience. »

The behavioural tendency in modern art

“. . . By “Modern Art” we mean that cultural continuum of ideas, forms and human activity which differs radi-cally from any previous era and is both expressive and formative of the attitudes and conditions of our time. To describe it as a continuum may seem con-tradictory to its accepted identity. It is seen popularly as an anarchic, highly diversified and chaotic situation which loses as much in coherence and continuity as it gains in novelty and imagination. Now, undoubtedly it is anarchic, but in the good sense that interaction be-tween artists is free and not constrained by aesthetic canons or political directives.

The diversity of images, structures and ideas which it engenders is far greater than at any other period in history. And it may well seem chaotic; a common cultural consciousness is not readily apparent today. But it is our purpose to demonstrate that Modern Art is fundamentally of a piece, that there is unity in its diversity, and that the quality which unifies it is in dis-tinct contrast to the essential nature of the art which went before it. We shall describe this quality as “be-havioural” and we shall show how it evidences our present transition from the old deterministic culture to a future shaped by a Cybernetic Vision.

The analysis of this behavioural tendency will be largely confined to one broad area, that of the visual/plastic arts, since there it seems to be most marked, but in a more general sense we shall discuss the arts as a whole, illustrating their convergence and inter-action in this context. We shall demonstrate how this unity of approach may be potentially part of a larger

unity, an integral culture, embracing modern sci-ence and technology. And we shall warn how this unity, and the incipient cybernetic vision in art, may be inhibited by artistic attitudes which, out of ig-norance and fear, are opposed to radical creative change, and view a cybernated society with indif-ference or hostility.

The general characteristics of modern art

The dominant feature of art of the past was the wish to transmit a clearly defined message to the spec-tator as a more or less passive receptor, from the artist as a unique and highly individualised source. This deterministic aesthetic was centred upon the structuring, or “composition,” of facts, of concepts of the essence of things, encapsulated in a factu-ally correct visual field. Modern Art, by contrast, is concerned to initiate events and with the forming of concepts of existence.

The vision of art has shifted from the field of ob-jects to the field of behaviour and its function has become less descriptive and more purposive. Al-though in Painting and Sculpture the channel of communication remains largely visual, other mo-dalities are increasingly employed-tactile, postural, aural; so that a more inclusive term than “visual” art must be found, and the one we propose is “behav-ioural.” This behavioural tendency dominates art now in all its aspects.

The artist, he artifact and the spectator are all in-volved in a more behavioural context. We find an insistence on polemic, formal ambiguity and insta-bility, uncertainty and room for change in the im-ages and forms of Modern Art. And these factors predominate not for esoteric or obscurantist rea-sons but to draw the spectator into active partici-pation in the act of creation; to extend him, via the artifact, the opportunity to become involved in cre-


ative behaviour on all levels of experience-physi-cal, emotional and conceptual. A feedback loop is established so that the evolution of the artwork/ex-perience is governed by the intimate involvement of the spectator. As the process is open-ended the spectator now engages in decision-making play.

Creative Participation

We may say that the boundaries between mak-ing art, the artifact itself, and the experience of the work are no longer clearly defined. Or, more pre-cisely, that the tendency for this to be so is evident. There are still in this transitional period many art-ists who contrive to force the new sensibility into old moulds, just as in technology there are many industrialists who attempt to squeeze cybernation into a nineteenth-century structure of operations. The participational, inclusive form of art has as its basic principle “feedback,” and it is this loop which makes of the triad artist/artwork/observer an inte-gral whole.

For art to switch its role from the private, exclusive arena of a rarefied elite to the public, open field of general consciousness, the artist has had to cre-ate more flexible structures and images offering a greater variety of readings than were needed in art formerly. This situation, in which the artwork exists in a perpetual state of transition where the effort to establish a final resolution must come from the observer, may be seen in the context of games. We can say that in the past the artist played to win, and so set the conditions that he always dominated the play. The spectator was positioned to lose, in the sense that his moves were predetermined and he could form no strategy of his own. Nowadays we are moving towards a situation in which the game is never won but remains perpetually in a state of play. While the general context of the art-experi-ence is set by the artist, its evolution in any specific

sense is unpredictable and dependent on the total in-volvement of the spectator.

Where once the function of art was to create an equilibrium, establish a harmony on he public level of relatively passive reception, we now find art as a more strident agent of change, effecting a jolt to the whole human organism, a catalyst which sets up pat-terns of behaviour, of thought and emotion, which are unpredictable in any fine sense. We observe in the painting of Poussin, for example, the wish to fix a set of relationships in the spectator’s consciousness, to reinforce these absolutes by the stability of the formal omposition; he communicates but by a one-way chan-nel. The modern artist, on the other hand, is primar-ily motivated to initiate a dialogue, to set feelings and ideas in motion, to enrich the artistic experience with feedback from the spectator’s response.

This cybernetic process of retraction generates a con-stant stream of new and unfamiliar relationships, as-sociative links and concepts. Each artwork becomes a sort of behavioural Tarot pack, presenting coordi-nates which can be endlessly reshuffled by the spec-tator, always to produce meaning. This is achieved principally in one of two ways: either the artifact has a definitive form but contains only a small amount of low-definition information; or its physical structure is such that its individual constituent parts can change their relationships, either by the direct manipulation of the spectator, or by his shifting viewpoint, or by the agency of electrical or other natural power.

The active involvement of the spectator can be thought of as removing uncertainty about a set of pos-sibilities. Deep involvement and interplay produces information. The “set” of the artwork has variety only in so far as the observer participates. The variety of the set is a measure of the uncertainty involved. An important characteristic of Modern Art, then, is that


Picture 4: luce Laval


it offers a high degree of uncertainty and permits a great intensity of participation. As to the artist’s role, it can be said to function on two levels simulta-neously, the private and the social. In the first case, the primacy of a total behavioural involvement in the activity or process of making art is apparent. The artist is not goal-directed in the sense of work-ing towards a predetermined art object.

The artifact is essentially the result of his creative behaviour, rather than the reason for it. The growth of a painting or sculpture or environment is of more importance than the achievement of its final form. Indeed, unlike Classical Art, there is no point at which it can be said to have reached a final form. From the social point of view the artist’s behaviour is a Ritual in which he acts out the role of the Free Man controlling his world by taking endless risks as he plunges into the unknown territories of Form and Idea. It is a paradigm of a condition to which the hu-man being constantly aspires, where freedom and responsibility combine to reduce our anxiety of the unknown and unpredictable while enlarging our ex-perience of the unfamiliar and irresistible.

At this early stage of a radically new culture the artist is doing little more than exploring his new re-lationship to the spectator. He is searching for new ways of handling ideas, for more flexible and adap-tive structures to contain them; he is attempting to generate new carrier waves for the modulations of contemporary experience; and he is searching the resources of technology to expand his repertoire of skills. His concern is to affirm that dialogue is possible-that is the content and the message of art now; and that is why, seen Tom the deterministic point of view, art may seem devoid of content and the artist to have nothing to say.

The modern means of communication, of feedback

museo del metaverso 123 and viable interplay-these are the content of art. The artist’s message is that the extension of cre-ative behaviour into everyday experience is possi-ble. The message is timely and apposite at a period in which we can anticipate the reduction of labour to a minimum and expect the creative use of leisure time to be the main preoccupation of our lives.

And even if the artist were to have fully explored the new channels of communication and thorough-ly exploited the media and techniques of modern technology, it is unlikely that his attitude would change. He would continue to avoid the limitations of an aesthetic geared to the transmission of finite messages or the formulation of fixed attitudes and absolute values. He will continue, instead, to pro-vide a matrix for ideas and feelings from which the participants in his work may construct for them-selves new experiences and unfamiliar patterns of behaviour. . . .

The cybernetic vision in art

By this term we do not mean “the Art of Cybernet-ics” nor do we refer to an art concerned to illustrate Cybernetics, nor yet an art embodying cybernetic machines or Robot Artalthough anyone of these things might be involved at some point, and again, they might not. We are referring to the spirit of Cy-bernetics which may inform art and in turn be en-riched by it. We contrast the Cybernetic Vision in Art to the Deterministic Vision of the past which has already been outlined. We say of Cybernetics that, before it is a method or an applied science, it is a field of knowledge which shapes our philosophy,influences our behaviour and extends our thought. We are moving towards a fully cybernated society where processes of retraction, instant communica-tion, autonomic flexibility will inform every aspect of our environment. In that forming society, of which we are a part, the cybernetic spirit finds its expres-


Picture 5: Eifachfilm Vacirca


sion in the Human Science and in Environmental Technology; the two poles between which we act out our existence. It is the spirit of our understanding of life at its simplest and most complex levels, and a large measure of our ability to control it. The economic and social effects of automation in the cybernated society will be profound. The effects of our transition of that future state are already felt, particularly in the United States. Matters of leisure, class formation, political and economic power have already called for revision and new thinking. Cybernetics already dominates our more advanced concepts of transport, shelters, stor-age and other day to day matters of control and com-munication and has caused the radical transformation of many industrial and commercial procedures. The effect of the computer on human thought is currently the subject of vigorous discussion in academic circles; the man/computer relationship is seen to be as much a question of identity as of methodology.

Fundamentally Cybernetics concerns the idea of the perfectibility of systems; it is concerned in practice with the procurement of effective action by means of selforganising systems. It recognises the idea of the perfectibility of Man, of the possibility of further evolution in the biological and social sphere. In this it shares its optimism with Molecular Biology. Bio-cy-bernetics, the simulation of living processes, genetic manipulation, the behavioural sciences, automatic environments, together constitute an understanding of the human being which calls for and will in time produce new human values and a new morality.

How does the artist stand in relation to these radical changes? On the level of opinions or concepts he is and will be free to accept or reject them. But on the level of deep human experience they will “alter sense ratios or patterns of perception steadily and without resistance.” The artist is faced with two possibilities; either to be carried along in the stream of events,


Picture 6: Velazquez Bonetto: cybernetic particle sculpture


mindlessly, half aware and perhaps bitter and hostile as a result; or he can come to terms with his worJd, shape it and develop it by understanding its under-lying cybernetic characteristics. Awareness of these underlying forces will sharpen his perception; the utili-sation of new techniques will enlarge his powers of thought and creative action; he will be empowered to construct a vision in art which will enhance the cy-bernated society as much as it will be enriched by it. Understanding and awareness, in short, are the con-ditions for optimism in art.

There is reason to suppose that a unity of art, sci-ence and human values is possible; there is no doubt that it is desirable. More specifically we propose that an essentially cybernetic vision could unify and feed such culture. The grounds for supposing that Art has anticipated this integral situation and is prepared for it can be found in the emphatically behavioural ten-dency which it displays. Cybernetics is consistent with Behaviourist Art; it can assist in its evolution just as, in turn, a behavioural synthesis can embody a Cyber-netic Vision.

Cybernetics and behaviourist art

It is necessary to differentiate between “l’esprit cyber-netique” as we have tried to describe it above, and Cybernetics as a descriptive method. Now, art like any process or system can be examined from the cybernetic point of view; it can also derive technical and theoretical support from this science-as in the past it has done from Optics or Geometry. This is not unimportant since the artist’s range can be extended considerably, as we briefly indicate below. But it is important to remember that the Cybernetic Vision in Art, which will unify art with a cybernated society, is a matter of “stance,” a fundamental attitude to events and human relationships, before it is in any sense a


technical or procedural matter. Behaviourist Art con-stitutes a retroactive process of human involvement, in which the artifact functions as both matrix and cata-lyst. As matrix, it is the substance between two sets of behaviours; it neither exists for itself nor by itself. As a catalyst, it triggers changes in the spectator’s total behaviour. Its structure must be adaptive implicitly orphysically, to accommodate the spectator’s respons-es, in order that the creative evolution of form and idea may take place. The basic principle is feedback. The system Artifact/Observer furnishes its own con-trolling energy; a function of an output variable (ob-server response) is to act as an input variable, which introduces more variety into the system and leads to more variety in the output (observer’s experience). This rich interplay derives from what is a self-organis-ing system in which there are two controlling factors; one, the spectator is a self-organising sub-system; the other, the artwork is not usually atpresent homeostatic.

There is no a priori reason why the artifact should not be a self-organising system; an organism, as it were, which derives its initial programme or code from the artist’s creative activity, and then evolves its specific artistic identity and function in response to the envi-ronments which it encounters. The artist’s creative activity is also dependent on feedback; the changes which he effects in his immediate environment (or “arena”) by means of tools and media set up con-figurations which feed back to affect his subsequent decisions and actions. Thus Modern Art, with its fun-damental behavioural quality, is theart of the organisation of effects. And when all the control factors, including the artwork itself, are ef-fectively homeostatic, art will be concerned with the automatic control of effects. Cybernetics, of course, is the science of the organisation of effects, and of the automatic control of effects.

Equally, there is no a priori reason why the artwork should become a self-organising system; the ba-sic feedback process of behaviourist art operates within the conventions of painting and sculpture, provided that they display low definition, multiple associations and indeterminate content, within pa-rameters which are, at least implicitly, flexible. And, as we have suggested already, this is nowadays the case-even to the extent of providing a more or less empty receptacle (the canvas) into which the spectator can project his own imaginative world, e.g., Yves Klein, Ad Reinhard.

The Computer and growth systems

However, historically it has been a characteristic of the artist to reach out to the tools and materials which the technology of his time produces, just as his perception and patterns of thought have tended to identify with scientific and philosophical attitudes of the period. If the cybernetics spirit constitutes the predominant attitude of the modern era, the com-puter is the supreme tool that its technology has produced. Used in conjunction with synthetic mate-rials it can be expected to open up paths of radical change and invention in art.

For it is not simply a physical tool in the sense that an aluminium casting plant or CO2 welding gear are tools, i.e., extensions of physical power. It is a tool for the mind, an instrument for the magnifi-cation of thought, potentially an intelligence ampli-fier. The interaction of man and computer in some creative endeavour, involving the heightening of imaginative thought, is to be expected. Moreover the interaction of Artifact and computer, in the con-text of the behavioural structure, is equally fore-seeable. Experiments are already taking place. We have cited Schoffer’s use of a computer in some of his structures. In music Iannis Xenakis has made

museo del metaverso 129 extensive use of an IBM 7090-aprocess in which he “specifies the duration and density of sound events, leaving the parameters of pitch, velocity and dynamics to the computer.” The “Light-Harp” project of Haukeland and Nordheim, an environmental sculpture emitting sound in rela-tion to the quality of local light, with sound sources changing position within the structure, calls for a highly sophisticated control and communications system within it.

The computer may be linked to an artwork and the artwork may in some sense be a computer. The necessary conditions of behaviourist art are that the spectator is involved and that the artwork in some way behaves. Now, it seems likely that in the artist’s attempt to create structures which are probabilistic, the artifact may result from biological modelling. In short, it may be developed with the properties of growth. Cybernetics already furnish-es models which could assist in this development, e.g., Beer’s Fungoid Systems and research into chemical and chemical-colloidal computers. The potential for the future is enormous.The cybernetic vision not only shapes modern sci-ence and technology, integrating and bridging dis-parate fields of knowledge and improving artificial control and communication systems by the under-standing of complex natural processes, but it can be expected to find expression and enlargement in Art. It can assist in the evolution of art, serving to increase its variety and vigour. . . .”


Ara Pacis Interview

Roxelo Babenco: Che cos’é Diabolus Art Space, oltre ad essere una comunità di artisti?

Velazquez Bonetto: Forse il nome Art Space Di-abolus puó essere un po’ frainteso, perché sug-gerisce che noi ci occupiamo esclusivamente di arte. Il nome Cybernetic Art Research Projekt (CARP) esprime meglio il nostro modo di pensare. Nel metaverso, molte delle astrazioni o dei concetti umani perdono il significato.

Non esistono frontiere nazionali, differenze etniche o religiose. Anche i sistemi politici perdono senso.I più importanti aspetti della vita nel metaverso sono l’arte, la scienza e la tecnica. Il metaverso é un meraviglioso punto d’incontro per la comuni-cazione e la collaborazione, dove questi aspetti si ispirano reciprocamente. Ci interessa l’esperienza in un mondo libero da tanti concetti inutili che nel mondo reale sono soltanto causa di conflitti ed equivoci. La scienza e l’arte sono entrambe orien-tate verso il futuro. L’interessamento per il futuro e la voglia di renderlo più bello possono essere con-siderati come il comune denominatore del nostro gruppo. Questo é il punto di partenza del nostro lavoro.

Roxelo Babenco: Come spieghi il grande successo di The Wall, The RINGS e Metropolis?

Velazquez Bonetto: La causa più importante del successo é il fatto che artisti eccellenti e validi tecnici professionisti hanno accettato l’invito per una collaborazione internazionale senza puntare ad ottenere un profitto materiale o finanziario. Le più splendide opere della storia dell’arte nascono sempre da uno sforzo irrazionale. Il nostro é un co-mune sforzo intellettuale, che da soddisfazione. E l’unica spinta propellente del gruppo é proprio rag-


giungere questa soddisfazione. Mi sento onorato di aver incontrato nel metaverso persone così ec-cellenti e di avere la possibilità di lavorare con loro. Si può probabilmente spiegare il successo anche con il fatto che tutte e tre le produzioni trasmettono un messaggio importante per il futuro. Questi mes-saggi vengono dal passato, ma non hanno perso la loro attualità. La mente umana ha una forte ten-denza a scrutare il futuro e a paragonalo con il pas-sato. Si deve ancora aggiungere che tutte e tre le produzioni presentano numerose sorprendenti in-novazioni tecniche. L’uso dei mezzi espressivi di questi nuovi media é veramente esemplare.

Roxelo Babenco: Che cosa significa essere un ar-tista nel mondo virtuale?

Velazquez Bonetto: L’arte é in un certo senso eter-na. La sua essenza non cambia da millenni e tratta questioni umane fondamentali. Ma nel metaverso, i mezzi espressivi sono arricchiti. Questo nuovo media artistico si avvale di tutti i mezzi espressivi precedenti, ma aggiunge l’opportunità di una col-laborazione e comunicazione internazionale, il che crea una qualità nuova. Questa esperienza regala la soddisfazione e la gioia dell’esplorazione alla gente creativa. Che cosa vogliamo di più?

Roxelo Babenco: So che stai lavorando molto in Opensim, anche in collaborazione con il Museo del Metaverso. Questo è previsto nel futuro program-ma di Diabolus o c’è di più?

Velazquez Bonetto: Questa è una domanda in-teressante. La grid Second Life di Lindenlab é un “concetto chiuso”, dove le “risorse” sono limitate. Questo fatto vincola l’immaginazione artistica ed annienta parte del vigore creativo. Opensim é fon-damentalmente un “concetto aperto”, e di conseg-uenza, nonostante i problemi tecnici attuali, sarà senza dubbio il modello del futuro.


Picture 7: Velazquez Bonetto


Picture 9: Nicola Reinerman


Picture 12: Rumegusc Altamura


Picture 15: Jonathan Kazan


Picture 16: Jonathan Kazan


Picture 17: Werner Kurosawa


Picture 18: Werner Kurosawa


Picture 19: Selavy Oh


Picture 20: Selavy Oh


Picture 21: Dancoyote Antonelli, Werner Kurosawa


Picture 22: Dancoyote Antonelli


Picture 23: Dancoyote Antonelli


Picture 24: Mencius Watts & Taggert Alsop


Picture 25: Mencius Watts & Taggert Alsop


Picture 26: Josina Burgess


Picture 29: Gleman June


Picture 32: Gleman Jun


Picture 35 Gleman Jun


Picture 36: Rose Borchovski


Picture 37: Shellina Winkler


Picture 39 : Shellina Winkler


Picture 44: Solkide Auer


Picture 50: SaveMe Oh


Picture 51: Maryva Mayo


Picture 55: Merlino Mayo


Picture 58: Rose Borchovski, Selavy Oh


Picture 59: Fransi Lisle


Picture 60: Glyph Graves


Picture 63: Lucian Iwish


Picture 64: Lucian Iwish, Arco Rosca


Picture 65: Lucian Iwish, Arco Rosca


Picture 68: Lusian Iwish


The Avatar Orchestra Metaverse is a global col-laboration of composers, artists and musicians that approaches the virtual reality platform Second Life as an instrument itself. The Orchestra conceives, designs and builds its own virtual instruments, mak-ing it possible for each individual performer in the Orchestra to trigger sounds independent from one another and to play together in real time. These in-struments feature sound, visuals, and animations. A performance of a jumping, hovering, floating, dancing, and twirling Avatar Orchestra Metaverse is a truly spectacular event.

Avatar Orchestra performs regularly in Second Life and in mixed reality events at new media, music and visual arts centres in North America, Europe

and Asia.

AOM began to work and to play in march 2007.We, at that time the avatars maxxo klaar, paco mariani, miulew takahe, dethomas dibou, bingo onomatopoeia and vit latynina had been teeming up during december and january 2007 to make a live performance at the Pomodoro Bolzanos Art Birtday celebration on the 17th january. During this time we where discussing alot about future collab-orative works combining music.

So we ended up at Dorkbot Second Life first meet-ing on the 19th february 2007. There we met maxi-millian nakamura that presented this meeting. We came to discuss about collaborative works and about gathering more avatars to perform pieces in orchestral format like possibilities to make a virtual Vicky Mosquitos in this new orchestral concept in SL and the Fadheit piece that maximillian intro-duced.

We started to form the idea of doing a Vickys Mosquitos #13 at the Art.Think.Box / Netherbeck of Pomodoro Bolzano. Harold Schellinx (aka hars hefferman) supported this idea to make a version of Vicky in SL. hars and his Ookoi compagnon Peter Mertens (aka frans peterman) was very in-volved in the rehearsals to make the premiere of Vicky´s Mosquitos #13 on the 14th march 2007 in a mixed reality context as Ookoi was invited at The Waag festival in Amsterdam on this date and we all thought it an interesting thing to play with this piece together with the green dressed real Ookoi members present in Amsterdam at same time as the green dressed avatars was playing in Second Life. bingo onomatopoeia was programming the aviophone for this piece (the instrument we played: see the glossary). vit latynina made the choreogra-

MdM events and

performances


Picture 1: Avatar Orchestra Metaverse performance


Picture 2 Avatar Orchestra Metaverse performance


phy. hars and frans made the green Ookoi dresses for AOM to wear. miulew takahe wrote the score and created samples and edited the Vicky voices in collaboration with hars. On the 14th of march was the premiere of Avatar Orchestra Metaverse performing Vickys Mosquitos #13 for both inWorld avatar audience at art.think.box and in real at The Waag festival in Amsterdam.

Jeremy Owen Turner performance

Wirxli FlimFlam is a founding member of Second Front. In Real Life (RL), Wirxli is known as Jeremy Owen Turner (b. 1974 - Victoria, B.C., Canada). Turner is an internationally exhibiting avatar performance artist, curator, music composer and writer based in Vancouver. Turner has been performing in virtual environments since about 1996 and has specifi-cally performed as an avatar since 2001.

Turner was the coordinator for Vancouver’s LIVE Biennial of Performance Art in 2005 and has just been appointed their Director of Avatar Develop-ment for the LIVE Biennial in 2007. www.livevan-couver.bc.ca

In addition to Second Life, Turner has also per-formed produced artwork and/or performances in these avatar environments: Digitalspace Traveler, Cybertown, Active Worlds, Moove/Roomancer, Vir-tual Ibiza, IMVU, MUSE and The Palace.

Prior to being a performance artist in Second Life,

Picture 8: Jeremy Owen Turner performancePicture 6: Jeremy Owen Turner performance

Picture 7: Jeremy Owen Turner performance


Turner was most known for co-producing the very first in-world documentary of a virtual (avatar) community called AVATARA (2003) with Donato Mancini and Pat-rick “Flick” Harrison.

DC performance

An alumni of the San Francisco Art Institute, DC Spensley has lived and worked in this most tolerant and beautiful of North American cities for 20 years. Co-founder of quasi art movements like “The Gomi School” and “Critical Mass”, Spensley’s latest project spoofing the meta-narrative is called Hyperformalism which describes formalist abstraction in a hyper con-struct. These neologisms are descriptive of the art-ist’s perceived place in the larger context of cultural production, part “art movement” part marketing appli-ance and narrative license to create visual, aural and conceptual cohesion from the critical chaos of post-modern pluralism.

DC’s twenty year career is difficult to quantify. A polymath, the artist wears the hat of writer, director, cinematographer, composer, performance artist and most recently has appeared as the avatar DanCoy-ote Antonelli in the virtual reality simulation entitled Second Life. While most people jealously guard their pseudonymity inside this alternate reality, Spensley professes to be the same artist in both worlds and has exhibited recently at the ZeroOne/ISEA confer-ence at the San Jose California Museum of Art, the Bumbershoots Festival under the auspices of Frye Art Museum of Seattle, the Dutch Electronic Arts Festi-val and numerous other venues in Second Life and real life since DanCoyotes Second Life birth in April of 2006.

DanCoyote (a pun on Cervante’s Don Quixote) has achieved significant notoriety exhibiting art based on

situated technology and reactive architecture while at the same time creating, producing and direct-ing a the only the only zero gravity dance troupe in either world. Spensley/DanCoyote’s ZeroG Sky-Dancers perform in Second Life and are often pro-jected into real world venues, spanning the divide between continuums. The SkyDancers are a cross between water ballet and aerial acrobatics and have been said to invoke a sense of wonder and pageant similar to Cirque du Soleil.

Source: http://slccartexhibit.wordpress.com/artists-checklist/bio-dancoyote-antonelli/

Juria Yoshikawa performance

After two decades of creative pursuits - ranging from conceptual art, installation, poetry, perfor-mance, computer art, animation, photography and digital design - Juria Yoshikawa arrived in Second Life in the winter of 2007 looking for a new artistic spark. Rather than bringing in rl artwork, Juria is compelled to use mainly the elements that make up sl itself. A typical Juria Yoshikawa virtual artwork mixes kinetic objects, animated texture, ambient noise and av animations. She inevitably chooses scales larger than conventional gallery work be-cause she is interested in people experiencing the work in a physical way - flying through them, rid-ing on them and socializing within the art. To Juria virtual art is about freeing oneself up to create in ways she finds impossible in real life.Email me at [email protected].

Lance ShieldsI am the real life person behind both Juria and An-dres. As this SL art blog is starting to get viewed by interested folks I wanted to be clear about who is who. Especially in the case of Juria being a female, I wanted people to know that she exists in SL as one of my alter egos but that there is not a real life

museo del metaverso 219 female face behind her. In my real life, I am a Tokyo based multimedia artist and designer. I have spent many years making digital art, installation art and performance. Sculpture and installation are where I started my creative career but I became progres-sively more involved in the digital and interactive. I see Second Life as a return back to my artistic roots yet at the same time combines my newer in-terests in the phenomenology in the virtual world. This difficult to say word is defined as “the reflective study of the essence of consciousness as experi-enced from the first-person point of view”. In my commercial life, I am a social media strategist a global company embrace social networking, blog-ging and Second Life.

Source: http://memespelunk.org/blog/?page_id=39


Picture 11: Dancoyote Antonelli aka. DC Spensley performance


Picture 12 Dancoyote Antonelli aka. DC Spensley performance


Picture 13: Juria Yoshikawa performance


Picture 14: Juria Yoshikawa performance


Picture 15 Juria Yoshikawa performance


Picture 16: MdM performance


Picture 17: MdM performance


Picture 18: diabolus-CARP WALL performance


Diabolus/CARP The Wall performance

iReport —

Pink Floyd the Concert performed in Second Life by the project CARP.Is Second Life (SL) just a game or a future & present platform for artists? Get some valueable insight from one of the most established artist groups of SL and decide yourself .

CARP (Cybernetic Art Research Projects) is an art-ist group of Second Life who explores the countless possibilities of SL, as a creative platform. We will take a closer look at todays show, which is based on Pink Floyds epos “The Wall”. CARP transfered the classic epos into the present and used the possibilities of SL to create a Hollywood like expierience. Created only with brilliantly creative Minds, dilligence and an affort-able budget. The next performance is at Friday 2 nd April at the Diavolus Art Space, 2pm SLT. For updates and invitations please join the SL group “Art Gallery Diabolus”. A Backstage interview

Today a huge audience had the pleasure to watch CARP´s interpretation of “The Wall”. I meet with Jo-sina Burgess and Debbie Trilling for an interview on the dance floor. This two Artists speak for the CARP project who is the creator of this wonderful show. For the CARP project, Second Life is more then “just a Game” or a “Simulation”. It is a new platform, where artists from all over the world can meet, share there creative minds and create something new. More then a painting, more then a poem; It can reach the level of a whole virtual world. As in previous times, artists discover and pioneer new possibilities. Exploit and

explore to bring Second Life to new borders while setting a benchmark for free minds.

Josina Burgess is from Amsterdam, Netherlands; a performer, spokes person for the CARP and sur-rounded by confidence, even in hectic moments. Debbie Trilling is the Creative Director for “The Wall” and a power women who makes ideas hap-pen, in a blink of an eye and several months of hard work with diligence. CARP, Duggy Bing of Cartoonimals and Patio Plasma of Exploratorium are some of the places where her Art can be seen.

I had the pleasure to meet these wonderful Ladies on the dance floor, to bring the CNN audience the lasted news from SL.

Kiko Hunniton: Josina, after problems at the begin-ning an amazing performance. Are you glad and relaxed now? Please tell our readers about “The Wall”.Josina Burgess: WELL A BIT, today we had for a short time problems, because the preparations for the huge Metaverse Art Festival have already begun.It took us several months to create the show with all the buildings and scripts and all done in Team work with the first performance back in April 2008. We constantly meet and think of ways to improve the show. Today our guests see Version 3. Our Cre-ative Director Debbie Trilling had with Velazquez (Vela) Bonetto the sparkling idea for “The Wall”, in Second Life. Other performances are “Metropolis”, “The Ring” and in a few days with the Metaverse Art Festival.

A major part in all my creative work is CARP. At the beginning, 3 years ago, i started working with Vela, a wonderfull hungarian professor, architect, mas-ter of art, master engineer and programmer. A true multi talent! Together we laid the cornerstone for

museo del metaverso 235 CARP and our work attracted Artists from all over the world with amazing talents and minds. At the beginning we performed with a mixture of RL-SL ( Real Life - Second Life) for instance at the Museum in Florence. Thus made us to truly pioneers in the new SL Metaverse. A future project is to document our work in a book.

Kiko Hunniton: Josina, not all people see the count-less possibilities of Second Life, what would you like to tell them?Josina Burgess: Oh, that would be a long story. First i would start with the question: “Why to you think so?”. Later i would bring my arguments and most importantly, i would show them SL with some of the magnificent creations. Done by the brilliant minds. Only in SL it is possible to bring people from all over the world together, create and invent. All for the very first time, something we will tell our grand children.

We try to create new forms of art including a new form of entertainment. Where else can you sit in a theater and the seats will take you up, fly with you from scene to scene. Where else can you sit in a seat and cameras take over your view, let you have close ups from whatever you like.Where else can a seat “animate” you in such a way that you become a “part” of the show.

Its a new dimension! We as CARP push the lim-its, where we can go and step up to a boarder, we challenge it to see if we can go further. Working in Teams and help individual artists is a cornerstone of our work. To bring ideas alive. We seek also cooperation with other artists. Art and science are twins and the ban pronounced by Descardes will sooner or later lift, we are ready for it. Here in Sec-ond Life, the personality of a person is often better expressed then in RL (Real Life) and i am very glad that many of the CARP artists do meet in Real Life.

Kiko Hunniton: Debbie, you as the Creative Director; would you please be so kind and tell us about “The Wall”Debbie Trilling: Vela (Velazquez Bonetto) and I were mulling over some ideas.. and half-jokingly I said, “we should do Pink Floyd’s ‘The Wall’.... as soon as I said it, we looked at each other, and knew that this was a great idea; that was Oct 2007. I spent that week-end building demos...full size wall, the bedside, the aeroplane and some particle effects to demo to Vela & Josina the scope of what I had in mind. It was big...lol...but today it is actually even bigger than I originally imagined. We gathered together a team of builders, scripters etc and got to work, the original build (V-1) took 6 months.

We totally rebuilt for V-2, and again for V-3; some ob-jects are the same, like the puppets, but, for the most part...we have re-written for each versionAs our own experience of large shows in SL has increased, we have rebuilt and rescripted to keep apace. The first show was in April 2008....since then we have performed the show to around 2800 Resi-dents.

Kiko Hunniton: a fix star in the sl arts heavenDebbie Trilling: lol yeah, kinda feels like that some-times. Wall is a fun project with many talented individ-uals contributing. Together, we think we have created something special in SL, and we’d love for people to come see it.

Thank you for the interview and the magnificent work the CARP team has done, i look forward to attend fu-ture shows and exhibitions from CARP. To be witness when a new Art Dimension of SL is explored.

Kiko Hunniton from Second Life for iReport CNN


Picture 21: diabolus-CARP Living Architecture party


Picture 23: diabolus-CARP Living Architecture party, live music: Al Hofmann


Picture 25: diabolus-CARP NNOIZ Dark concert


Picture 26: diabolus-CARP NNOIZ Dark concert sculptures: Igor Ballyhoo


Picture 27: diabolus-CARP NNOIZ Dark concert

MillaMilla Noel

a special edition of the museo del metaverso

and theartspace diabolus

cybernetic art research project

2010


mdm art book

Documents

the museo

metaversomdm8 museo

prefazioneil museo

the metaverse museo

metaversosolkide auer

the virtual space

the virtual surface

the copyright owners