In respond to your concern regarding content. My feeling, is that you
are not being over-critical, you are in fact raising the most important
issue that should be raised for any work, (technology or not)
</bigger></color></bold>Personally, It is the most important concern I
struggle with in my work. Additionally, in my opinion I do not feel
that members of our public really cares if works are technologically
mediated or not. In that respect, it is our responsibility to make sure
content remain at the for-front of our concerns. (specifically when we
explore interactive technologies).
However, my intention (in my last e-mail to my comrades) was to inform
you all about my next show, as well as extend an invitation to attend
in the event any one was planning to be in the area.
Best Regards, Yacov........
>> "Electric Mask" uses a video motion capture system for the creation
>> of sound interactively in real time. the work includes four
>> CyberHumanDancers animated on the computer (Poser+) and out-putted
>> to video. (no human dancers included in this work. "All Round Me"
>> uses booth human bodies and body-bags +projected computer generated
>> 3D animation's. The human dancers will be activating sound
>> interactively in real time by applying pressure as they move on an
>> Electronic Dance Floor. "Command Enter" uses movement material
>> generated totally on the computer (Poser II +Detailer++).
>Don't take this as criticism, but: what are these pieces attempting
>A lot of announcements here describe pieces in terms of what
>technology they use, how they use it, and (sometimes) the working
>method applied to make the pieces. Very few announcements describe
>artistic intent of the piece.
>Am I being over-critical? Am I missing something in my
>Is the use of technology in dance considered interesting in and of
> Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects
> http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control
> NOTICE - this vessel has triple screws - keep clear of blades