top of page

EMANUELE

DAINOTTI

Muddle

Starting point

In 2016 I started a research focused on the concept of the loop; taking into account both the reiteration of an action within the behavior of the human being (including the social sphere and the private sphere) and its metalinguistic meaning within the video medium.

During the development of this cycle of works I applied a narrative and aesthetic synthesis operation in order to search for open narrative structures that put themselves in dialogue with the users.

The next step was to work directly on the image. During an art residency in Montevideo I’ve worked through the development of videos in which the aspect ratio changes slowly, constantly and imperceptibly violating the image and leading it to deny itself to the viewer.
In May 2019 I was in residence at the MUST Museum (Italy), where I developed a series of works starting from the research of the philosophers and anthropologists Danowski and Viveiros de Castro as opposed to the writings of E. Thacker and T. Ligotti. Each residence is an incentive for me to confront myself with something that I have never handled before; during the residence at MUST it was my moment to draw. I worked on drawings with photosensitive pigment: visitors were called to “activate” the drawings with a torch and in this way I left both narrative and temporal intent in their hands. The fundamental components of the video medium were thus created in the relationship between the work itself and the user.

 

Research

Subsequently I deepened my research on the work of Byung-Chul Han and then met Timothy Morton’s work on my journey. I want to continue developing my research on time (especially on the loop theme) accompanied by an investigation that deepens the relationship between image and user (focusing on the video image), now bringing it to face new questions.
The writings of Byung-Chul Han and Morton are leading me to develop a strong interest in what processes today govern the reading and coding of an image through a device. I do not perceive a boundary where technology enters our “reality” without keeping in mind how that technology is influenced by our ways of creating, conceiving and using it.
I’m referring in particular to Morton’s concept of Hyperobjects and his links with the OOO and to Byung Chul Han’s studies on self-improvement, which becomes self-upgrading, if it is placed in a context of hyper-technological and productivity-driven society.

 

Output

I would like to create a MetaVR video installation, in which the viewer can deal directly with his own VR-projection.
Thanks to a video camera I would like to record the viewer and reproduce its own image in real time in the VR headset.
The tendency is to give a real person the opportunity to “live” a virtual experience.
But what if we turn the situation around? What if we insert reality into a virtual reality?

 

These are the questions that I am asking myself and that I would like to share with the users:

 

-How can I compare myself with my own VR projection?
-Where is the border between reality and virtual reality experience?
-How do I deal with my virtual projection?
-What is the difference between Viewer and User?

 

Political and aesthetic implications multiply.
Especially if this research fits into the biopolitical and neoliberal context we are experiencing.
A strong contrast with “There is no alternative”.

 

Another development is to include the projections of the users who participated in the virtual experience before us, so that you can also see the projections of previous visitors in addition to your own projection thanks to the VR viewer.

muddle.jpg
muddle1.jpg
muddle2.jpg
muddle3.jpg
muddle4.jpg
bottom of page