Some Ontology of Interactive Art

Philosophy and Technology 27 (2):267-278 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Lopes (2010) offers an account of computer art, which he argues is a new art form. Part of what makes computer art distinctive, according to Lopes, is its interactivity, a quality found in few non-computer artworks. Given the rise in prominence of such artworks, most notably videogames, they are surely worthy of philosophical inquiry. I believe their ontology and properties are particularly worthy of study, as an understanding of these will prove crucial to critical understanding and evaluation of the works themselves. Lopes’ account of interactive art is novel and important, but flawed, and in this essay I will discuss its flaws and suggest a better account of the properties of interactive art that builds on his work, providing a partial account of the ontology of interactive art. In Section 1, I discuss Lopes’ definition and ontology of interactive art; in Section 2, I argue that he only accounts for the properties of displays, neglecting the properties of interactive artworks themselves. In Section 3, I discuss several possible solutions for Lopes and why they are inadequate before Section 4 presents my view, that interactive artworks possess all of the properties of their varying displays because each possible display is part of the artwork. This is compatible with Lopes’ definition of interactive art, and so much of his account can be preserved, but with a refined account of the properties of interactive artworks. What I present is by no means a complete ontological study of interactive art, but hopefully lays the groundwork for future work on this ontology

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What is interactivity?Aaron Smuts - 2009 - Journal of Aesthetic Education 43 (4):pp. 53-73.
The Ontology of Interactive Art.Dominic McIver Lopes - 2001 - Journal of Aesthetic Education 35 (4):65-81.
Interactive kinds.Muhammad Ali Khalidi - 2010 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (2):335-360.
Video Games and the Philosophy of Art.Aaron Smuts - 2005 - American Society for Aesthetics Newsletter.
Interactive Fiat Objects.Juan C. González - 2013 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 4 (2):205-217.
The art of videogames.Grant Tavinor - 2009 - Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Videogames and aesthetics.Grant Tavinor - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (8):624-634.
A Philosophy of Computer Art by lopes, dominic mciver.Timothy Binkley - 2010 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 68 (4):409-411.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-08

Downloads
138 (#129,246)

6 months
19 (#121,979)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Dominic Preston
Cambridge University

Citations of this work

Meriting a Response: The Paradox of Seductive Artworks.Nils-Hennes Stear - 2019 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 97 (3):465-482.
Walton, Truth in Fiction, and Video Games: A Rejoinder to Willis.Martin Ricksand - 2020 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 78 (1):101-105.
Walton, Truth in Fiction, and Video Games: A Rejoinder to Willis.Martin Ricksand - 2020 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 78 (1):101-105.
Philosophy of Digital Art as Collaboration.Andrew J. Corsa - 2019 - Hyperrhiz: New Media Cultures 19.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The art of videogames.Grant Tavinor - 2009 - Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
A Philosophy of Mass Art.Noël Carroll - 1997 - Clarendon Press.
A Philosophy of Computer Art.Dominic Lopes - 2009 - New York: Routledge.
A Philosophy of Mass Art.Noël Carroll - 1998 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 62 (1):182-183.

View all 13 references / Add more references