Reading Response: "From Participation to Interaction" by Söke Dinkla

I appreciated reading this piece, most specifically because it relates to a project I am working on. Dinkla writes that “audience participation was [a]… means to reduce the distance between performer and audience… by spatial integration” (p. 69). This makes art more accessible, and it lowers the barrier to making art. Dinkla quotes Erkki Huhtamo, who notes that participatory art is about ‘the annihilation of the barrier between life and art’ (p. 71). I’m curious though, when that barrier is blurred, or completely eliminated, what is art then? To me, I suppose that is the point – to shift the perspective and prompt a deeper understanding of what art-life is. Rather than going through life asleep, we should wake up to the possibilities around us and be aware of how our actions and interactions influence ourselves, society and the world.

I’m not sure this occurs in the same way with the Happenings; Dinkla does write that “participation is located along the fragile border between emancipatory act and manipulation” (p. 73). I’m curious about the self-reflection that occurs in an authoritarian-manipulative environment. When someone’s actions are instructed, I do think that makes them think about manipulation and authority. Just ask anyone who spent time in the military.

Dinkla writes about the paradoxical and “historically rooted antagonism between nature and technology” (p. 74). I think this is part and parcel of this course, and it captures some of what I was attempting to communicate in my first project. It really is the gist of some of my key existential questions. I found this piece to be inspirational in helping me come up with several ideas for future projects that look at how social interactions in public spaces are mediated by technology.