|  
 ( 
        Text in Deutsch ) >>
   Mirrors 
        Mathias 
        Fuchs 
       "I'm 
        dead now!" is obviously a statement, that contravenes the laws of 
        classical logics. Either one is dead or one speaks of death: to do both 
        simultaneously, as Epicurus once pointed out, is nonsense. Game addicts, 
        in other words dyed-in-the-wool gamblers with symptoms of obsession, are 
        usually unable to distinguish between the representation of their game 
        figures on the screen and themselves. Consequently, they are no longer 
        in a position to separate life from death. Game freaks and their fellow 
        players find nothing odd about the claim to be dead when the game comes 
        to a close. This is not the result of a lack of linguistic sensitivity, 
        nor a lack of logic, but the result of the highly serviceable form of 
        identity augmentation. The player's biological persona merges with the 
        electronic stimulation of the active person. This construction is serviceable 
        because it increases the intensity of the linguistic experience, and because 
        it allows one to be both dead and alive at the same time. However, this 
        augmentation of identity is problematical with respect to classical percepts 
        of identity. Certainty 
        could emerge from identity at the latest with Descartes' attempt to see 
        things "clare et distincte". Descartes' intellectual experiment 
        was to conceive sensuous experience as the deception of a being (where 
        "I" is merely conjured before me) that dissolves the moment 
        that Descartes construed himself as a thinking being. It is only with 
        the aid of this construct that Descartes could dispel the doubts that 
        he was being deceived by a god. In this way Descartes eliminated possible 
        intermediaries (media) between himself and the world and creates the basis 
        for the continuity of a personal "I", that everyone possesses 
        and that everyone makes answerable for their deeds and thoughts. It was 
        through Descartes' trick that ethics and a system of law related to individual 
        people become imaginable. Clear guidelines to identity, however, are the 
        price paid for the those rights, which bars the schizophrenics, the dreamers, 
        the intellectually weak, the gamblers and the procrastinators. Some of 
        these possess too much identity, the others too little - a luxury in one 
        case, a defect in another. But one way or another an anomaly, that destroys 
        the concept of a single identity. The non-identical threathens to undermine 
        the enlightened, reasonable, non-Cartesian world and the gamblers - the 
        game presents the concept of identity with a dangerous challenge. In the 
        game the borders between the person and its environment dissolve. Roles, 
        history, gender, ethnical identity and geograpy also blur in the game. 
        This begins with "Cowboys and Indians" and ends with the Unreal 
        Tournament, Quake or Final Fantasy. Bombproof 
        IdentityIt seems to be that play and a bombproof certainty of identity are incompatible 
        principles. The spoilsport is of course the one who rather mundanely points 
        out "but you're not a Red Indian" (which is true in the majority 
        of cases), or the fellow player that pronounces "you're not dead, 
        you're just pretending!". Of course the player is dead in the sense 
        of an electro-biological personal union constituted by the act of playing. 
        Thus, the course of the game, especially the narration of the game, becomes 
        the spring of a construction process of an extended identity, that should 
        not be seen an act of consciousness, but the result of a game set-up. 
        Richard Rorty refers to the mediating instruments that create mental representations 
        from a reflection of reality as a vocabulary. In the "Mirror of Nature" 
        and subsequently in "Contingency, Irony and Solidarity", Rorty 
        attempts to rehabilitate the narration as opposed to the explanation and 
        claims: "this new vocabulary makes a formulation of the objective 
        possible. It is the tool for a job that one could not have imagined before 
        the development of a special range of descriptions - descriptions that 
        it helps even in producing." Rorty draws the inference that someone 
        who argues on the basis of another vocabulary could not be persuaded with 
        reasons. One could at the most persuade them to accept one's own vocabulary. 
        Just as Rüdiger Zill rightly pointed out in "Broken Rays, Shattered 
        Mirror" this task of persuasion cannot be assigned to philosophy. 
        Zill regards "other agencies 
 literature, cinema, television" 
        as being suitable. For a number of reasons one should also add computer 
        games to the list of instruments of persuasion: one of these being the 
        high degree of popularity of computer games enjoy in the presentday entertainment 
        industry; another is that computer games seem to be emerging as a leading 
        technology that the previously dominant sectors of film and music will 
        now have to follow: finally, computer games are still - but not for much 
        longer - the first technology to be used by teenagers and also one that 
        is being adopted by the over twenty year olds. The persuasiveness of game 
        narrations can be seen to be based on the factor that helps to construct 
        mental representations. One cannot blame Rorty as a writer that his terminology 
        consistently aims at linguistic mechanisms, it appears to me with reference 
        to computer games to be more fruitful to aim at the most suggestive elements 
        of the game: the texture and sound libraries, the effects, the game play. 
        Let us replace Rorty's "vocabulary" with the texture library, 
        "linguistic" with audiovisual and the narration with the story.
 Are there 
        any visual elements that differentiate games from films or television 
        and simultaneously act as catalysts for new forms of consciousness? I 
        would like to submit the suggestion that the game mirror should be examined 
        as an element that could be effective in constructing identity. Naturally, 
        mirrors play an important role in cinematic history, but the mirror in 
        the cinema remains constantly in the medium and does not divert the gaze 
        to the viewer of the film. Computer games are more innovative in so far 
        as the viewpoint of the viewer must not necessarily be predetermined by 
        the medium. A game mirror is not identical to a film mirror. In early 
        computer games one was tied to a third person view (Pacman, Super Mario) 
        or first person view (Doom). More recent games on the other hand allow 
        a choice of either of these two forms of presentation. Players report 
        that they tend to identify more strongly with the game figures in third 
        person shooters. The gaze from the eyes of the game figures prompts one's 
        consciousness to a degree of identification and an intensity of identification 
        that is different to a perspective that views the game terrain god-like 
        from above. I maintain that the installation of feedback views, as can 
        be found in mirrors and closed-circuit cameras in games, can introduce 
        a further increase in complexity. Important steps in this direction were 
        already implemented by video art and early computer art. However, I will 
        try to prove later that video art was bound to reach a limit that computer 
        games are now in a position to overcome. Self-CelebrationComputer work involving feedback setups such as those where Myron Krueger 
        showed the viewer in the monitor and added reactive agencies. Works like 
        these characterized what Mario Perniola referred to as "self-celebration" 
        with video art in mind. Computer and video art do not intend to be television 
        and separated themselves from the latter through a different geometry 
        of viewing. Instead of gazing into the distance, proximity and what is 
        hidden were to be made visible, freed of idealization, phoney authenticity 
        and banal reference to the seemingly factual. Video and computer art were 
        seen as egalitarian, immediate communication with respect to a social 
        utopia, that always retained a moment of feedback and critical gaze in 
        the mirror. Perniola called video culture a culture of the mirror and 
        in adaption of a well-known aphorism of McLuhan, one could characterize 
        the media work of the period quite well by saying that: "the medium 
        was the mirror".
 In his study 
        of the functions of interactive artworks the Canadian David Rokeby finally 
        arrived by way of metaphors of navigation and discovery to the mirror. 
        Media that - in contrast to the mirror of glass - do not reflect anything 
        in their path in indentical form, would have to be called "transforming 
        mirrors" in David Rokeby's terminology. In contrast to proverbial 
        wisdom of "just as you shout into the forest, so will it echo back", 
        the transforming mirror changes the form and figure of the mirrored. Rockeby 
        found transforming mirrors in interactive technical processes and in interactive 
        art. Rockeby differentiated between the usage of transforming mirrors 
        from that of flat ones, by the fact that in the first case the "interactor" 
        does not recognise his movements as being purely distorted, displaced 
        or compacted but medially. Thus, the active recipient experiences himself 
        as the subject experiences itself during dream work, the media assume 
        the role that Freud assigned to the dream. "The interactor sees some 
        representation of himself or herself like a mirror image or shadow, transformed 
        by the potential with which the artist has endowed the space.."  Rokeby cites 
        his own work "Very Nervous System" as an example of a transforming 
        mirror. In "Very Nervous System" a camera digitalizes the image 
        of the interactors and transforms this pictorial information in a matrix 
        of grey tones and then transfers the data to pattern recognition algorithm 
        that produces sounds from the movements of the interactor. The transforming 
        operation of the "mirror" in this case of this installation 
        lies in the quantification of the image, its translation into grey tones 
        and the medial translation into the area of sound. Rokeby describes 
        the objective and function of interactive art as follows: By providing 
        us with mirrors, artificial media, points of view and automata, interactive 
        artworks offer us tools for constructing identities - our sense of ourselves 
        in relation to the artworks and, by implication, in relation to the world". 
        While Rokeby wants to present us in his installation with a (even if transforming) 
        mirror, other artists are less willing to supply us with the mirror as 
        a functionally efficient tool. Autonomous 
        Mirror"Tumbling Man" by Chico MacMurtrie and Rick W. Sayre represents 
        a robot that uses the elbow and knee movements of the interactor and transfers 
        these to the shaky motoricity of the machine. The robot may mirror here 
        the intent of movement but fails with respect to the movement itself. 
        The robot trips, trys to get up again, and cramps up continually. The 
        active user can recognise himself in the robot, but his mirror image remains 
        distorted. Movement guided by intention becomes a caricature of failed 
        implementation. While one can use the mirror for reassurance in everyday 
        life, the medial mirror represented by the robot serves on the contrary 
        for insecurity. Similarly, Christian Möller's installation "Autonomous 
        Mirror" is designed to present a programmed non-conformity contrasting 
        with real-time mirroring. For a time the figure generated by the computer 
        behaves like the viewer of this figure. It imitates arm and leg movements, 
        and assumes the same posture as the viewer. But the algorithm that guides 
        the movements presupposes that the figure can also break the routine of 
        reproduction and can surprise the viewer with seemingly autonomous movements. 
        If Lichtenberg remarked "a book is a mirror: when an ape looks into 
        it - well, an apostle cannot look out!" , so, too, one must reformulate 
        this for the autonomous mirror of interactive art: "where apes look 
        in, apostles can look out - and the other way round". Interactive 
        installations are characterised by the fact that they not only distort 
        formally and change, but that they can reinterprete contextually and reevaluate: 
        an elegant movement can be turned into an awkward one, leisure can be 
        turned into haste and obedience into rebellion. The Canadian pioneer of 
        robotics Norman White is an artist who is especially interested in the 
        dislocations caused by robot ensembles.
 Deception 
        and Trick MirrorNorman White's "Helpless Robot" or the installation "Facing 
        Out, Laying Low" reveal behavioural patterns of dictatorial presumption 
        and bored rejection of the demand for mirroring. What the mirror image 
        reflects back to the recipient in the form of the robot is less an image 
        than an attitude. In his most recent work "Monster", White constructed 
        a cybernetic object, that reacts as a submarine or robotic Nessie to the 
        visitors of the reservoir, but also according to circumstance avoids and 
        hides from them. The artificial intelligence that is behind this project 
        should be seen as artificial emotional intelligence that might understand 
        and be able to communicate this, but the objective of whose activity lies 
        more in the development of autonomous gestures.
 Mirror 
        ThingsIn computer games of the most recent generation, we met a renewal and 
        renaissance of the mirror, the surveillance camera and the distorting 
        mirror that produces the impression that the now rather lame dynamics 
        of the game culture of video and computer installations has been resurrected 
        from a deep slumber in the garb of a new medium. But computer games present 
        us not just with a remake, a nostalgic reminder of the media of the '80s. 
        Armed with the cutting edge of the newest game engines, mirror games are 
        turning up in the new computer games. In Max Payne, a new Finnish cult 
        game, the player is continually egotistically and narcissistically concerned 
        with himself, if he can jump, stumble or died particularly well. This 
        self-infatuation with one's own death is celebrated through the fact that 
        Max Payne can reincarnate himself as a pistol bullet that flies to the 
        detriment of his second self, the figure of Max Payne. Just as the heart's 
        blood of the dying Narcissus dyed red the floor and the petals of the 
        flower of the same name, so too is Max Payne surrounded by the colours 
        of death. The Dooms, Unreals and Quakes do not spare any expense to serve 
        the player with the grandiosity of post-mortal colour- and blood-letting. 
        Mirroring and self-observation are intergrated into the game as an interactive 
        operation. Analagous to first and third person games, one speaks of a 
        bullet view as the unification of the player with the weapon that is about 
        to kill him. The fact that this weapon does not actually kill him but 
        merely a game figure is a formalist old-fashioned injunction that I have 
        already attempted to invalidate. What sense would it make, after all, 
        to identify with the pains of a figure, if this figure was not that of 
        the player himself?
 Mirrors also 
        surface as decoration, spatial elements and architectural features. The 
        warp zones in Unreal, in which I can met myself as a player and the Camera 
        Clients from UT2003 structure space as a manneristic self-referential 
        mirror space that is turned in on itself and in which I can implosively 
        fall in on myself. It seems to be that the interior spaces of the psyche 
        and the indentities and to be, that seem to have a greater attractiveness 
        for the games world at the moment than the extraterrestial colonies of 
        the '80s. The mirror 
        spaces of the games are the visible gameplay articulation of an idea. 
        The French author Jaques Rigaut (1899-1929) called that type of object 
        whose single objective is to mirror, mirror things:"Mirror things are models of a type of beauty, that we refer to as 
        elegance. Mirror things are suitable for a perfection fully independent 
        of the individual. Mirror things are not to be found in nature but are 
        rather a product of the disciples of superficiality - that is, in that 
        which appears before the mirror. The compliance to these uncomprimising 
        adherents of the superficial transforms external reality into an essentially 
        different and elegant something, in a bright and unique beauty".
 Ultra-DandyismPerniola suggests that this point of view should be called "ultra-dandyism" 
        and that it characterized Rigaut's attitude as a challenge to the world, 
        to transform every object and every event into a thing of beauty, a perfect 
        beauty that emerges from an inner mimesis.
 One can call 
        the spatial objects of these new games mirror things and contrast their 
        mimetic perfection with the cold stimulation of architecture, bodies and 
        physics that had so enthralled us in past decades. It could be that one 
        reason for the search for mirror images might lie in a dissillusionment 
        with the unmirrored, constructed reality. It could be that we see self-fabricated 
        reality as being not elegant and beautiful enough, and for this reason 
        look for mirror reflections and the view inwards - even in games. One could 
        even cynically claim that an industry that is continually avidly seeking 
        innovation is presenting us with the mirror as a topical and trendy form 
        of binoculars. Hence, with reference to this technology one would have 
        to concur with Hegel when he stated: "Technology appears on the scene, 
        when necessity arises".  (transl. 
        David Gogarty)   |  |