Virtual Art: From Illusion to Immersion (Leonardo Books)
by Oliver Grau
MIT Press, 2003
416 pages; includes bibliography and index
ISBN: 0262072416
Price: $45.00
Reviewed by Amy Ione
PO Box 12748,
Berkeley,
CA USA 94712-3748
ione@diatrope.com
Given the degree to which media art and new technologies have expanded
contemporary discourse, Oliver Grau's Virtual Art: From Illusion to
Immersion is a timely book. Overall, the scope of the research is the
book's most impressive feature. Tracing depictions of illusionary visual
space back to antiquity, the author skillfully describes a number of
projects that he believes establish historical precedents for the contemporary
virtual reality case studies discussed. The book begins with (among
other things) the frescoes in the Villa dei Misteri in Pompeii, the
gardens of the Villa Livia near Primaporta, Renaissance and Baroque
illusion spaces, and panoramas. Later chapters turn to interactive art,
interface design, agents, telepresence, and image evolution. Among the
contemporary artists and groups introduced are many that will be known
to Leonardo readers, including ART+COM, Maurice Benayoun, Char Davies,
Monika Fleischmann, Ken Goldberg, Agnes Hegedues, Eduardo Kac, Knowbotic
Research, Laurent Mignonneau, Michael Naimark, Simon Penny, Daniela
Plewe, Paul Sermon, Jeffrey Shaw, Karl Sims, Christa Sommerer, and Wolfgang
Strauss. No doubt the range of case studies will appeal to those who
desire to firmly establish intersections among art history, visual culture,
and media history.
Indeed, Virtual Art is quite an accomplishment. Those seeking a general
survey will applaud it. The book, however, does not persuasively engage
with the overview critically. Grau never reconciles how to address the
competing demands of a lengthy chronology with those of an in-depth
analysis, and this limits the reach of the book overall. Moreover, his
decision to chronicle a large, descriptive catalogue of art indicative
of illusion/immersion, rather than to cogently scrutinize the range
in relation to a complex theme, leads me to conclude that this enthusiastic
contribution, while an adequate sampling, is not a robust study. Although
the author claims to demonstrate a metamorphosis among the far-reaching
studies, he does not explicitly develop the tensions and commonalities
that exist among the variety of works included. Thus it is difficult
to see precisely how the projects cohere.
More specifically, although it is clear from the case studies that Grau's
research included issues surrounding the emotional and political power
of the images he presents, he did not seem to have a well-developed
strategy for interrelating the discrete sections. For example, Grau's
impressive discussion of Anton von Werner's 1883 "The Battle of
Sedan" explains how this panorama was conceived as a political
tool, used to mold the public mind. Reading through it I could not help
but wonder why Grau failed to introduce Plato's views here (and elsewhere).
Indeed, as I reflected on the sources referenced, I kept thinking that
Platonic contributions to the trajectory of the debates on art and illusion,
as well as the political and emotional aspects of images, were the elephants
in the room Grau never mentioned. This oversight led me to think that
Grau's book runs strangely parallel to the existing critical analyses
of illusion and immersion.
Plato comes to mind because his writings and legacy has been perhaps
the primary influence on the denigration of the image as well as the
views of illusion that came to define academic art history. Even a brief
overview of this influence would have provided an historical touchstone
for Grau's thesis as presented, for Plato, clearly, did not share Grau's
view. Despite his own artistry, Plato's dialogues demonstrate that he
questioned the value of artistic contributions. He rails against the
kinds of illusions artists create and criticizes the skillful ways in
which they deceive us. According to Plato, those who make art frequently
compel strong and decadent emotions, arousing passions rather than reason.
Rather than celebrating this, he concluded that artists mistake the
fire for the sun, and create illusions that keep others from seeking
the sun, the path to true understanding. For example, in Ion, an early
work, Plato is already expressing some of his doubts about art directly,
explaining that possessing the skill of mimesis (imitation) is not to
possess true understanding. This differentiation between true understanding
and having the ability to create the illusion of something (i.e. imitate)
is further developed when this philosopher sets out his metaphysical
position in the Republic, where he also introduces the story of the
Cave. The well-known Cave is but one example of the ways in which Plato
uses analogy and metaphor to make the argument that mere appearances
are twice removed from Truth. Again and again the dialogues introduce
the idea that the ability to create the appearance of something (i.e.
an illusion) is insidious because it has the power to bewitch the soul.
Ultimately Plato equated the mastery of mimesis with the skills of a
puppeteer, only good for entertaining children.
Grau does not appear to share Plato's low opinion of artists and their
abilities to create convincing illusions. Yet, it was unclear to me
whether or not he recognized this when he concluded with the thought:
"Obviously, like Plato's prisoners in the cave, what we need to
do is to turn toward the light, to face the new and, armed with our
knowledge, confront it squarely. The question is not to find a way out
of the cave, for there is no way out of the history of media. There
are only old and new media, old and new attempts to create illusions:
It is imperative that we engage critically with their history and future
development." (Grau, 2003, p. 346)
If this paragraph is meant to suggest we need to re-think Plato's view,
I would agree. My concern is that the complexity inherent in virtual
reality precedents was underdeveloped in Grau's analysis, and this less
than piercing analysis does not offer a foundation for future critical
engagement. Ignoring the reach of Plato's legacy in regard to the history
of illusion, for example, points to a missed opportunity to place the
subject. It also underscores the degree to which Grau ignored a large
body of research as well as the opinions of contemporary critics of
technology who continue to follow Plato's lead when arguing that the
new technologies are more artistic, amusing, and dangerous than they
are enriching. Let me emphasize that studies acknowledging Plato's influence
are not confined to philosophers and cultural critics. For example,
E.H. Gombrich, considered the doyen of art history and illusion research
when he recently passed away, began his last book, The Preference for
the Primitive with the comment:
"The well-known dictum by the philosopher Alfred N. Whitehead,
that the whole history of Western philosophy is but a series of footnotes
to the writings of Plato, applies with special force to the philosophy
of the arts . . . Plato . . . [believed] art can only flatter and deceive
the senses and seduce the mind to feed on phantoms." (Gombrich,
2001, p. 11)
Strangely, Grau also fails to integrate Gombrich's voluminous research
into the book. Gombrich is among the many important scholars that are
never engaged, although several are mentioned in passing. Had Grau effectively
introduced some of these diverse, critical viewpoints, even minimally,
his strikingly narrow perspective on illusionistic history could have
asked questions that significantly enhanced the study overall. A broader
spectrum of views, for example, would have allowed Grau to place his
proposals in relation to those who see the topic from a perspective
quite unlike his own. Then, reflectively speaking to the critical voices,
he would have added depth to the enthusiasm of the study.
Empirical scientific research is also strangely absent from the text.
There is little indication that the author recognizes the extent to
which empirical visual science has aided in the development of the technologies
used in stereo projects and in the study of visual illusion, for example.
Had Grau critically engaged with these domains (and similar areas) there
might be more developed explanations of (among other things) (1) how
illusions created on a two-dimensional surface compare to those that
have a 3-dimensional foundation, (2) how a project conceived using linear
perspective conceptually compares to one that relies on stereoscopic
vision, (3) how projects that depend on a viewer using one static viewing
point are perceived/experienced as compared to those that encourage
interaction or dynamic viewing, (4) the degree to which perceptual constancies
are a part of illusion/immersion, (5) how data explaining how/why we
experience visual illusions impacts the development of projects, (6)
the limitations of static viewing points, head-mounted displays, wands,
gloves, (and limiting devices in general), (7) why some (historical
and contemporary) projects simply miss the mark when attempting an illusionistic
presentation, etc.
On balance, Grau's broadly based survey magnificently presents a diverse
collection of projects and ably translates experiential modes into verbal
descriptions. Unfortunately, a short review cannot adequately explore
the breadth of this research. Suffice to say, that Grau does a wonderful
job in reminding us that the incentive to create illusory environments
is not new and this author has also offered areas we can explore when
seeking to add historical perspective to the innovative projects of
today. To Grau's credit, his excellent descriptions bring the diverse
works to life. Although critical issues are not examined comprehensively,
future research will no doubt build on the foundation Virtual Art: From
Illusion to Immersion provides. Yet, perhaps ironically, the small black
and white reproductions underscore the limitations of verbal descriptions.
Reproduced static images simply cannot replace an actual experience/environment,
particularly when the experience is illusionistic or immersive. Finally,
it should be noted that Gloria Custance's translation is both intelligent
and easy to read. In sum, Virtual Art: From Illusion to Immersion has
limitations but is, nonetheless, a groundbreaking survey.
Gombrich, E. H., Ed. (2001). The Preference for the Primitive: Episodes
in the History of Western Taste and Art. Phaidon, London and New York.