Thematic Section

Adventures beyond anthropocentrism in virtual reality art

Author(s)
Keywords
  • Virtual Reality
  • Illusion
  • Anthropocentrism
  • Umwelt
Abstract

In the following essay, I consider if and how VR’s uncanny ability to create an illusion of presence and generate a sense of body ownership might be used to go beyond our anthropocentric perspective, towards non-human experiences. By adventuring outside the domain of human experience, my goal is to address the affordances and limitations of VR’s illusionistic potential. Knowing full well that certain economic pressures preclude artists from pursuing the kinds of provocations I describe in this essay, I nevertheless invite readers to follow along as I explore alternative potentialities of contemporary VR. Specifically, I approach VR here in the hopes of finding ways of engaging with different bodies, spaces, and realities, even if illusorily.

References
  1. Ahn, S.J., et al., “Experiencing nature. Embodying animals in immersive virtual environments increases inclusion of nature in self and involvement with nature,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 21, no. 6 (2016): 399-419, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12173.
  2. Bédard, P., “La machine subjective? Les appropriations cinématographiques des dispositifs immersifs contemporains,” Canadian Journal of Film Studies 28, no. 1 (2019): 66-92, https://doi.org/10.3138/cjfs.28.1.2019-0012.
  3. Bogost, I., Alien Phenomenology, or, What It's Like to Be a Thing (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012).
  4. Bollmer, G., “Empathy machines,” Media International Australia 165, no. 1 (2017): 63-76, https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X17726794.
  5. Bollmer, G., Guinness, K., “Empathy and nausea: virtual reality and Jordan Wolfson’s Real Violence,” Journal of Visual Culture 19, no. 1 (2020): 28-46, https://doi.org/10.1177/1470412920906261.
  6. Bolter, J., Grusin, R., Remediation: Understanding New Media (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2000).
  7. Botvinick, M., Cohen, J., “Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see,” Nature 391, no. 6669 (1998): 756, https://doi.org/10.1038/35784.
  8. Brakhage, S., “From Metaphors on Vision,” in P.A. Sitney, ed., The Avant-Garde Film: A Reader of Theory and Criticism (New York: Anthology Film Archives, 1978): 120-128.
  9. Bricken, M., “Virtual worlds: no interface to design,” in M. Benedikt, ed., Cyberspace: First Steps (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1991): 363-382.
  10. Casey, E.S., The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997).
  11. Collins, D.L., “Anamorphosis and the eccentric observer: inverted perspective and construction of the gaze,” Leonardo (1992): 73-82, https://www.jstor.org/stable/i270958.
  12. Crary, J., Techniques of the Observer: On Vision and Modernity in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT press, 1992).
  13. Ditlea, S., “False starts aside, virtual reality finds new roles,” New York Times (March 23, 1998): C3.
  14. Eagleman, D., “The Umwelt,” in J. Brockman, ed., This Will Make You Smarter (London: Doubleday, 2012): 143-145.
  15. Farmer, H., “A broken empathy machine,” Immerse, 2019, https://immerse.news/a-broken-empathy-machine-can-virtual-reality-increase-pro-social-behaviour-and-reduce-prejudice-cbcefb30525b, accessed January 10, 2023.
  16. Farmer, H., Maister, L., “Putting ourselves in another’s skin: using the plasticity of self-perception to enhance empathy and decrease prejudice,” Social Justice Research 30, no. 4 (2017): 323-354, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-017-0294-1.
  17. Farmer, H., Maister, L., Tsakiris, M., “Change my body, change my mind: the effects of illusory ownership of an outgroup hand on implicit attitudes toward that outgroup,” Frontiers in Psychology 4, no. 13 (2014), https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.01016.
  18. Farmer, H., Tajadura-Jiménez, A., Tsakiris, M., “Beyond the colour of my skin: how skin colour affects the sense of body-ownership,” Consciousness and Cognition 21, no. 3 (2012): 1242-1256, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.04.011.
  19. Feuchtner, T., Müller, J., “Extending the body for interaction with reality,” Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2017), https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025689.
  20. Gregory, S., “Immersive witnessing: from empathy and outrage to action,” Witness Blog (2016), https://blog.witness.org/2016/08/immersive-witnessing-from-empathy-and-outrage-to-action/, accessed January 10, 2023.
  21. Grusin, R., The Nonhuman Turn (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2015).
  22. Jarvis, L., “Body-swapping: self-attribution and body transfer illusions (BTIs),” in Immersive Embodiment: Theatres of Mislocalized Sensation (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019): 99-154, 113.
  23. Kilteni, K., Normand, J.M., Sanchez-Vives, M.V., Slater, M., “Extending body space in immersive virtual reality: a very long arm illusion,” PloS one 7, no. 7 (2012): 1-15, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0040867.
  24. Lanier, J., “Homuncular flexibility,” in 2006: What is your Dangerous Idea? Edge: The World Question Center (2006), https://www.edge.org/response-detail/11182, accessed January 10, 2023.
  25. Lesur, M.R. et al., “The plasticity of the bodily self: head movements in bodily illusions and their relation to Gallagher’s body image and body schema,” Constructivist Foundations 14, no. 1 (2018): 94-105, https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-162795.
  26. Lombard, M., Ditton, T., “At the heart of it all: the concept of presence,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 3, no. 2 (1997), https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00072.x.
  27. Maselli, A., Slater, M., “The building blocks of the full body ownership illusion,” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7 (2013): 1-15, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00083
  28. Merleau-Ponty, M., The Phenomenology of Perception (1945) (New York: Routledge, 2010).
  29. Montani, P., “The hallucinatory aspect of virtual reality and the image as a ‘bilderschrift’,” AN-ICON. Studies in Environmental Images no. 1 (2022): 154-172, https://doi.org/10.54103/ai/15441.
  30. Murray, J.H., Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace (1997) (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT press, 2017).
  31. Murray, J.H., “Not a film and not an empathy machine,” Immerse (2016), https://immerse.news/not-a-film-and-not-an-empathy-machine-48b63b0eda93, accessed January 10, 2023.
  32. Murray, J.H., “Virtual/reality: how to tell the difference,” Journal of Visual Culture 19, no. 1 (2020): 11-27, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1470412920906253.
  33. Nagel, T., “What is it like to be a bat?,” The Philosophical Review 83, no. 4 (1974): 435-450, https://doi.org/10.2307/2183914.
  34. Nakamura, L., “Feeling good about feeling bad: virtuous virtual reality and the automation of racial empathy,” Journal of Visual Culture 19, no. 1 (2020): 47-64, https://doi.org/10.1177/1470412920906259.
  35. Nash, K., “Virtual reality witness: exploring the ethics of mediated presence,” Studies in Documentary Film 12, no. 2 (2018): 119-131, 124, https://doi.org/10.1080/17503280.2017.1340796.
  36. Paolucci, C., “Perception, hallucination, virtual reality. From controlled hallucination to Resident Evil 7: Biohazard,” AN-ICON. Studies in Environmental Images 1 (2022): 112-128, https://doi.org/10.54103/ai/15443.
  37. Pinotti, A., “What is it like to be a hawk?,” in Y. Hadjinicolaou, ed., Visual Engagements: Image Practices and Falconry (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2020): 30-47, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110618587-003.
  38. Reinerth, M.S., Thon, J.N., “Introduction,” in M.S. Reinerth, J.N. Thon, eds., Subjectivity across Media: Interdisciplinary and Transmedial Perspectives (New York: Routledge, 2017): 1-25.
  39. Reinerth, M.S., Thon, J.N., eds. Subjectivity across Media: Interdisciplinary and Transmedial Perspectives (New York: Routledge, 2017).
  40. Roquet, P., “Empathy for the game master: how virtual reality creates empathy for those seen to be creating VR,” Journal of Visual Culture 19, no. 1 (2020): 65-80, https://doi.org/10.1177/1470412920906260.
  41. Seinfeld, S., Feuchtner, T., Maselli, A., Müller J., “User representations in human-computer interaction,” Human–Computer Interaction 36, no. 5-6 (2021): 400-438 https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2020.1724790.
  42. Selinger, E., Postphenomenology: A Critical Companion to Ihde (New York: SUNY Press, 2012).
  43. Sherman, W.R., Craig, A.B., Understanding Virtual Reality: Interface, Application, and Design (San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman Publishers, 2003).
  44. Steptoe, W., Steed, A., Slater, M., “Human tails: ownership and control of extended humanoid avatars,” IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 19, no. 4 (2013): 583-590, https://doi.org/10.1109/tvcg.2013.32.
  45. Von Uexküll, J., A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans with a Theory of Meaning (1934) trans. J.D. O’Neil (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010).
  46. Wees, W.C., Light Moving in Time: Studies in the Visual Aesthetics of Avant-Garde Film (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992).
  47. Won, A.S., Bailenson, J., Lanier, J., “Homuncular flexibility: the human ability to inhabit nonhuman avatars,” Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: An Interdisciplinary, Searchable, and Linkable Resource (2015): 1-16.
  48. Won, A.S., Bailenson, J., Lee, J., Lanier, J., “Homuncular flexibility in virtual reality,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 20, no. 3 (2015): 241-259 https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12107.
  49. Yang, R., “If you walk in someone else’s shoes, then you’ve taken their shoes: empathy machines as appropriation machines,” Radiator Blog (April 5, 2017), https://www.blog.radiator.debacle.us/2017/04/if-you-walk-in-someone-elses-shoes-then.html, accessed January 10, 2023.
  50. Yee, N., Bailenson, J.N., “The difference between being and seeing: the relative contribution of self-perception and priming to behavioral changes via digital self-representation,” Media Psychology 12, no. 2 (2009): 195-209 https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260902849943.
  51. Yee, N., Bailenson, J.N., “The Proteus effect: the effect of transformed self-representation on behavior,” Human Communication Research 33, no. 3 (2007): 271-290, https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208330254.
Read Article
Published

20 December 2022

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54103/ai/18458
How to Cite
Bédard, P. (2022). Adventures beyond anthropocentrism in virtual reality art. AN-ICON. Studies in Environmental Images [ISSN 2785-7433], 1(II). https://doi.org/10.54103/ai/18458
Copy

Issue
Vol. 1 No. II (2022): Just an illusion? Between simulation, emulation, and hyper-realism

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
License
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.