Thematic Section

On the razor’s edge: the (virtual) image between illusion and deception

Author(s)
Keywords
  • Immersion
  • Presence
  • Virtual reality
  • Representation
  • Hallucination
Abstract

Most often, the concept of illusion has been interpreted in a negative way as a synonym for deception. However, a second, positive meaning has gained sometimes prominence according to which illusion does not necessarily imply any cognitive failure or distortion. As such, it can even play an important role in eliciting genuine aesthetic enjoyment. This introduction focuses on crucial aspects in the history and theory of aesthetic illusion, a notion that has resurfaced recently as a key aspect of the phenomenon of immersion, being regarded as a goal to be pursued by both the creators and the experiencers of virtual environments.

References
  1. Bateson, G., The Message “This Is Play” (Princeton: Josia Macy Jr. Foundation, 1956).
  2. Bogost, I., Alien Phenomenology, Or, What It’s Like to be a Thing (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012).
  3. Calleja, G., In-Game. From Immersion to Incorporation (Cambridge MA: The MIT Press, 2011).
  4. Daston, L., Galison, P., Objectivity (New York: Zone Books, 2007).
  5. Flusser, V., Towards a Philosophy of Photography (1983), trans. A. Mathews (London: Reaktion Books, 2000).
  6. Fried, M., Theatricality and Absorption: Painting and Beholder in the Age of Diderot (Chicago-London: University of Chicago Press, 1983).
  7. Grau, O., Virtual Art: From Illusion to Immersion (Cambridge MA-London: The MIT Press, 2003).
  8. Grossi, G., La notte dei simulacri. Sogno, cinema, realtà virtuale (Milan: Johan & Levi, 2021).
  9. Hofer, M. et al., “The role of plausibility in the experience of spatial presence in virtual environments,” Frontiers in Virtual Reality 1, no. 2 (2020) , https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2020.00002
  10. Koblížek, T., ed., The Aesthetic Illusion in Literature and the Arts (London: Bloomsbury, 2017).
  11. Lombard, M. et al., Immersed in Media. Telepresence Theory, Measurement & Technology (Cham: Springer, 2015).
  12. Lombard, M., Ditton, Th., “At the heart of it all. The concept of presence,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 3, no. 2 (1997), https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00072.x.
  13. Marin, L., “The frame of representation and some of its figures” (1988), trans. C. Porter, in On Representation (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001): 352-372.
  14. Milk, C., “How virtual reality can create the ultimate empathy machine,” TED conference, March 2015, https://www.ted.com/talks/chris_milk_how_virtual_reality_can_create_the_ultimate_empathy_machine.
  15. Murray, J.H., “Virtual/reality: how to tell the difference,” Journal of Visual Culture 19, no. 1 (2020): 11-27.
  16. Peck T.C. et al., “Putting yourself in the skin of a black avatar reduces implicit racial bias,” Consciousness and Cognition 22, no. 3 (2013): 779-87, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2013.04.016. Epub 2013 May 28. PMID: 23727712.
  17. Pinotti, A., “Staying here, being there. Bilocation, empathy and self-empathy in virtual reality,” Bollettino Filosofico 37 (2022): 142-162, https://doi.org/10.6093/1593-7178/9657.
  18. Putnam, H., “Brains in a vat,” in Reason, Truth and History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981): 1-21.
  19. Salen, K., Zimmerman, E., Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals (Cambridge MA: The MIT Press, 2003).
  20. Scarpina, F. et al., “The effect of a virtual-reality full-body illusion on body representation in obesity,” Journal of Clinical Medicine 8, no. 9 (2019), 1330, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8091330.
  21. Slater, M. et al., “Inducing illusory ownership of a virtual body,” Frontiers in Neuroscience 3, no. 2 (2009): 214-220, https://doi.org/10.3389/neuro.01.029.2009.
  22. Slater, M., “Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 364, no. 1535 (2009): 3549-3557.
  23. Stella, F., Working Space (Cambridge-London: Harvard University Press, 1986).
  24. Walton, K.L., Mimesis as Make-Believe: On the Foundations of the Representational Arts (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990).
  25. Weibel, P., “The intelligent image: neurocinema or quantum cinema?,” in J. Shaw, P. Weibel, eds., Future Cinema: The Cinematic Imaginary after Film (Cambridge MA-London: The MIT Press, 2003): 594-601.
  26. Wiesing, L., Artificial Presence. Philosophical Studies in Image Theory (2005), trans. N.F. Schott (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010).
  27. Wolf, W., “Illusion (aesthetic),” in P. Hühn et al. (eds.), Handbook of Narratology (Berlin-New York: de Gruyter, 2009): 144-160.
Read Article
Published

20 December 2022

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54103/ai/19919
How to Cite
Conte, P., & Wiesing, L. (2022). On the razor’s edge: the (virtual) image between illusion and deception. AN-ICON. Studies in Environmental Images [ISSN 2785-7433], 1(II). https://doi.org/10.54103/ai/19919
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.