I visited Spruth Magers, which is a gallery located across the street from LACMA. The opening exhibition featured the work of digital media artists Stan VanDerBeek and Jon Rafman, and included video, sculpture, immersive environments, and a VR installation. The exhibition loosely focused on the evolution of digital video over the span of 50 years via the work of two experimental video artists, but seemed to lean toward the body horror associated with human/machine symbiosis and the contrast between organic and artificial timespans in digital media.
This response will focus solely on the VR aspect of the exhibition. My observation time with the VR headset installation overlapped with my presence in the waiting line, as there we upwards of 15 people waiting to have a turn. While there were multiple VR headsets available, the line was still long and dominated the back space of the gallery, both as a point of obstruction and anticipation. I waited about 20 minutes for a turn, while observing the installation of the headsets in the space. There was no visual projection of what the headset users were seeing, so the content maintained its mystery throughout the exhibition. There were a number of other videos playing in the space that were within sight from the VR line, so guests settled for watching them from afar or had open conversations with other visitors as they waited. It seemed that most visitors were not paying attention to the reactions of those in the headset, which I found particularly unfortunate as watching someone who does not know you are watching is a pleasing experience given the voyeurism. Though in retrospect I understand that people do not stare out of courtesy.
There seems to be an element of embarrassment involved with putting on a headset, inasmuch that you willingly make yourself vulnerable to the observation of others. This is sometimes tempered by an overcompensation of performance when wearing the headset (e.g. overreactions). That said, those who started out embarrassed seemed to have their social anxieties melt away after the simulation begins. I noticed that the participants immediately forget their place in the social sphere of the gallery, i.e. that their presence in the room is no longer considered. Their awareness of other people dissolves as they react (sometimes embarrassingly) to the visual stimuli. That said, I noticed that some older gentlemen almost didn’t react at all, absolutely in any way, perhaps because they were a) unable to fully immerse or b) unable to forget their social presence in the gallery. In this way, there appears to be a politics surrounding whether or not someone will react to this type of visual stimuli encountered in a VR headset.
For this particular installation, there was no wall text provided. The only guiding information about the piece was delivered via a patient docent who helped guests strap on the headset and blindly find a seat on the VR bench. While I do not believe that VR installations are pardoned from providing didactics about the work for the benefit of the viewer, I found that this particular piece operated well without it. The visualization was abstract and autonomous enough that it did not require an explanation — it simply asked for the time and participation of the viewer to be led through a story.
I really like the observations you made about both the people using the VR headsets and those who were waiting to use them. Even though everyone is using the same headsets and people clearly chose to visit this museum, I think it’s interesting that some people were embarrassed to be using the headsets and that people felt that it was polite to not stare at those who were wearing the headsets, even though its clear that the person wearing the headset wouldn’t notice. VR is still a new technology, so I feel like most people are still experiencing it for the first time and I’m interested in visiting this gallery in the future to see it for myself!
This gallery is something I definitely need to check out if it’s still open! How did you find out about this installation? I think incorporating VR into every aspect of art, entertainment and tech is rising in popularity so many artists may feel the pressure of using it to elevate or enhance their work. In this case, you noted that it was not necessary or an integral part of the work. Why do you think that is? I wish there were an image to give us an idea of how it was used and how well it worked in the space. I think you really observed others around you and gave a great analysis as to why they behaved in that way. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and your experience!
Having gone to see this installation as well, you did a great job capturing the sort of impatience or removal I experienced in the line for VR. The experience of waiting in a line, at least in the context of a gallery, seems to have the guise of making the art into an attraction. The experience of waiting in line could be part of the immersion, of course, as one must wait to get hands on a (relatively) budding technology. Also, loved your insights on how people reacted, or didn’t react, once in VR!
I really enjoyed reading this and I’ve got to go see it! I liked your description of the embarrassment aspect of putting on a headset. I wonder, too, how this is connected to the disorientation that happens when putting on and taking off a headset.