Miyajima Tatsuo Naoshima House Project → Tatsuo’s trademark aesthetic, numbers from 1-9 and void moving all at different speeds with the same rule applied, positioned spanning across the water outlet. This creates a unique poetic aesthetic that is distinguishable from a single number device. Single number device vs. Multiple devices synchronised vs. Multiple devices desynchronised → The platform art is about the very third category.

The Primitive of Platform Art: Identical Rule/Algorithm-based Unit, repeated and aggregated independently to create a chaotic/wholistic aesthetic.

Identical Rule/Algorithm-based Unit: A module. Single Module. Represented as M(t)
Where t is a variable. This module is an algorithm-based unit, sort of functional, dependent on the parameter t (which usually represents speed – time).

Module combined and multiplied: All combined in a different/distinguishable state. What is interesting is that the whole operating principle/basic aesthetic is the same algorithmically/modularly (The capital letter M), but a Least-Marginal-Difference (Baudrillard) - the alternation in the given parametric input - and variation of these inputs across different modules, induce a unique aesthetic difference → Sort of acting like a natural ecosystem of aggregated modules (World-displaying)

Referencing the aesthetic of Small Multiples on Data visualisation – But small multiples are usually static, but Platform Art shows the dynamics. Small multiples have limitations in showing only the cross-section of the world/information we’re living in, but platform art has an ability to communicate the wholistic dynamics which surround/are embedded in the world/information we’re living in.

Source of inspiration: Literally train platform, London Victoria Station, Train Departure Board → What creates a livingly feeling and atmosphere here is the tension between similarity - and dynamic difference across channels. Different information, same layout, presented distinguishably.

Another source of inspiration: OPIC Test center - Ava. Look at 30 computers placed in a grid, all displaying the same avatar, ‘Ava’ speaking the test problem, but within a slightly different speed/context/text. How cringy is this? How distancing is this? How utopian/dystopian/efficient/inefficient is this?

Representative example: Miyajima Tatsuo – The modular system is singular: A system of moving the number from 1 to 9 and void, and back again. But the speed an the starting point are all different, and this serves as the key to the unique aesthetic in contaminates.

Similar but contrary example: Rafael Lozano-Hemmer
In the case of Rafael, he uses multiple output channels which are based in same algorithmic foundation, and thus can be considered as modules, but in his case these output channels are somehow synchronised/dependent on a single grand rule - For instance, user’s breathing will control the light intensity over different channels continuously and thoroughly, rather than each channel reacting dependently. This is beautiful, but just a multi-channel interaction. In order to be considered as platform art, each module needs to have some degree of autonomy and thus react asynchronously, although its foundation algorithm/layout should be identical to each other.

My artworks: Noneqaulity, Das Gerede, (Sort of Factory 4.0)

Das Gerede → Literal representation of the inspiration I got from London Victoria Station, re-constructed with ChatGPT-based conversations criticising the ‘das gerede’ within our daily meaningless conversations