Christopher Arnott: In your experience, what draws artists to the
Internet as a performance medium? Do most of them come from other media,
or are they finding their initial creative voice on the Internet?

Robbin Murphy: The Internet is an information system consisting of
millions of nodes all over the world that agree to use Internet
Protocols to transmit data and only really exists when these protocols
are performed. Otherwise, it's just handware and fiber optic cables.
Artists are drawn to what they think the Internet is or want it to be
and many are disappointed when it doesn't live up to their expectations.
It may be unreasonable to consider it a medium like film or theater. So
I would say those who find their initial creative voice, or a renewed
voice, with it are the most successful.

CA: Do you find that the Internet becomes a primary medium for artists
or do they feel a need to continue with other media, particularly live
club, theater and/or gallery performances? Are there plusses or minuses
to the distinct type of live interaction (i.e. no heckling, no immediate
applause, yet the possiblity for more articulate praise or criticism)
available through this medium?

RM: A few artists seem to exist only on the Internet, the most obvious
example being the team of jodi.org. Yet even they lecture and give
interviews in person and publish work in traditional books and
magazines. In Europe there is a very strong concept of the Internet as a
tool for networking, personal interaction and multimedia. In the U.S. we
often put artists into categories that restrict movement and may be the
result of the emphasis on marketing now even in cultural institutions. I
read an interview recently with Laurie Anderson about her difficulties
with her record label and her inability to work with their marketing
needs, which is why she doesn't record much anymore.

CA: Is there a developing terminology for live Internet performance? Is
there a preferred term for such performances? What are some common terms
which come into play when building a performance?

RM: The term "interactive" gets used a lot but I don't think it means
much anymore. Some people seem to think there is something inheritantly
wrong with an artist controlling the situation but I don't know where
that thinking comes from. If you consider all the different forms of
communication on the Internet I think terms like "moderating",
"direction", "scripting"–all methods of control–are important to
consider.

CA: Do all the traditional theater concerns of design, structure,
length, clarity, cohesion of design elements, etc. etc. still apply?

RM: Using these terms can be convenient but you have to be careful about
applying them to the Internet without modification. Graphic designers
who work with print technology often assume the Web should be approached
the same way.

CA: Generally, in this medium, is the directorial presence or the
performing presence the more important aspect? Is it more an auteur
sensibility, as in Hitchcock films, or a star sensibility, as in Jackie
Chan films?

RM: Traditionally, information was either stored (script, film) or
transmitted (performance, projection). Computers add a third component
of computation or manipulation where the director and the programmer could
write a script that would essentially direct and perform at the same
time.

CA: How did you yourself end up in this field? What do you feel you've
accomplished, and what changes still need to be made? What technical
breakthroughs would further the artform?

RM: The Internet sparked my interest in the possibilities of performance
and computers and gave me a reason to think seriously about them. I
co-organized "PORT" with Remo Campopiano at the MIT List Visual Arts
Center last year, which was time-based performance work using the
Internet. Today I'm thinking in terms of information systems and
concepts of the virtual museum whith exploring what we
already have.

CA: Who are the most prominent performance-oriented artists on the
Internet? Who were the pioneers of the form? Who are the important
up-and-coming stars? How much do these artists interact with each other,
through your network or otherwise?

RM: I would say anyone who uses the Internet effectively is
performance-oriented. I've aleady mentioned jodi.org who also work with
others in Europe in a form they call "net.art". The gangs at
irational.org and backspace.org in London. The FloodNet project. Ebon
Fisher has interesting ideas about the future of gaming that he's
exploring now at the University of Iowa. Martht with the
Guggenheim but I'm still uncertain about what I think of it.

There are lots of artists who use digital technology but don't
necessarily use the Internet and there has been a great deal of
discussion lately about whether there is or should be a connection.

CA: What are the greatest misunderstandings about this artform?

RM: That the Internet is a medium like video or television.

CA: What could ruin this artform?

RM: Art curators who think the Internet is a medium like video or
television. Corporations who will only give money to artists to do
research and development for new products.

+ + +

Robbin Murphy is an artist and co-founder of artnetweb. Christopher
Arnott is from the New Haven Advocate.