ABSTRACT

This chapter compares works by Heinz Mack, Brion Girsny, and Ian Somerville with respect to their potential to activate perception and to push it to its very limits. Through a combination of continuous or incessant motion and irregular, flickering light, these works alter and broaden perception. As can be seen through films that document the reception of these works, only slight modifications to the physical components of these works result in major differences in how they are experienced. Spectators are challenged to experience these works at various levels of involvement, from heightened commitment to total absorption, each dependent on the manipulation of primarily visual stimuli, which, at their most intense, may induce hallucinations. The intensity of the works depends on the degree of immersion and the proximity of the lights. Therefore, filmmakers can only approximate the experience of the original through techniques such as screens within a frame, fast cutting, or superimpositions. There is a very fine line between fostering creativity and claiming control over the senses. Without providing any definitive answers, this contribution asks what an aesthetics of excessive demand might look like.