Abstract Angeliki Chrysanthi, Picharides Giannis
Spaces: an immersive playable journey that explores philosophical concepts
of space and movement.
Extended Abstract
The interpretation of space preoccupied philosophical thought since its birth. The way
human intellect perceives space throughout the ages affects the way humanity perceives its
existence in the world. The more we immerse ourselves in Virtual Reality (VR) environments
the more we are confronted with new questions pertinent to spatial perception. In this
presentation we discuss the design of “Spaces”, a playable immersive VR installation, that
experiments with concepts of space mainly in view of the philosophical interpretations of
Immanuel Kant and Michel Foucault. The design of the experimental virtual environment
focuses on two axes. Firstly, it explores the perceptual sufficiency of humans to recognize
spaces, based on the Kantian sensible intuition. Secondly, it experiments with the notion of
heterotopia, based on Michel Foucault’s Panopticism. In this frame, the virtual interactive
space is designed in a way that the user is gradually led to discipline to the limitations of a
virtual space imposed by its creator. Our initial research question centres around whether we
can define the perception of space in playable virtual environments, and how, considering
the aforementioned philosophical frames? The work also aims to create a dialogue on the
effect of the above experimentations with the felt flow of the experience as the user moves
within the virtual environment.
The theoretical background of the work draws from theories on the perception of space
mainly under the prism of Kant and Foucault. Based on the Kantian theory of sensible
intuition, the geometry of space is perceived a priori and precedes any other knowledge we
construct in each environment. For instance, the user perceives the geometry of a virtual
environment through her faculties. Also, she has a complete understanding of certain
notions that define her position in space (up-down, forward-backward, left-right), as well as
the range of distance between herself and the elements of the virtual world. Since space has
been mentally constructed in our perception, our cognition draws from our prior experience
in order to classify the objects in it. In other words, the human mind recognises objects in the
virtual environment that has previously perceived empirically in the physical world. This way
the user can identify the objects independently of their properties acquired in the virtual
world. Based on Kant, this happens because our knowledge of “things” is based on the
affect they have on us. J.J. Gibson also talked about the notion of affordances when
explaining the perception of the environment. For instance, knowing that a couch affords
“sitting on” one can project this functionality on objects that she has not encountered before
but recognises the specific affordance based on the similar geometry. The user ought to
position herself in the space in order to start interacting with it.
The Foucauldian approach considers the perception of space as heterotopia. The virtual
space, as part of a long history of heterotopias experienced by human societies, sets
multiple layers on top of the perceived physical environment and exists at a different
timeframe than the individual who “inhabits” it. Lastly, the virtual environment offers isolation
from the physical world and limited access to it. As the user enters the virtual environment,
she becomes aware of entering a different spatial frame and acts accordingly. According to
the Foucauldian approach of discipline and panoptisism, one could argue that a user is
placed in a very rigidly defined spatial frame and is aware of being constantly observed (e.g.
by the rules of the system). This condition offers limited abilities of action and interaction,
usually predefined and very specific, at times even obligatory. If the user does not wish to
comply with the prescribed rules, she cannot progress the virtual experience. At once, the
sense of existing limitations in the environment automatically limits the level of felt freedom.
Certainly, the ability to navigate a virtual space and interact with it is limited to the extent that
the designer has allowed it. For instance, a space may be designed to visually welcome the
user for exploration (for instance with the use of luminosity, objects of curiosity, and
pathways), while in fact it offers limited opportunities for movement and interaction and vice
2
versa. Then, movement within a virtual environment becomes another critical factor of the
perception of space. But then new questions arise. Do we perceive virtual environments
through affective movement as in the real world? Do we perceive a virtual space for what it
does (affords the user to do) or rather what it aims to represent? We propose that involving
the role of movement and interaction in the perception of space is perhaps more adequate to
frame and define perception in and of virtual spaces.
To experiment with the above notions of space and movement, and open up a fruitful
discussion on perception, we use the case of the work “Spaces”. The latter wishes to
communicate in a symbolic rather than an explicit way the creator’s intention. The work uses
a linear abstract narrative structure which is represented by a playable journey from
darkness to light. The user can freely interact with several elements existing in dark spaces
until she gradually reaches an ultimate light source. At once, as the user moves into more
illuminated spaces, she loses the ability to interact with the elements of the virtual world. The
central proposition of this work is that “Contemporary individuals can define themselves
based on the space they inhabit. The space which a person occupies - whether physical, or
social, or virtual - is defined both by what it does and what it aims to represent each time.
The individual is agnostic to the true nature of space and is forced to comply with its pre-
decided and structured elements. But since space is also a perception, each space becomes
part of one’s own way of structuring things that exist in it. In this process the individual is
challenged to emancipate and understand the space she occupies in order to omit the
obligatory structuring. The user is challenged to enlighten herself.”
Finally, in this presentation we will discuss the development of the original work and
conclude with a synthesis of the theoretical discussion and the practice-based research
work.
Main Bibliography
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus. Translated by Brian Massumi.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
De Vega, E. P. (2011). Experiencing built space: Affect and movement. International Journal
of Arts & Sciences, 4 (3), 45-58.
Foucault, M. (1986). Of Other Spaces. Diacritics 16 (1): 22–27.
Foucault, M. (1920). Discipline & Punish. Random House.
Friedman, M. (2012). Kant on geometry and spatial intuition. Synthese 186(1): 231–55.
Janiak, A. (2009). Kant’s Views on Space and Time. Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy:1–26.
Schwitzgebel, E. (2019). Kant Meets Cyberpunk. Disputatio 11(55): 411–35.