on-line version which runs around the table. They don't have to communicate anymore face2face, but the interfaces will do this for them. This possible environment seems to fully promote the idea of optimum and surveillance, although it may not be the first aim. How do you as an artist, who tries to develop new ways of communication and extension beyond pure progression of intelligence, treat this problem?

 

JS: Perhaps I could answer this by saying that there are two basic investigations going on in «e-Skin». Firstly, there is the one you mention, a reactive office environment where the use of the interface is related to a real environment and yes, it should contain those connotations and criticisms of surveillance and disembodiment. This is also a commercial interest of one of our research partners about information management. Then there are two virtual audio-visual environments, where the interface can be used to respond to art and science contexts. The science context is a journey through skin layers (the epidermis and dermis of the human skin). Here viewers can re-construct and learn about the current discourses

surrounding scientific skin-research using the interface. However being an artist the art context is naturally more important to me. Here three characters from different cultural backgrounds can tell their personal stories by responding to the viewers use of the interface. We are hoping that these three levels of interaction will constitute a type of ergonomical and metaphorical extension of the skin as an intelligent interface, but also the use of «e-Skin» can raise awareness for the need of more intuitive perception and healthier navigation devices in technology rather than simply constructing more controlling mechanisms.

 

YV: Would you say that art has to help to improve industrial devices so that we become cyborgs more at ease?

 

JS: Yes that is so. Most of our interactive technologies are badly designed and un-healthy for the body, especially the computer keyboard.

 

YV: At the beginning of our talk you suggested, that perhaps combinations of art and science might have a