Urban Screens

From Amsterdam Wiki

Contents 1 The Urban Screen 1.1 Research question 1.2 Colleagues 1.3 Presentation 2 Abstract 3 Background 4 Research methods 4.1 Methods strategy employed + Affordances and limitations 4.1.1 Online inquiry 4.1.2 Observations 4.1.3 Interviews 4.1.3.1 General public 4.1.3.2 Workers of the Zuidas 4.2 Reflexivity 5 Analysis 5.1 Location 5.1.1 Human flow and coagulation: an audience in motion can nevertheless "engage" with visual art 5.1.2 The background may be an advantage 5.2 Format 5.2.1 Unidirectionality vs. interactivity 5.2.2 Sound, or lack thereof 5.3 Content 5.3.1 The Programming 5.3.2 Reactions 5.3.3 Bridging 6 Discussion 7 References 8 Appendix 8.1 Raw data 8.1.1 Photos 8.1.2 Expert Interviews

The Urban Screen

Research question

What factors contribute to how CASZuidas functions as a medium for visual art?

Colleagues

Greg Bigelow
Computer Science and Comparative History of Ideas
University of Washington, '12

Maxwell Forbes
Computer Engineering
University of Washington, '13

Presentation

On Monday, August 16, 2010, Greg and Max presented their project along with the rest of the University of Washington research groups at the Virtual Knowledge Studio in Amsterdam. The following resources are available at this time:

• Full program

• Our slides on Google Docs
  • (appears to only look as intended on Google Chrome? Assessing problem ...)

Abstract

Situated in the Zuidas, the “second largest new construction site in Amsterdam,”^[1] the giant LED urban screen called the Contemporary Art Screen Zuidas (CASZuidas) is at the center of an initiative by the city of Amsterdam to integrate art into this rapidly developing region^[2]. The city has created the Virtueel Museum Zuidas for this task, and they, with CASZuidas curator Jan Schuijren, hope to quite literally bring culture to a space^[2] that -- on top of gearing towards becoming a dynamic, metropolitan, and futuristic^[3] urban center for “living, working, and entertainment”^[4] -- hopes to grow to one of the most predominant business centers in the European Union^[5].

The CASZuidas is not only in an environment of transition, but is itself an instance of transition; as urban screens take shape and become increasingly ubiquitous across the globe^[6], screens such as CASZuidas, which shows 80% contemporary art films^[7], negotiate their own identity in the rapidly changing landscape of digital technologies in public spaces^[6]. What we wonder is, how does it complete its task? In other words: What factors contribute to how CASZuidas functions as a medium for visual art?

Background

Moving Architecture

Our investigation takes place during a time in which "information displayed on large projection screens is becoming more and more ubiquitous in urban spaces." ^[6]This is a transformation of the skin of the modern city, replacing static architectural surfaces with moving images. ^[6] However, despite this "growing prominence, public screens remain peripheral" in media scholarship. ^[8] In fact, architect and researcher Ava Fatah gen. Schieck argues that the presence of urban screens in public space so much alters the built environment that our current analytic tools "are ill-equipped to deal with and analyze their effects." ^[6]

The growing importance of urban screens, coupled with their relatively unstudied nature, make them an excellent target for sociological research. We stumbled into the topic after observing people playing around and on the Seattle Center fountain. If the relatively primitive technology of a fountain could excite and activate the public domain, what might more advanced technologies be capable of? We eventually found urban screen literature and grew excited at the prospect of investigating how modern digital visual technologies could alter the urban landscape and one’s subjective experience of it.

Urban screens are interesting to us not just because they embody an ingeniously wide array of uses of digital technology, but also because their status in the public domain is currently being negotiated. Indeed, while urban screens are becoming more ubiquitous, the vast majority of those screens, in Netherlands and around the world, are used solely as advertising tools. ^[9] Sociologist Scott McQuire argues that if this trend holds, "large screens are likely to remain merely another channel of visual noise in an oversaturated environment". ^[10] This would be a profound waste of the wide potential for digital screens to transform the urban landscape. As such, we chose to investigate urban screens in Amsterdam by choosing one in particular that was unique insofar as it is one of the only screens in the world almost exclusively dedicated to showing contemporary visual art pieces. ^[11] CASZ premiered in 2007 as an initiative of Virtueel Museum Zuidas "in collaboration with SKOR", or Foundation Art and Public Space. ^[12] CASZ operates from 6:00 to 24:00, 365 days per year, showing visual art works for most of the time with information on local arts events and a select number of advertisements for a maximum total of 90 minutes per day. ^[12] The website for CASZuidas functions as both a source of information about the screen itself as well as an in depth digital archive of information about the artists and works shown on the screen.

A Virtual Museum

CASZ is a part of an overall artistic intervention into the long term development of the Zuidas region being carried out by the Virtueel Museum Zuidas (VMS), an entity financially supported by the Amsterdam city government. VMS points out on their website that "the extraordinary attention given to integrating art in public space here has the complete support of the city of Amsterdam, developers and investors. They attach great importance to creating an atmosphere of culture in the Zuidas. It makes it more attractive for businesses and individuals to settle here and is an essential contribution to the liveliness and (international) reputation of the area". ^[13]

The development goals for the Zuidas are extremely ambitious. It is "intended to provide housing for 25,000 citizens, international headquarters of major corporations, many smaller knowledge intensive and/or creative industries, new cultural institutions, high end shopping areas and nightlife venues." ^[14] Furthermore, it is intended to become the primary point of entry into Amsterdam and serve as a major transportation hub. ^[5]

Thus, CASZ is intended, at the broadest, to help create "a creative cultural climate" which will make "it more attractive for businesses and individuals to settle in the Zuidas." ^[13] This strategy is increasingly common throughout the world, as city councils, "inspired by Richard Florida’s best-seller ‘The Rise of the Creative Class’… propagate the ‘creative city’"… by "offering artists a facilitating infrastructure." ^[15]

Artistic Intervention and/or Spectacle

Indeed, these dual purposes, economic development and artistic enrichment, are, in CASZ, intimately bundled together. This makes it a particularly interesting case study given that it might represent the forefront of a new tactic for attracting the "creative class." In fact, Henk de Vroom, of the Virtueel Museum Zuidas, argues that the pursuit of profit and artistic enrichment can in fact compliment one another, arguing that "if art is to contribute to a sustainable urban environment, to the level of civilization of the city and the country and to the development of art itself, this can only be achieved... in areas where money is and where money is made." ^[16] Yet, even if this coupling might be pragmatically advantageous for the short-term goals of both artists and developers, there is a larger concern amongst some scholars and artists as to the use of urban screens as a force of spectacular illusion. This is articulated clearly by sociologist Julia Nevarez as she points out that "Debord made us aware of the spectacle of capitalism's consumer logic and most recently Virilio among others, problematized the proliferation of screens from TV to public space assemblages as having socialized us into passive spectators, distant and disconnected." ^[17] She argues that one of the clearest examples of how people are brought to passivity through the use of screens in public is evident in "how places become marketed through branding as how they represent the unique character of a place." ^[17] The attempts to establish the Zuidas region as a creative, cultural area through deploying CASZ would seem to be vulnerable to this argument.

The rise of the kind of critical analysis of spectacular images put forth by Virilio and Debord was prompted by the "phenomenal rise in scale and intensity both of the media and of consumption" over the past century. ^[18] As such, the continued escalation of media in the public domain, and urban screens in particular, will help ensure the continued relevance of this sort of critique. However, while we should be cognizant of these underlying theoretical concerns, there is good reason to avoid subsuming "visual digital genres and their consumption under a comprehensive concept such as 'the society of the spectacle... insofar as it is important to hold on to both the general or shared and the specific and distinctive... when attempting to explore the aesthetic dimension." ^[18] Furthermore, we ought to keep in mind that urban designers can not directly shape experiences. Rather, they can only be "concerned with creating frames for experiences that can be handed over to the users (owners, tenants, workers, shoppers, visitors etc.) who, as "prosumers", in the end, determine the quality of urban life." ^[14] This is not to discount the relevance of a critique of visual spectacle (an approach with much to offer) but to make clear that a full understanding of urban screens necessitates analyzing each intervention into urban space individually. ^[19]

Thus, we enter into the discussion of urban screens with the humble goal of providing an empirical description of how CASZ functions as a medium for visual art. In so doing, we hope to provide a glimpse of how urban screens are transforming, and might transform, the urban landscape.

Research methods

Gathering data was a process of continually refining our methods. Originally, our methods were informed by our background research, both in literature and information about the screens and places we were visiting. But after visiting a site, employing our methods to collect data, and analyzing the data, we would find a more specific line of inquiry to follow, and would need to revise our methods accordingly. This recursed several times, until we had honed our methods to the point where we were collecting data that was most pertinent to our revised topic and research question. They are presented here.

Methods strategy employed + Affordances and limitations

Online inquiry

We poured through websites related to the development of the Zuidas, the Virtueel Museum Zuidas, and the CASZuidas. We also read websites dedicated to other urban screens such as Streetcaster and those related to the producers and managers of such screens, including SKOR, Illuminate (of Matthijs ten Berge) and Researchgroup Art and Public Space.

The sites on the Zuidas and Virtueel Museum Zuidas (VMZ) showed us the official "image" that was being projected of the developing Zuidas region and the projects in it. We were able to get a sense of the goals that the municipality and VMZ had in mind for the region in general and how CASZuidas was to play a part in fulfilling those goals (specifically enriching the public space with art). The CASZuidas site itself provided a full schedule of every program, transition, and advertisement to be shown on the CAZuidas for one week surrounding the present day, allowing us to gain a broader understanding of the content of the CASZuidas, both in the types of programs being shown and their frequency. The sites about related urban screens were valuable in developing an "urban screen context" in which to place the CASZuidas. Specifically, we were able to isolate the specific formatting design decisions in the CASZuidas, and identify alternatives and their implementations.

Though convenient, online information provides several limitations. Though it is useful to get the official perspective in writing, it often differs from reality. For example, there are not generally crowds of people gathering around the CASZuidas, and the programs online are often off-sync with the screen. Also, the screen will repeat programs many times in a row, which is not clear from the website. In this sense, the website may hinder data collecting, because one might be tempted to take all information as final when it seems extremely detailed and complete, when in fact there are slight but very important differences in the offline implementation.

Observations

Our observations generally came in three forms:

• Written notes
• Photos
• Videos

We split them into two main components: spatial and social

1. Spatial observations involved taking notes of the surroundings (of the CASZuidas) as well as the screen itself. This included:
   1. CASZuidas programming (content, repetition, themes, and stlye)
   2. Main entrances and exits to the Zuidplein, nearby transportation stops, and parking areas
   3. Seating areas available, both in the elevated stone areas of the Zuidplein and in its cafes and bars
   4. Which of the seating offered views of the CASZuidas
   5. Architecture surrounding the Zuidplein (details of the WTC modern glass monoliths to the east and west, the elevated roadway to the north, and the Zuid Station to the south)
   6. Design of the Zuidplein, such as how trees created viewing areas for the screen
   7. The operating hours of the cafes, restaurants, and stores in the Zuidplein
2. Social observations were focused on the people in the Zuidplein:
   1. Overall traffic flow related to times of day and days of the week
   2. Which entrances to the Zuidplein are most commonly used, by whom, and at what times of day
   3. Where people who enter the Zuidplein generally go; what path they take
   4. What percentage of travelers bike in and how this affects their path
   5. The general makeup of the population demographically (tourist, commuter, Zuidas worker)
   6. Which seating areas were used, by whom, how frequently, and at what times of day

The majority of the observations were taken through written notes, but photos and videos were also employed when effective.

• Photos were vital in capturing the view of the CASZuidas from multiple angles, images from the screen, snapshots of congestion and traffic (or lack thereof), quickly recording vital information (such as store hours), and capturing architectural elements for later detailed description and analysis.
• Videos were vital in recording flows of traffic at different times of day or days of the week. They also allowed us to save clips of the CASZuidas in operation.

Overall, observation was most effective in establishing the context in which the CASZuidas is situated, most distinctively contributing to the "location" factor in terms of its ability to deliver visual art to the public.

Inevitably, limitations are present when observing the environment. With the two of us, we are only able to observe a part of the Zuidplein at one time, and though we attempted to pick the most strategic areas that would offer the most comprehensive view, there were spatial gaps in our observations. We also did not record note about the Zuidplein all times of day for every day of the week, which would paint the most complete picture of the flow of people and use of the space. We were also only observing during a few months out of the year, and at a time when many are on holiday, which does not account for seasonal variation. In addition, we were unable to observe a special event, which we believe would have dramatically changed the use of the CASZuidas.

Interviews

By speaking to people we encountered in the Zuidplein, we developed primary evidence for how the public was reacting to the CASZuidas, which would help us in determining how effective it was at delivering to them visual art.

General public

Most specifically, we classified any that did not work in the Zuidas as "general public." Because no one that we spoke to had come to the Zuidplein for the purpose of staying there specifically, all could be classified as "travelers." This would include:

• foreigners arriving to Amsterdam or catching a train out (often Germans)
• locals of the greater Amsterdam area who happened to be passing through that day
• infrequent commuters who would come to the Zuidplein perhaps two or three times per week

Though we allowed room for the interviewee to influence the direction of the interview based on their responses, we guided each interview by four main questions:

• What brings you to the Zuidplein? (establish demographic)
• How often do you come here? (clarify demographic specifically)
• What do you think of the Zuidplein?
• What are your thoughts on the screen? (we would point out the CASZuidas)

Workers of the Zuidas

We would classify people in this category if they were either of:

• frequent commuters who would pass through the Zuidplein almost every weekday
• employees of the Zuidas who worked in the World Trade Center or near the Zuidplein

In most cases where it was unclear if someone was a worker we would ask them about why they were present, but if it was fairly clear that they were on a lunch break in the Zuidplein, outside the WTC for a smoke break, or dressed well and hanging around the area, we would just ask them the last one or two questions (mainly what they thought of the screen).

Our technique for interviewing members of the public perhaps underwent the greatest development as we spent more time studying the CASZuidas. The questions we asked became fewer and more specific, and our technique for approaching people to ask for their opinions improved. Thus, our success rate (garnering interviews) improved over time. As we focused on workers later in the process, we acquired much more data from that group of people. We believe this is reasonable, as Jan said in an interview that his target audience is the person who sees the CASZuidas several times per day, which is essentially how we classified "workers of the Zuidas." However, we believed it was important to note as there was not an even split in interview data.

Interviews were a great source of primary data, and perhaps the most influential and useful data that had to be collected on site and could not be found online, in literature, or in media. With that said, there were limitations to our process:

• Many people declined to give an interview. It is possible that there is a correlation with those who were willing to speak to us and those who thought of the screen in a certain way.
• Often, those who were moving quickly through the Zuidplein we would either not want to approach for fear of slowing them down, or they would decline an interview. Thus, our sampling of commuters may be disproportional.
• We never approached a group of more than three people who were well-dressed and speaking together in Dutch, merely out of intimidation.
• Language could have been a factor in some cases. For example, after asking "Do you watch the screen?" one woman replied "no I have not watched it today." When asked about other times, she said she had watched it in the past and described a specific image. When we were able to speak with someone for longer than ten or twenty seconds, we would be able to catch this miscommunication, but it is possible that some interpreted "Do you watch the screen?" as "Do you watch the screen right now?"

Reflexivity

Before we had visited the CASZuidas for the first time, we had thought that it would be a major attraction and that many people would be watching it. Because we had framed our inquiry by the Seattle Center's International Fountain, we had been considering urban screen in general, as well as the CASZuidas specifically, in that context. Even in conducting background research of the CASZuidas, we were presented with images of excited crowds gathering around the CASZuidas watching the Dutch football matches.

Once we arrived at the Zuidplein and started looking for signs of activity related to the CASZuias, we realized that we had hugely misconceived the role of the screen in this space. Our plan had been to track those watching the screen, conducting our research entirely by analyzing media related to the CASZuidas and spending lots of time systematically observing the public's interaction with the screen. But once we got on the field, we had to completely restructure our methods, and began to develop interviews as a central component of our data collection. It was not apparent on the surface how people interacted with the screen, so we would have to actively seek out this information rather than letting it come to us.

Analysis

Through an initial analysis and categorization of our data, we created a framework in which we could synthesize our material into relevant findings. This framework of location, format, and content also organize our data into the three factors that directly relate to our research question.

Location

Human flow and coagulation: an audience in motion can nevertheless "engage" with visual art

From our observations, we witnessed that the vast majority of people in the Zuidplein are merely passing through, heading to or from the Station Zuid. This is inevitable, as the Station Zuid is growing to increasing prominence as a transportation center in Amsterdam, especially with the new north/south train line being installed, Nearly all types of public transit stop there.

It is worth noting that there are some areas of seating in the Zuidplein, notably cafes along the east and west sides and elevated concrete areas for trees interspersed throughout the middle. We counted 180 seats on the east side of the square -- the side where there is a possible view of the CASZuidas -- and roughly half of them had a possible view of the CASZuidas. However, people mainly sat in these areas in the evening, and when they were there it was extremely rare that we witnessed someone glance at the screen. The most common use of the seating areas that we saw was during lunch hours on the weekdays, when workers would sit on the elevated concrete areas in the middle and west sides of the Zuidplein, as well as sit in the cafes on the west side.

Thus, the main potential that CASZuidas has to interact with people is when they are passing through the Zuidplein from south to north, towards the Zuid Station, on the easternmost path. This trek takes approximately one minute, which we timed and confirmed with Jan Schuijren^[11]. The CASZuidas has only this narrow time window in which to make an impression on passerby with its images. Schuijren acknowledges this, and said that his intended audience are those who would get many such brief exposures, "up to four times a day"^[11] and "more than four days a week"^[20].

One problem that may seem likely to arise with brief glimpses of art like this would be weather or not a passerby would internalize an image or understand the work. Some of the films are short, around a minute, while others can be a dozen minutes or even an hour. Schuijren says that it is not a problem that people will only catch a small part of a (possibly) much larger work^[11]. What is more important is that an image or scene will stick with them and make them think and consider; the goal is not for them to understand it immediately, but to have them remember it at some point months in the future^[11][20].

Our interviews with the public suggest that this process is happening to some. Of those we interviewed who had seen the CAZuidas times before in the past, it was almost universal that even those who responded that they never watched the screen could recall a specific image that they had seen on it in order to illustrate whether they liked the screen.

The background may be an advantage

Also worth consideration in the situation of the CASZuidas is its physical surroundings. Behind the CASZuidas (to the south) is the concrete face of the Station Zuid. More prominent visually are the east and west boundaries of the Zuidplein, framed by the World Trade Center 6. These are large, modern structures, with exteriors built mostly with glass.

Those who we interviewed had a mix of reactions, but consistently fell into two categories:

1. The area is "nice." It feels "metropolitan" and "new." By far the most common word we were told was "modern."
2. It is "bland," "generic," and "could be anywhere in the world." It is "modern" but "not unique to Amsterdam."

When we talked to Jan Schuijren about this during our interview, he said that these properties suited the CASZuidas very well because they do not provide any cognitive competition:

I wouldn’t change a thing [about the Zuidplein] - it’s great, I think. I think it’s great - maybe the best, even. You can only judge background if you also judge content. If you look at it purely aesthetically, we have the best content. With the business architecture, you have such an abstract background, it is clear to everyone what it is. People think they know what we’re seeing, it looses its specificness - its whole money thing is not graspable. You can allow yourself to only take the backdrop of the screen aesthetically. What you see there you don’t need to think. It’s business, it’s financial business. It’s abstract to everyone (except for the people who work there), so it makes a perfect backdrop for the screen^[11].

Format

Unidirectionality vs. interactivity

The CASZuidas is a unidirectional media screen. This means that CASZuidas broadcasts information into the public space, but it does not take in any input. There is a one-way flow of data. This makes it similar to how a museum functions, which is fitting in that CASZuidas was created as an initiative by the Virtueel Museum Zuidas.

As a point of comparison, however, the Streetcaster screen in Lelystad, The Netherlands, a work of creative director Hans ter Burg, is also a large urban screen, but it does include interactivity. Hans ter Burg said that for making new urban screens that are interesting and go beyond how screens are often ignored, "the key word is interactivity"^[9].Streetcaster, for example, has weekly game nights in which they connect a Wii or an Xbox to the screen and the public can come by and play games. Hans also mentioned a screen that he visited in Liverpool while learning more about established urban screens before implementing Streetcaster. "The camera ... just [registered] us standing there ... People are passing by, they see themselves, and that's the most interesting content you could ever present"^[9].

Jan Schuijren has said that for the audience of CASZuidas, passing by multiple times a day and many days a week, interactivity would be too much to ask. Schuijren has made clear this CASZuidas is an arts stage and is not a community screen^[20]. Playing video games or acting as a mirror would not fit into the character of the CASZuidas.

However, Han ter Burg also mentioned that for Streetcaster, they invited children at local schools to create short films and displayed them on the screen in the public square.^[9]. He said that an urban screen "should always have a local relevance ... people should feel connected to the screen, that it's their screen, and they can do things with it"^[9]. He suggested that CASZuidas could reach out to local art schools, for example, and have students design short artistic films specifically for its display^[9].

Such an idea could not be implemented without bumps: Jan Schuijren specifically picks art that he deems worth of showing on the CASZuidas, and there are many art works that he would not consider showing because they do not meet his quality standards^[11]. However, in our lengthier interviews of workers who spent a lot of time in the Zuidplein, a common complaint was that CASZuidas was not relevant to the area at all. They saw it as a foreign artifact, stuck in the square, that did not relate to its community. Thus, introducing local art could serve to engage the public audience more, establishing a greater sense of community. It could serve as an additional technique of bridging.

Sound, or lack thereof

CASZuidas is completely silent in operation. It does have screens that were installed to broadcast Dutch football matches for the 2011 FIFA World Cup, and curator Jan Schuijren was hopeful that after this happened they would use the speakers on a daily basis for art films. However, this was not the case, and Schuijren says he is still working towards one day having audio projected daily from the screen^[11]. During our interviews, about half of those with whom the topic of audio was breached said that they believed the screen would benefit by broadcasting sound, that it would make the art films more complete.

Initially, it was in the plans to have speakers installed on the CASZuidas and projecting audio, but this fell through after public retaliation to the concept. The other half of those we asked about audio during our interviews said that the audio would be unwanted and bothersome. In fact, Schuijren mentioned that were a screen in his neighborhood going to start broadcasting audio, he would not be listening to it, but would rather be starting a petition to get rid of it. Officially, though, of course he would love audio for CASZuidas^[11].

As of August 2010, the only option is to call the toll free number that is printed on the frame of CASZuidas and listen to the audio on a mobile phone. We attempted to call this number several times with Skype, but were never successful. In all of our observation in the Zuidplein, we never once had any indication that anyone was listening to the screen on their mobile phone while watching it.

Because of this lack, art films that Schuijren selects must fit into one of three criterion:

1. it must deliver its content well and make sense without sound,
2. it must have subtitles,
3. or it must make very clear with its video that audio would be necessary in order to understand it, so that people will be inspired to call the number.

The lack of sound certainly gives the CASZuidas more of the atmosphere of a "museum screen," insofar as museums are silent and instead promote reflection. However, the universal lack of sound that we perceived does raise the question of whether the CASZuidas would more effectively communicate its artwork were its voice to be heard.

Content

The Programming

The contemporary visual art pieces shown on CASZ tend to range from a minute to an hour in length, with a great deal of variation. A good sense for the typical programming on CASZ can be had by visiting the program schedule.

CASZ has featured the work of over 400 different artists from around the world. Even though the CASZ is of relatively low resolution, Jan indicated that he has only had one artist not agree to have their work shown. We hypothesize, and Jan tentatively agrees, that much of this support is likely due to the fact that CASZ is a relatively novel, and hence interesting, medium^[11].

Reactions

Not one respondent indicated an interest in contemporary art. Upon asking one group of travelers about their thoughts on CASZ, they demanded I explain the meaning or purpose of the film being shown, which depicted a half-clothed man bouncing in a room. These two findings seem to support Jan’s contention that the majority of people using the Zuidplein would not normally expose themselves to this kind of artistic content.

As shown in the graph of reactions to CASZ, more people had favorable opinions of the screen than negative opinions. Of the three basic demographic groups, this was most apparent for those who worked in or immediately surrounding the Zuidplein.

Importantly, 7 out of our interview subjects referred to specific works which they had seen. Jan indicated that during his own interviews with people in the Zuidplein, almost everyone remembered a particular work. This is not necessarily inconsistent with our own findings given that we had no interview question that seems likely to prompt the recall of any particular work. All but one of our subjects referenced a work because they found it disturbing. However, only 4 of those 7 respondents had negative opinions of the screen. Three of those four people were co-workers and they were upset over what they described as a pornographic film shown anywhere from 4 to 6 months ago. The other respondent was upset over a film shown that morning, which she incorrectly believed was showing the 9/11 terrorist attack.

Two of the respondents that specifically mentioned a work but still had a positive reaction to the screen referenced a piece showing a man gradually covering his face with freshly chewed gum.

Bridging

As part of a strategy to get more people interested in CASZ’s contemporary visual art programming, Jan has helped implement a tactic he calls “bridging,” or using more traditional content to make people comfortable with the screen and hopefully more receptive to its artistic offerings.

One notable bridging technique was to show the 2010 World Cup on CASZ. Notably, 3 of our respondents indicated that they only watched CASZ during the World Cup and 4 others indicated that they would watch CASZ more if it showed football. While this does not provide definitive support for the success of this particular bridging attempt, it does suggest that some individuals have come to link CASZ with football or would enjoy more football related content.

Another important act of bridging was to implement three timeslots during the rush hour times of the day during which a few selected advertisements would be shown. Jan’s theory is that the business community will tend to be more comfortable around advertisements than around contemporary art. Relating to this hypothesis, we found that 6 out of 34 of the Zuidas workers with whom we spoke mentioned without prompting that the content of CASZ was not appropriate to its location, also citing desires to have the screen show stock quotes, business news and other content related to professional work. This suggests that the business community may feel more comfortable with advertisements, as they are an already accepted component of the contemporary business environment.

Discussion

Our research indicates that there are three primary factors contributing to how CASZ functions as a medium for visual art: location, format, and content. These factors are very much interrelated. In order to see this connection, it must be pointed out that at a basic level, CASZ is unique because it thrusts contemporary visual art programming into the public arena. Usually, the kind of content aired on CASZ must be sought out and chosen by its audiences, whether by going to a museum, a festival, or finding the videos works online. Thus, the location of CASZ, in a busy area in the public domain, adds new dimensions to how we think about its format and content.

For one, it means that CASZ’s unidirectional presentation should not be taken lightly. Jan is aware that this is a critical design question, arguing that the Zuidplein’s regular users ought not be burdened with the weight of interactivity. He also argues that the lack of choice on the part of the viewers of CASZ is advantageous insofar as it allows him to expose contemporary visual art to an audience who would not voluntarily watch such works. However, it is precisely this lack of choice, and the friction it sometimes causes to the sensibilities of its audience, that puts a burden on Jan to carefully choose CASZ’s content.

Based on the responses we gathered from users of the Zuidplein, it is clear that the content that has thus far been presented on CASZ is stimulating, in both positive and negative ways, to a significant number of people. Attempts to encourage more people to engage with the art content of the screen through showing the World Cup and selected advertisements seems like it may be a promising strategy. However, it relies on the assumption that people will grant some degree of innate essence to the screen, attributing positive feelings not only to the particular content, but to the medium itself. There is also a danger here, insofar as the potential audience may turn against the screen entirely based on a single negative experience (as in the case of the three people concerned over a “pornographic video”).

At the most basic level, our research suggests that the medium through which contemporary visual art is displayed radically affects how it is experienced. As two individuals who hope to create technologies in the future, the most likely application of this research in our own lives is to inform our design sensibilities, encouraging us to keep in mind that a technology never exists in isolation. Rather, it exists as part of a constantly evolving environment that can change its operation in unexpected ways.

Indeed, we as individuals are a part of that environment, in constant interaction with the technologies of others. As the urban landscape becomes further saturated with images, concocted to seize our attention and sculpt our sensibilities, it will become even more important to learn to creatively navigate the virtual/urban milieu. Successfully doing so will require, among other things, the ability to look with fresh eyes at our digital and architectural surroundings, carrying out on a more modest scale the kind of investigation we have just completed.

References

1. ↑ Zuidas: Facts & Figures. Zuidas Information Center. Zuidas: June 2010.
2. ↑ ^{2.0 2.1} "Virtueel Museum :: Videoscreen CASZuidas". Virtueel Museum Zuidas. virtueel-museum.nl. Virtueel Museum Zuidas, n.d. August 17, 2010
3. ↑ de Vries, Marina and Katja van Stiphout. "Virtueel Museum Zuidas: Programma Kunst en Zuidas". Information pamphlet for Virtueel Museum Zuidas. Virtueel Museum Zuidas, ING, Zuidas. Summer 2010.
4. ↑ Zuidas Information Center. World Trade Center, Centrale Hal, Strawinskylaan 59, 1077 XW Amsterdam. Visited August 2010.
5. ↑ ^{5.0 5.1} Salet, Willem and Stan Majoor, eds. Amsterdam Zuidas: European Space. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2005.
6. ↑ ^{6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4} Schieck, Ava Fatah. "Towards an Integrated Architectural Media Space: The Urban Screen as a Socializing Platform." Urban Screens Reader. Ed. Scott McQuire, Meredith Martin, and Sabine Neiderer. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2009. 243-261.
7. ↑ "CASZuidas". Virtueel Museum Zuidas. caszuidas.nl. n.p., n.d. 17 August 2010.
8. ↑ Huhtamo, Erkki. "Messages on the Wall: An Archaeology of Public Media Displays." Urban Screens Reader. Ed. Scott McQuire, Meredith Martin, and Sabine Neiderer. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2009. 15-29.
9. ↑ ^{9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5} ter Burg, Hans. Personal interview. 12 August 2010
10. ↑ McQuire, Scott. "Mobility, Cosmopolitanism and Public Space in the Media City." Urban Screens Reader. Ed. Scott McQuire, Meredith Martin, and Sabine Neiderer. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2009. 45-65.
11. ↑ ^{11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.9} Schuijren, Jan. Skype interview. 9 August 2010.
12. ↑ ^{12.0 12.1} CASZuidas Website
13. ↑ ^{13.0 13.1} "Virtueel Museum" 2010.
14. ↑ ^{14.0 14.1} Jantzen, Christian, and Mikael Vetner. "Designing Urban Experiences. The Case of Zuidas, Amsterdam." Knowledge, Technology & Policy 21.4 (2008): 149-162. Web.
15. ↑ Burnham, Scott. Droog event 2 Urban play: a project by Droog Design on the occasion of Experimental Design Amsterdam 2008, 21 September - 2 November 2008. Amsterdam: Droog Publ., 2008. Print.
16. ↑ “Researchgroup Art and Public Space.” Web. 3 Aug. 2010.
17. ↑ ^{17.0 17.1} Nevarez, Julia. "Spectacular Mega-public Space: Art and the Social in Times Square" Urban Screens Reader. Ed. Scott McQuire, Meredith Martin, and Sabine Neiderer. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2009. 163-178.
18. ↑ ^{18.0 18.1} Darley, Andrew. Visual digital culture. London: Routledge, 2000. Print.
19. ↑ Broeckmann, Andreas. "Intimate Publics: Memory, Performance, and Spectacle in Urban Environments." Urban Screens Reader. Ed. Scott McQuire, Meredith Martin, and Sabine Neiderer. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2009. 109-121.
20. ↑ ^{20.0 20.1 20.2} Schuijren, Jan and Scott McQuire. “Putting Art Into Urban Space: An Interview With Jan Schuijren.” Urban Screens Reader. Ed. Schoot McQuire, Meredith Martin, and Sabine Neiderer. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2009. 145-150.

Appendix

Raw data

• Main page: Urban Screens Raw Data
• Google Doc spreadsheet of interview data

Photos

• Seattle Center - May 16, 2010
• July 22/23
• July 26
• August 5 - Greg
• August 5 - Max
• August 8 - Greg
• August 8 - Max
• August 10 - Greg
• August 10 - Max: CASZ
• August 10 - Max: Moodwall
• August 12

Expert Interviews

• Raw data: Matthijs interview
• Raw data: Hans Ter Burg interview
• Raw data: Jan Schuijren interview