Craft & Design
Giant Atari 2600 joystick

Giantjoystick
Multiplayer Atari, using a giant joystick from artist Mary Flanagan… “Inviting users to play classic arcade games by collaboratively moving on and controlling a 9-foothigh joystick (modelled after the 1980 Atari 2600 one), Mary Flanagan highlights the spatial and social role of the interface. The joystick itself becomes a social sculpture and territory for inter-personal communication.” [via] – Link.

18 thoughts on “Giant Atari 2600 joystick

  1. “Flanagan highlights the spatial and social role of the interface. The joystick itself becomes a social sculpture and territory for inter-personal communication.”

    What a load of BS – it’s people playing classic video games with a giant joystick. That’s cool enough for most people, so don’t pretend it is more than it is. I hate these pretentious art description blurbs that pretend to give meaning to the meaningless.

  2. Artist’s statement aside, if I had a 9′ tall joystick in my living room, a group would be way more into playing the game than they are now.

  3. hi all! the text that is circulating is from a critical essay written about the [giantJoystick ], not the artist statement or press release from the gallery. I think [gJ] is a great chance for meeting new folks and playing collaboratively. Its a work my parents and friends could interact with together. Familiar and fun. That’s cool enough!

    I also think its cool if historians or theorists want to think critically about the role of these kinds of projects in a ‘big picture’ way, but that in itself is not the ‘blurb’ about the work.

    hope you stop by and play!

    ~mary

  4. Mary – exactly. Your art need not be described to be enjoyed, and frankly such descriptions are a turn-off to just going and experiencing the art.

  5. I think that making so much of fuss about the statement also creates a kind of false diversion of the fact that Flannagan is a women, who has created an object that looks masculine – as in pretty phalic. Thta means something – if we are not aloud to explore other meanings as well, whether it is in text or the work, then it gets a bit dim really…

  6. I think that making so much of fuss about the statement also creates a kind of false diversion of the fact that Flannagan is a women, who has created an object that looks masculine – as in pretty phalic. That means something – if we are not aloud to explore other meanings as well, whether it is in text or the work, then it gets a bit dim really…

    I don’t mind text around works, I learn more that if I ignore them – It’s better than closing all options down – go for it girl, don’t let anyone stop you from being who you are…

  7. I think that making so much of fuss about the statement also creates a kind of false diversion of the fact that Flannagan is a women, who has created an object that looks masculine – as in pretty phalic. That means something – if we are not aloud to explore other meanings as well, whether it is in text or the work, then it gets a bit dim really…

    I don’t mind text around works, I learn more that if I ignore them – It’s better than closing all options down – go for it girl, don’t let anyone stop you from being who you are…

  8. Muddler: You’re a tool, dude. Get a sense of fun for god’s sake. The woman is making fun stuff mean something.

  9. Hi Muddler,

    I think that your interpretation is very simplistic. I myself would not dare to with what’s’ cool enough for most people’ – everyone is different, and assuming that the text is BS, is fine as a personal opinion, but everyone else seems to think different than you, so you are not most people. There’s more to it than what you propose which is the surface of things…

    Anyway wishing everyone well.

Comments are closed.

Tagged

current: @adafruit - previous: MAKE, popular science, hackaday, engadget, fallon, braincraft ... howtoons, 2600...

View more articles by Phillip Torrone