I believe that this site is best viewed in the designed sequence. While surrendering control of the time line to me may seem to fly in the face of the cardinal rule of web use: interactivity, I've attempted to establish a particular attitude or disposition, over a period of time, in order to best support the content of the artwork. I have reduced the user's button-clicking to small windows in space and time in which the attentive can click and see much more, or miss the opportunity and remain in one environment. Since few works on the web yank away your control for as long as this one does, I'll explain myself by asking you to consider this:

I like to think of this website as the node, and the Internet itself as a huge morass of connections and real choices. This model echoes that of the human brain. A website is to the Internet as a neuron is to the brain. This is a form I present often in this work.

I question whether the kind of interactivity that one experiences at many web sites is truly "interactive" in any meaningful sense of the word. The range of choices has been pre-determined for users and pales in comparison to the real choices that the user makes out on the Internet. The kind of button-crazed "interactivity" that we often experience is condescending when viewed in this light. The illusion of freedom is an insidious augmentation to real confinement.

In order to create a kind of hide and seek/ index finger exercise, what other types of mental interactivity are sacrificed? Complex and profound exchange occurs between one's mind and even entirely static of art works.

When a new technology comes along, it takes time to realize that pushing every button and pulling every lever may not be a productive approach. Time-honored ways of interacting with art should not necessarily be abandoned even during a paradigm shift.

Because its form reflects the creative process, my strong hope for the Internet is that it will resubstantiate that process in our collective consciousness. However, I see no reason why we should throw away linearity in the process; the idea should be to add to it. After all, the invention of the "table of contents" in books (which provided random access, links, and choices to book users) did not prohibit the writing of linear, narrative novels, nor did it prevent people from reading them.

Lee Boot
11/30/96

Entry Page