DD: If my more public and political comments reveal me to be an anarchist, this one certainly points toward enlightenment mysticism. Why it thrills me to interweave here and there, now and then, virtual and real, live and taped, you and me...I don't know. But it does. Profoundly. An analogy in painting might be "trompe l'oeil". I dont want you ever to be entirely certain of where, why, or when, in image, sound, text.
In "Terrible Beauty" I am followed by an "other" who is always speaking over my head from the web (enlarged on the wall behind me) to the audience at the same time I am speaking. He/she constantly maintains she/he is the authentic me, often speaking in the language of the audience. I notice that in these events the audience becomes as captivated by the mystery as I am. Perhaps I share a larger post-industrial pathology, whetted by the Id complexity and role-swapping at your hand in chatlining. But there is a secular reason as well. I object to the false line between virtual and real inserted both by the language and by convention. The notion that web events are distant, immaterial, and non-real needs to be destructed. I have begun to make solid, massive, awesomely material works that bear the same image or message as the sites. The most recent example is "mother metabody," a large foam-molded breast with whom you can speak simply by tenderly touching her nipple. At the moment you can watch Mother Metabody on the site itself, interacting with "real" humans. If you go to the Neue Galerie in Graz to see "The Anagrammatic Body" you can see her in a large framed flat image, beckoning you to join her on the web.
I have more ferociously material objects in mind. The virtual is real, the real is virtual. Blending them is our destiny.