Olafur Elisasson - The Weather Project - Simulations

http://www.ted.com/talks/olafur_eliasson_playing_with_space_and_light?language=en#t-133726

This is a TED talk by Olafur Eliasson, who is an installation artist primarily, and very active in the contemporary scene. I'm not going to try to sum him up entirely, or even just his artistic career. I will however briefly talk about some of the work he has done and what I find interesting about it. I first learned of him through a site called moonmoonmoonmoon. It's a 3D space that exists on a server, accessible through a browser, that hosts a large white sphere. On this sphere, anyone is invited to draw whatever they please, and the results are shown publicly and simultaneously; everyone has access to this moon.

This work is a good primer on what he is primarily interested in. An activation of space, one that is usually considered anti-social (the Tate Modern's Turbine Hall, various white-wall galleries, etc). In a sense, he create simulations. In his work "The Weather Project", the Tate modern played host to a simulated Sun, which was accompanied by a subtle fog, and a massive mirror in the ceiling so visitors could lounge on the floor looking up at themselves. More recently, he has simulated a rocky mountain side featuring a small stream running through a gallery space. The seemingly featureless, grey landscape was only broken by the trickle of water that bisects the room. This stream is also the beginning of a narrative.

So what interests me most about all of this is why anyone would be engaged by a simulation of something when the "real thing" is so quotidian. A 2D, orange circle in place of a star, a room half full with pebbles as opposed to an actual field. What makes such shallow "copies" of these environments even remotely meaningful or seizing? I like the idea that we find a simulation of something more meaningful compared to the "real" thing because we know that effort, time, and creativity was put into the creation of it.

We can appreciate The Weather Project because we know that someone else, another consciousness that exists outside of us, created and offered us an alternative version of reality.  Maybe this is just me being solipsistic, but I think it makes sense. The "natural world" is a reflection of how we perceive reality through our limited, physical senses, but to see another's simulation of something, we gain a better understanding of how other's see reality. Again, it's a simple idea, but an important one, I think. I'd go as far as to say that simulations of things can be more  meaningful than the "real" thing because it is a simulation. If it made by another consciousness, there is the implication and assumption that there is meaning, why else would anyone make it? This is only true under the assumption that one doesn't find the world inherently meaningful, or doesn't believe in some form of Creationism or higher power.