The paper features the multimedia means employed to arrange an interactive space in public buildings. The advancement of computer technologies contributed to the development of the multimedia kind of art, with its versatility, multiplicity, and distinctness. Multimedia art can be integrated into the design of an objective-spatial environment in two ways: mechanical (implemented through the use of kinetic art objects, or kinetic deep spatial art) and multimedia (achieved through the use of sensory technologies and the creation of interactive projections onto surfaces).
The author explored the approaches to the development of objective-spatial environment through multimedia objects: an imaginative approach based on the formation of the objective-spatial environment focusing on the generation of imagery and artistic expressiveness of the interior; functional utilitarian approach contributing to the arrangement of an objective-spatial environment dominated by the functionality of objects filling the interior.
The paper reasons the possibility to integrate Yevhen Lysyk’s stage design ideas with the multimedia technical means to produce an interactive dynamic design as an artistic performance within the public building. It would contribute to the preservation of artworks by the brilliant scenographer still used in contemporary repertoire, and also add to the diversity of space, make bright imagery of the interior, and underlie its functionality. Moreover, with the help of modern digital technologies, we can increase the range of supporters of Yevhen Lysyk’s art to cultivate the feeling of the beautiful and the love for genuine art.
Gofman, I. 2003. Frame Analysis: An Essay on Organizing Everyday Experience [Analiz freymov: esse ob organizatsii povsedn'evnogo opyta]. M. : Institut sotsiologii RAN. P. 217. (in Russian)
Hrytsiuk, L. S., 2016. Installations in architectural space: a game of art with architecture [Instaliatsii v arkhitekturnomu prostori: hra mystetstva z arkhitekturoiu]. Suchasni problemy arkhitektury ta mistobuduvannia, 43/1, pp. 119-124. (in Ukrainian)
Hruieva, O. V., 2016. Installation as the newest form of political actionism [Instaliatsiia yak novitnia forma politychnoho aktsionizmu]. Visnyk Dnipropetrovs'koho universytetu. Seriia : Filosofiia. Sotsiolohiia. Politolohiia, 5, pp. 17-24. (in Ukrainian)
Eko, U. 1998. Missing structure. Introduction to semiology [Otsutstvuyuschaya struktura. Vvedenie v semiologiyu]. TOOTK «Petropolis». P. 108. (in Russian)
Kassirer, E., 2001. Philosophy of symbolic forms [Filosofiya simvolich'eskih form]. Tom 2. Mifologich'eskoe myshl'enie. M.; SPb. : Un. kniga. P. 120. (in Russian)
Mamardashvili, A. & Pyatigorskiy, A. 1997. Symbol and consciousness [Simvol i soznanie]. M. : Shkola. Pp. 50-125. (in Russian)
Morris, Ch. U., 1982. Foundations of the theory of signs [Osnovaniya teorii znakov]. Semiotika. Sbornik perevodov. Pod red. Yu. S. Stepanova. M. : Raduga. Pp. 37-89. (in Russian)
Panofskiy, E., 1999. Meaning and Interpretation of Fine Arts [Smysl i tolkovanie izobrazitelnogo iskusstva]. Stat'i po istorii iskusstva. Sankt-Peterburg. Pp. 46-65. (in Russian)
Pirs, Ch. S., 2009. What is a sign? [Chto takoe znak?]. Vestn. Tomskogo gos. un-ta. Ser. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya, 3(7), pp. 88-95. (in Russian)
Stanislavska, K. I., 2010. Installation as a visual and entertaining form of modern art [Instaliatsiia yak vizualno-vydovyshchna forma suchasnoho obrazotvorchoho mystetstva]. Aktualni problemy istorii, teorii ta praktyky khudozhnoi kultury, XXIV, pp. 228-236. (in Ukrainian)
Stoian S. P., 2013. Aesthetic analysis of contemporary art: installation as a visualization of instantaneity [Estetychnyi analiz suchasnoho mystetstva: instaliatsiia yak vizualizatsiia myttievosti]. Materialy mizhnarodnoi naukovoi konferentsii «Dni nauky filosofskoho fakultetu'2013», 4, pp. 64-65. (in Ukrainian)
Fuko, M. 1996. Archeology of knowledge [Arheologiya znaniya]. K. : Nika-tsentr. Pp. 23-41. (in Russian)
Bishop, C. 2005. Installation Art. A Critical History. London. 144 p. (in English)
De Oliviera, N., Oxley, N. & Perry, M. 1994. Installation art. London. (in English)
De Oliviera, N., Oxley, N. & Perry, M. 2004. Installation Art in the New Millenium: The Empire of the Senses. London. (in English)
Goodman, N., 1976. Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. The Bobbs-Merrill Company, INC. A Subsidiary of Howard W. Sams & Co., Inc. PUBLISHERS: INDIANA POLIS, NEW YOBS, KANSAS CITY. Pp. 65-48. (in English)
Guzek, Ł. 2007. The art of installation. The issue of the relationship between space and presence in contemporary art [Sztuka instalacji. Zagadnienie związku przestrzeni i obecności w sztuce współczesnej]. Warszawa : Wydawnictwo Neriton. 292 s. (in Polish)
London College of Communication. 2019. UAL: because the world needs creativity. London : Published by University of the Arts London. 148 p. (in English)
Reiss, J. H. 1999. From Margin to Center: The Spaces of Installation Art. Cambridge, MA. 181 p. (in English)
Rosenthal, M. 2003. Understanding Installation Art: From Duchamp to Holzer. Munich. 96 p. (in English)
Suderburg, E. 2000. Site, Intervention: Situating Installation Art. Minneapolis-London. (in English)
Szuts, Z., 2019. Central Saint Martins / UAL: always challenge what you know. London : Published by University of the Arts London. 24 p. P. 11. (in English)