With the growth of networks and the multiplication of personal computers over the last decade, interactive formats have proliferated. Nevertheless, computer systems weren't the stimulus for interactive audio-visual production. We could list a large number of mechanical devises, electronic or hybrids, that allow non-linear navigation of audio-visual content, starting with, to cite at random, the philoscope, the mutoscope, analog video recorders, etc. If the information era has standardized the digital interface as the control and navigation devise par exellence for non-linear content, we shouldn't forget those that preceded them.

JF/PP: How do you elaborate the notions of linearity and interaction in your work?

IM: From the viewpoint of narrative, the concepts ‘linear' and ‘interactive' are completely different. The procedure in itself is of little interest to the artist; the important thing is its link with the language we use to articulate our audio-visual discourse. Thus, we're especially interested in the second definition of the words ‘linear' and ‘interactive' (that which refers to language). In audio-visual language, the acoustic images create relations with certain concepts. These associations can have a dynamic or static character: the image of a tree can refer exclusively to the corresponding concept, or else it can shift toward another (a tree can mean more than a tree: This is not a pipe ). The discourse is ordered in time, connected to a time line, in which the writer/reader is permanently faced with the option of affirming or refuting everything that came before, of writing or re-writing the discourse. Non-linear narratives make use of this property of the discourse, which allows what is said to be written and immediately re-written.