This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts, East Asian Studies Stanford University

Innovations in Art Through the Lens of Business Model Analysis and the Dynamics of Creative Industries: A Case Study of teamLab

by Anqi Xu

June 04, 2020

Advisor: Professor Richard Dasher Department: East Asian Languages and Cultures

Approval Signature: ______

Date: ____4 June 2020______

1 Abstract

This thesis examines the patterns of innovations that teamLab, a Japanese engineering firm turned artist group, has brought to the art industry. It explores these patterns in light of business model analysis and the dynamics of creative industries. The approach herein draws from design thinking (see Plattner, Meinel, and Leifer 2011) to contrast the creation and the distribution processes of art with those of design-related fields. In this way, on one hand, the thesis adopts standard business terms such as “business-to-consumer” (B2C) versus “business-to- business” (B2B) that are rarely used by art professionals to discuss the business side of art industries. On the other hand, based on such models, the thesis uses design thinking to analyze teamLab’s development of artistic practices from an engineering background. It argues that the group’s marriage of engineering and art has allowed it to forge a highly original approach to innovate art making, art viewing, and art business models.

Accordingly, the thesis demonstrates teamLab’s innovations on three levels—products, services, and business models. First, the group grew from creating utilitarian, commercial pieces in the early days to a spectrum of artwork that range from being functional to aesthetic. This evolution reflects the group’s transition from a B2B to a B2C approach to art making. Its innovation lies in its efforts to marry a user-centric, problem-solving mindset of design thinking with a professional artist’s first person-centric, aesthetics primary outlook to create new art products. Second, teamLab has used such artwork to address challenges with art viewing. It has developed exhibitions that connect with the audience physically and conceptually, which reflects a design thinking mindset. Its innovation lies in its creation of these new exhibition experiences as service businesses in the art world. Third, in this process, teamLab extended its businesses from being a player outside fine art, to a product supplier inside fine art, and eventually to a

2 service provider inside fine art. In effect, it has expanded from a B2B business in engineering, to a B2C art product business, and finally to a B2C art service business. Its innovation lies in its development of a composite business model—which on one hand, covers design-related fields and art; and on the other hand, within art, combines product businesses and service businesses.

In this way, teamLab has straddled the boundaries between design related industries and art, between the B2B and the B2C models for art creation, and between product businesses and service businesses in the art space. In other words, marrying design thinking and art making has allowed teamLab to create highly original artwork, exhibitions, and business models. It demonstrates that innovations are not necessarily groundbreaking inventions but can be new combinations of existing elements.

Keywords: teamLab; art; design thinking; engineering; product business; service business; business-to-consumer (B2C); business-to-business (B2B); Japanese art; international art world;

Japan business

3 Table of Content

Abstract 2

1. Introduction 5

2. The Art World in General Business Terms 7

3. teamLab: Business and Art 19

3.1 teamLab’s General Business Practices 19

3.2 teamLab’s Art Businesses 22

4. An Examination of teamLab in Light of Design Thinking 29

5. Conclusion: New Perspectives on Innovations in Art and Beyond 41

6. Bibliography 44

7. Appendix A: teamLab’s Artwork by Year 46

8. Appendix B: Artwork at teamLab Borderless Tokyo 70

4 1. Introduction

The international art world tends to use its distinct vocabulary to describe its business practices. For example, “the primary market” designates the space that sells original artwork for the first time, while “the secondary market” runs transactions with histories of provenance. This thesis abandons such vocabulary. It aims to explore the art world in general business terms in light of design thinking (see Plattner, Meinel, and Leifer 2011). By doing so, the thesis examines patterns of innovations in art by shedding light on two fronts—on one hand, the two major types of art businesses, offering respectively products and services; and on the other hand, the dynamics between art and design-related industries.

The thesis uses teamLab, a Japanese engineering firm turned art group, as a case study to explore such patterns of innovations. The group is worth noting because it operates both in the general creative business environment and in the art industry. In particular, it manages two main

URLs: https://www.team-lab.com/ and https://www.teamlab.art/. The former offers a comprehensive profile of teamLab as a business group. According to the “About” section of https://www.team-lab.com/, teamLab is organized around the principal for-profit company teamLab Co., Ltd. that operates four commercial subsidiaries— teamLab Engineering Co., Ltd, teamLab Kids Co., Ltd., teamLab Sales Co., Ltd., and teamLab Architects Co., Ltd. This business group structure is characteristic of Japanese firms that have been described by various scholars such as Clark (Clark 1979).1 The latter website focuses on teamLab’s artistic endeavors.

It catalogues the group’s artwork, exhibitions and concepts. Instead of an “About” section, the website offers a “biography” of teamLab as an “international art collective”.2 These two sites demonstrate that teamLab has developed a wide scope of practices, ranging from engineering

1 “Technology x Creative,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.team-lab.com/about/. 2 “Biography,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/about/.

5 and design projects to art. They also underline that art has constituted a core component of teamLab’s identity and practices.

The thesis will unfold in the following order. In Section Two, I will discuss existing business models in the art world in general business terms. I hope to distinguish two pairs of practices in the art world: product businesses versus services business; the B2C (business-to- consumer) models versus the B2B (business-to-business) models. In Section Three, I will outline teamLab’s overall business practices and its art businesses. I aim to first, describe the group’s four business subsidiaries; second, illustrate its creation and sales of artwork as products in addition to its production of temporary events and permanent exhibitions as services; and third, examine such products and services with respect to teamLab’s business subsidiaries to understand the role of art in the group’s operations at large. In Section Four, I will use design thinking as a tool to indicate teamLab’s expansion from a player in design-related industries to that in art. In that light, I will then analyze its patterns of innovations. I intend to demonstrate that on one hand, teamLab first emerged from an engineering background; on the other hand, it has developed a spectrum of artwork that range from being aesthetic to functional and focused on those that carry both traits. Such artwork have influenced the group’s business models. They have not only consolidated the group’s product business but also brought about its service businesses in the art world. In Section Five, I will summarize teamLab’s patterns of innovations and the relevance of such patterns to both inside and outside the art world. I will also reflect on other emerging trends in the art industry and evaluate teamLab’s impact on the space.

6 2. The Art World in General Business Terms

In this section, I will illustrate two pairs of practices in the art world: product businesses and services business; B2B models and B2C models. By contextualizing conventional practices in the art world, I hope to distinguish teamLab’s business operations from those of the industry incumbents and to analyze the group’s innovations in later chapters. Businesses in the art world largely have two types of offerings: products (e.g. artwork) and services (e.g. art fairs and exhibitions). A product business pivots on the transaction of ownership, whose players range from artist studios, galleries, to auction houses. A service business focuses on the creation of an experience, examples of which include museums and art fairs. In the product business of art, the users and the payers are oftentimes the same—they are the buyers of artwork. Their patronage determines the livelihood of product businesses and renders the focus of these businesses on serving these clients for financial gains. Yet in the latter scenario, the users and payers are not necessarily aligned, which could cause service businesses to develop a two-pronged concentration on engaging with the audience and with the patrons. Meanwhile, the differentiation between B2C models and B2B models lies in the goal of purchase. The former caters to private consumption. As collectors could purchase artwork for their own pleasure, museum visitors would pay for exhibition experiences to delight themselves. The latter assists commercial growth. While a collector could buy a masterpiece to secure loans from a bank, a museum would acquire a new piece to attract its audience. While B2C business models dominate both product and service businesses in the art world, B2B transactions are critical to design related industries.

To lay the foundation of this section, I want to first point out the lack of encyclopedic literature on the business models of the art world. On one hand, existing writings such as

“Making Visible: Artists and Galleries in the Global Art System” (Baia Curioni, Forti, and Leone

7 2015) often lean towards particular segments or geography of the market. On the other hand, comprehensive overviews including Big bucks: the explosion of the art market in the 21st century (Adam 2014) tend to give more up-to-date analyses of industry trends than a holistic examination of the industry structure. In this way, this section is not based on a single, thorough source but is independently formulated by using frameworks outside the art industry— particularly, those of product versus service businesses and the B2B versus the B2C models.

I also want to define the B2C and the B2B models in the art world to underline their distinction. In fact, it is worth considering both “consumers” and “businesses” in these two terms as “buyers”. The distinction is—the buyers of the B2C models would purchase goods or services for their own consumption while those of the B2B models do so for their commercial growth. In other words, a company can be a “consumer” if it were to buy a painting to decorate its lobby— not as a tool to drive its businesses. Hence, even a corporate buyer can engage in B2C transactions, as long as such transactions remain independent from their commercial operations.

As I will demonstrate in the following paragraphs, the B2C models are dominant across product and service businesses in art. Within product businesses, these models can take form in direct sales and distributor sales; within service businesses, they are mostly direct sales from service providers to customers. In comparison, even though the B2B models only constitute a minority of practices in fine art, they are critical to design-related industries.

Traditionally, the sales of artwork—characterized by the transfer of ownership—are product businesses, whose participants assume two types of roles: suppliers (by artist studios and second-hand artwork sellers) and distributors (by galleries and auction houses). Such roles are more fluid than fixed. While they characterize the players’ dominant traits, the players could

8 assume multiple roles simultaneously and adopt additional practices such as marketing, as I will indicate below.

Under the product business framework, artists are essentially the suppliers of artwork. To profit from their creations, they have two paths. Predominantly, they set up “studios” as commercial entities to sell and promote their works. As these commercial entities enable artists to actively engage in sales, artists could establish themselves as brands and capitalize on their brand recognition. In such cases, artists can be directly consumer-facing and take on an ensemble of roles by serving as their own marketers and retailers. If relying on their own, they could retain all the earnings but lack the external support to produce art, campaign, and increase customer outreach. Hence, they oftentimes connect with distributors whose role I will explain in the following paragraphs. Aside from building their own establishments, artists can collaborate with third-party studios. For example, the former could rent the latter’s space for artwork creation, and the latter could help the former to sell their creations or organize exhibitions to market the former. In such cases, the artists could pay the third-party studios by fixed costs or by commissions, which are percentages of the prices of artwork when they are sold. In turn, various modes of collaboration define the roles of the studios differently. On one hand, the third-party studios could stand on the supply side with the artists. They may be responsible for raw material procurement (e.g. the purchase of art equipment), warehousing (e.g. holding artwork on the artists’ behalf) and inventory management (e.g. overseeing the conditions and the availabilities of the artists’ creations) while the artists are the de-facto manufacturers of artwork. On the other hand, the third-party studios could assist the artists in sales by assuming the distributor’s role. It is also possible for such third-party studios to assume multiple roles and to different degrees, as their responsibilities may shift along the scale between being co-suppliers and distributors.

9 Next to suppliers, distributors of artwork provide channels for transactions. Two most prominent examples of such distributors are galleries and auction houses, as I will analyze them in detail respectively. Galleries makes artwork available from artists to collectors, usually for the first time. Their success depends on two critical factors: their ability to procure premium supplies, as they select artists whose products have competitive market values to generate profits; and their ability to grow market value for their artists, as they devote capital and resources to promote the artists’ industry prestige to fetch higher prices from their artwork.

In turn, these two factors determine two features of their revenue model. First, commissions are the most important source of a gallery’ income. They are usually charged on the basis of consignment, which means that the gallery doesn’t need to own but could participate in the sales of artwork that remain the artists’ properties. In other words, while artists are the suppliers and owners of artwork, galleries are the middlemen between the artists and the customers—they are the distributors and de facto sellers of artwork. On one hand, this commission-based practice is a protective measure for galleries to lower risks, as they often engage in the sales of new works or those of emerging artists that lack market records and comparisons. On the other hand, controlling the sales process, galleries have high bargaining power in negotiating commissions with artists. Such commissions could range from 33% to 44% of the selling price and reach as high as 60% in top commercial galleries, even though fierce competitions for established international artists could lower the galleries’ charges (Zorloni 62).

Second, the galleries’ intermediary role necessitates them to place a high priority on marketing and allows them to influence pricing. This is particularly true when works are sold for the first time, whose unproven market value increases both the galleries’ and the buyers’ risks.

To lower these risks, galleries strive to provide information to fill in the blank, such as the

10 artist’s awards, exhibition programs, and press reviews. Such information is not only crucial but also beneficial to generate demand, as gallerists could concoct attractive stories and engineer the price. An infamous example is Charles Saatchi, the founder of the London-based Saatchi

Gallery. With a blatant conflict of interest, he funded the exhibition Sensation: Young British

Artists from the Saatchi Collection (1999-2000) at the Brooklyn Museum, whose institutional cachet could boost the fame of his artwork and scalp the price. In addition to stirring up this controversy of ethical sponsorship, Saatchi is also known for buying artists’ works in bulk to control the supply and the circulation of these artists’ oeuvre to increase his holdings’ value.

As opposed to galleries that transfer artwork from artists to collectors, auction houses are the distributors that make artwork available from collectors to collectors. That is, they generally participate in the exchange of existing artwork with a history of transactions. Hence, to auction houses, the actual sellers of artwork are no longer the artists but the second-hand suppliers who draw artwork from their collections. These suppliers’ ownership records provide the market with information about the auctioned items (called “lots” in auction vocabulary) and make the value of these items more transparent. As a result, this relative transparency not only lowers the risks of auctioned items but also restricts, though not diminishes, the pricing power of auction houses.

To assist with such sales, auction houses orchestrate sales events—namely, auctions—that are timed and recurring. They profit primarily from commissions—the percentages of the price point at which a seller sells and a buyer buys—in addition to services such as art handling and authentication. Such commissions for auction houses differ from those for galleries. The latter sells on behalf of the artists and mostly charges them by taking percentages of their artwork sales. Yet, the former bills both the buyers and the sellers of artwork that engage in the transactions. In other words, while galleries profit from the supply side, auction houses gain

11 revenue from not only the suppliers but also the consumers. Granted, the commission-based revenue systems naturally motivate both galleries and auction houses to sell artwork at higher prices to obtain higher commissions. But this is particularly true for the latter, as auctioneers often dramatize the culmination of the selling act with the bang of the gavel.

It merits attention that the majority of artwork sales are B2C. However, there are cases where such transactions are instead B2B. For example, a museum could acquire new works from auctions to attract visitors and a collector may purchase a masterpiece as an asset to borrow funds from a bank.

Before delving into service businesses, it is worth inspecting the users and the payers in the product businesses of the art industry. Across the players in this sector—be them artist studios, galleries, or auction houses—the users and the payers are usually the same. Specifically, to artist studios and galleries, such users and payers are the buyers of the artwork. For auction houses, while the users are the buyers of the artwork, they constitute a segment of the overall payer group that also includes the sellers of the artwork. In this way, one could indicate that the overall agenda for product businesses in the art world is to address their buyers to increase financial gains. As I demonstrate above, all players in such space may assume multiple roles.

They may thus devote capital and resources to non-profit activities such as publication and philanthropy that may cast a positive light on their brands and promote their profitable acts.

Nevertheless, profit-making still remains the intention and the end goal of such efforts, as transactions determine the life and death of these players.

Apart from the sales of artwork, the creation of experiences in the art industry is a service business. A museum is a classic example of experience-based service businesses, whose core offerings are exhibitions. Generally, an exhibition has two characteristics: first, it remains

12 consistent throughout its duration, despite possible artwork rotations and other foreseeable changes; second, it does not engage in any form of sale, nor does its organizers have any financial stake in its theme or topic.

In most cases, a museum operates a bipartite structure of revenue generation—from both outside and inside the organization. According to Sotheby’s Institute, outside contributions and fundraising "typically count over half of a museums’ revenue at an industry standard of around

60%.”3 Meanwhile, program services and gained income are the two main sources of a museum’s inside revenue. Examples of the former include admission, membership and ticketed events. While not insignificant, they may be proportionally small in an organization’s overall revenue stream. For example, the Metropolitan Museum of Art reports that in the fiscal year

2018 to 2019, admissions and membership constitute USD 84.15 million (21.66%) in its total earnings of USD 388.442 million (the Metropolitan Museum of Art 2019).4 In addition to such program services, Sotheby’s Institute (Sotheby’s Institute) indicates that gained income— ranging from merchandise sales to image licensing—generally accounts for 40% of a museum’s revenue. As an emerging and expanding category, it represents “new and disruptive developments to the museum business model of the past”. This point is also supported by the example of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (the Metropolitan Museum of Art 2019), which gained USD 167.162 million from retail, auxiliary activities, release from restriction and transfers as well as other income that equaled 43.03% of its overall revenue. Because of this bipartite revenue structure, the majority of a museum’s users differ from that of its payers. On

3 “The Business Model of the Nonprofit Museum,” Sotheby’s Institute, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.sothebysinstitute.com/news-and-events/news/the-business-model-of-the-nonprofit-museum. 4 The Metropolitan Museum of Art, “2018-2019 Annual Report of the Year” (New York: the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2019), 41, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.metmuseum.org/-/media/files/about-the-met/annual- reports/2018-2019/annual-report-2018-19.pdf.

13 one hand, the museum’s users are primarily its visitors, who constitute a fraction of its payers only when they spend on admission, membership, merchandises or other museum offerings. In contrast, the museum’s payer group is more diverse in its composition, including but not limited to wealthy individuals, government branches and commercial licensees. In this way, apart from external patronage, a museum mostly operates a B2C model by providing and charging services to the audience. It may also engage in B2B businesses such as image licensing to generate internal income.

In comparison to museums, art fairs pose a trickier case. They are timed, recurring events whose purpose is to promote artwork sales—namely, the transfer of ownership. Yet, their business model—the work that art fair committees do—is to facilitate buyers and sellers’ experience of making transactions. An art fair thus has two responsibilities. On one hand, it serves as a marketplace to foster exchange, not only between buyers and sellers but also within each group. On the other hand, it curates its own content either directly (e.g. by promoting particular themes) or indirectly (e.g. by selecting particular galleries). In fact, it is worth comparing an art fair to an auction for clarification. Granted, both are event-based businesses that provide the buyers and the sellers of artwork with the experiences of making transactions.

However, an art fair profits from making such experiences, while the latter gains from the transactions themselves, which makes them respectively service and product businesses. In this way, even though the central activity of an art fair is trade, an art fair is not an artwork distributor because of its removal from the sales process. That is, an art fair only promotes but does not participate in the transactions. Instead, an art fair’s service is twofold. Visibly, it is the physical production of the event including the venue, the lighting, and the staff. Invisibly, it is the control over the participants’ quality: on the seller’s side, how prominent the galleries are and what

14 works they could bring; and on the buyer’s side, how affluent the collectors are and how much money they could spend.

Specifically, the quality of the participants decisively determines the quality of an art fair.

It marks the difference between an art fair and a traditional event production business as the fair’s key to success is not so much the setup as the client network. For example, Art Basel— widely reputed to set the highest industry quality and cost—has an extensive outreach to the most luminous sellers and buyers in the art world. To quality-control the sellers, the fair is known for its Selection Committee—a jury of six leading gallerists around the world who serve as its gatekeepers.5 To “recruit” the best buyers, “twenty-nine art experts”, in the fair’s words, constitute its global VIP Representative Network to develop and cultivate relationships with art patrons worldwide.6 In addition to buyers and sellers, establishing strategic partnerships is also critical. In fact, this need for external support is a common ground between art fairs and museums as service businesses. While outside contributions and fundraising constitute the majority of a museum’s revenue, sponsorships could cover an art fair’s operation costs and strengthen its client outreach. As I will explain below, these sponsors help an art fair to cater to its participants’ luxurious lifestyles by offering, for example, free car services and gourmet foods. In exchange, what the art fair offers the sponsors are channels to engage with their target audience. In this way, it is critical for an art fair to maintain a consistent quality of its participants across the board—including but not limited to the gallerists, the collectors, and the sponsors— since the value of one group decisively impacts on the experience of another.

5 The influence of this Selection Commission is described in the article “At Art Basel, a Powerful Jury Controls the Market” by Graham Bowley from The New York Times. Graham Bowley, “At Art Basel, a Powerful Jury Controls the Market,” The New York Times, June 14, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/15/arts/design/at-art-basel-a- powerful-jury-controls-the-market.html. 6 “VIP Relations,” Art Basel, accessed May 27, 2020, https://www.artbasel.com/about/vip.

15 By catering to the sellers and the buyers of artwork, an art fair collects revenue from both sides. This is its fundamental difference from a museum. As I previously indicate, because of the museum’s bipartite revenue structure, the majority of its users are different from that of its payers. However, an art fair’s users and payers are largely aligned—even though different user groups pay for the services disproportionately. Among the payers, it is galleries instead of collectors that constitute a fair’s main source of income. What galleries pay are booth rentals whose prices vary by size and visibility in addition to applicable service charges. According to

Tarmy (Tarmy 2018), Art Basel’s 2018 fair in Basel, Switzerland charged from CHF 400 (USD

408.5) per square meter for a subsidized “Statements” section to CHF 830 (USD 847.64) per square meter for its “Galleries” and “Feature” sections. The subsequent sums could amount to

$53,000 for a 60-square-meter booth and $88,000 for a 100-square-meter booth, discounting unavoidable additional service costs such as wall reinforcement, carpeting, and lighting. Such high charges reflect Art Basel’s premium pricing. It merits attention that even though the exhibitors were paying for their booths on paper, they were essentially investing in the fair’s industry recognition and VIP connections. In other words, while galleries nominally spend on the space of the fair, what the price indicates is the value of the fair.

With respect to buyers, an art fair similarly operates a tiered charging system. On one hand, it waives entrance fees for real collectors and privileging them with VIP treatments to encourage purchases. On the other hand, it tickets the general public with different pass packages to create an additional revenue stream. The former case reinforces the importance of sponsorship to an art fair, since VIP treatments—available to both collectors and gallerists as the fair’s clients—could be expensive. In the example of Art Basel, Basel, the fair’s partners range from a leading bank from its home country UBS to luxury consumer brands such as Nespresso, Ruinart,

16 and BMW. Their support may vary from direct capital installments to premium barista services.

It is these partners that shoulder the fair’s costs of facilitating VIP experiences. By contrast, to the general public, a ticket in 2020 could range from CHF 25 (USD 25.52) for a “Unlimited

Night Ticket” to CHF 250 (USD 255.2) for the VIP-equivalent, five-day pass “Unlimited+

Card”.7 Given that the fair attracted an overall attendance of 93,000 visitors over the duration of six days in 2019, even though this number includes both collectors and the general public, the additional revenue from the pass packages could still become hefty.

Similar to product businesses, service businesses in the art industry largely remain B2C, even though B2B operations are critical to art fairs. With respect to museums, throwing an exhibition for the sake of growing a stakeholder’s businesses would raise controversies around the institution’s code of ethics and puts its reputation at risk. An example is the aforementioned case of Sensation: Young British Artists from the Saatchi Collection, which drew strong criticism to the Brooklyn Museum. In contrast, by serving both the buyers and the sellers of artwork, art fairs foster transactions not only for individual consumption but also for the commercial growth of galleries. They thus operate a composite model, engaging in both B2C and B2B practices.

It is worth emphasizing that although the B2B models only constitute a segment of product and service businesses in the art industry, they are prevalent in design-related fields. The

Coca-Cola bottle provides a fitting case. On one hand, the bottle is aesthetic. It demonstrates the designers’ artistic output. On the other hand, the bottle is functional. It reflects the corporate brand’s demands. Similar cases also occur in the field of engineering, as a client-commissioned

7 It merits attention that Art Basel, Basel 2020 has not changed its pricing for ticket packages, even though the fair has been postponed from June to September 15–20 in the same year due to COVID-19. Across the industry, the pandemic is expected to take a heavy toll on art fair businesses by physically shutting them down and by increasing their difficulties in recruiting both gallerists and patrons. In fact, an art fair may need to attract more general visitors and lower their prices to incentivize viewership. “Buy Tickets,” Art Basel, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.artbasel.com/basel/buy-tickets.

17 software could illustrate not only its engineers’ coding styles and concepts but also the patron’s requests. In Section Four, I will return to this difference between fine art and design-related industries in their adoption of the B2B versus the B2C models. By understanding this difference,

I hope to shed light on the tension between art making and design thinking as well as the opportunities for innovations emerged from the marriage between the two.

In this way, the distinctive complexity of the art industry is visible on two fronts— product business versus service businesses; the B2B models and the B2C models. Within the former, product businesses pivot on the sales of artwork, whose participants assume two types of roles—suppliers (by artist studios and second-hand artwork sellers) and distributors (by galleries and auction houses). As suppliers provide artwork to distributors for sales, these distributors make such artwork available to consumers and primarily profit from commissions. In most cases, the users and the payers of product businesses are aligned, rendering them customer- and profit- driven. In comparison, service businesses are largely removed from the transaction of artwork.

Two prominent examples are museums and art fairs, which generate revenue from both external support and internal offerings. However, while the majority of the former’s users are divergent from its payers, the latter’s users are largely its payers—even though different payers pay for the services disproportionately.

With respect to the second front, the distinction between the B2C models and the B2B models lies in the goal of purchase. On one hand, the B2C models could apply to a corporate buyer if its goal remains private consumption. On the other hand, any buyer’s aim to use the purchase for its own commercial growth would constitute a B2B transaction. In the art world, the

B2C models dominate both product and service businesses. In product businesses, these models can be direct sales and distributor sales; in service businesses, they mostly remain direct sales

18 from service providers to users. In contrast, while the B2B models only constitute a minority of practices in the art world, they are exemplified in product businesses by a museum’s acquisition of artwork to attract visitors and in service businesses by an art fair’s assistance to grow galleries’ sales. Finally, it is worth noting that in contrast to its infrequent practice in fine art, the

B2B models are core to design-related industries, a point to which I will return in Section Four.

3. teamLab: Business and Art

This section describes the founding of teamLab, its general commercial practices, and its art businesses. By doing so, I hope to render a complete picture of the group’s business operations and to understand the role of art in this picture, which I will further examine in the next section in light of design thinking. With respect to teamLab as a general business operator, I will describe its starting point from engineering practices, its four subsidiaries, and the typicality of developing such subsidiaries in the Japanese business environment. In terms of teamLab as an art group, I will outline on one hand, its creation and sales of artwork that constitute its product businesses; on the other hand, its production of temporary events and permanent exhibitions that form its service businesses. Finally, I will indicate teamLab’s reputation in digital art as an industry leader by showing its strong productivity, viewership and market values.

3.1 teamLab’s General Business Practices

teamLab was founded in March 2001 by Toshiyuki Inoko in Tokyo shortly after he acquired his bachelor’s degree in Mathematical Engineering and Information Physics from the

University of Tokyo. Four of Inoko’s friends purportedly joined him as co-founders.8 The group

8 This thesis has not been able to confirm Inoko’s initial co-founders. This information that Inoko founded teamLab with four friends is taken from the article “At the edge of creativity, teamLab breaks free from frames.” “At the edge of creativity, teamLab breaks free from frames,” LuxArtAsia, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.luxartasia.com/2018/04/at-edge-of-creativity-teamlab-breaks.html.

19 was first incorporated as a limited joint-stock company but soon became to a regular joint-stock company in 2002.9 Today, teamLab is helmed by Inoko as the CEO alongside four Directors:

Daisuke Sakai, Yuzuru Yoshimura, Tetsuya Tamura, and Kenichi Watanabe. They specialize in areas such as engineering, product design, and robotics and constitute the nucleus of the group.

Over the past nearly two decades, teamLab has grown from a small, engineering-focused firm into an enterprise with expansive business outreach. According to Jenie (Jenie 2018), In the early years, the group’s co-founders primarily produced applications, back-end systems for web, web design, interfaces, and databases. It is worth noting that these early works were primarily produced for commercial clients. They indicate a stronger B2B approach than a B2C practice.

Currently, not only has teamLab recruited approximately seven hundred professionals from a variety of fields such as art, programming, engineering, CG animation, math, and architecture, but the group has also launched four subsidiaries around specific business lines—teamLab

Engineering Co., Ltd, teamLab Kids Co., Ltd., teamLab Sales Co., Ltd., and teamLab Architects

Co., Ltd.—with two overseas bases in Shanghai and Singapore.10 The breadth of its members’ professional knowledge contributes to the diverse businesses of these subsidiaries. Apart from the lack of information on the third affiliate—which probably serves as the backend support for the overall group—the other three have their unique product offerings. teamLab Engineering

Co., Ltd. develops website and app designs, branding promotions, spatial recognition support, video productions, data analyses, digital infrastructure construction, and maintenance among others.11 teamLab Kids Co., Ltd. supposedly manages teamLab Future Parks, which are venues

9 “Technology x Creative,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.team-lab.com/about/. 10 Ibid. 11 These engineering projects can be found under different tabs on https://www.team-lab.com/. “Works,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.team-lab.com/works/. “Products,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.team-lab.com/product/. “teamLab Engineering,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.team- lab.com/engineering/about/.

20 that host interactive digital exhibitions.12 Finally, teamLab Architects Co., Ltd. functions as an architectural firm whose limited portfolio—with a total of eleven projects—shows more interior renovations than architectural designs.13 In fact, this architectural firm has mostly offered in- house services to teamLab itself, as the group commissioned seven out of these eleven projects.

This development of multiple subsidiaries inside a mother group is characteristic of

Japanese businesses. According to Clark (Clark 1979), one distinct tendency of the Japanese firm is to organize its businesses as members of a group. On one hand, this tendency allows the firm to compartmentalize businesses and specialize in each direction through different legal entities.

On the other hand, it serves to keep the parent company in manageable scales. In other words, the grouping of business activities into respective subsidiaries has two purposes: first, using the independence of each subsidiary to foster growth at its own best interest; second, forming a microcosm of functions that are symbiotic and responsible for the overall wellbeing of the firm.

As teamLab divides its businesses into four subsidiaries—focusing respectively on engineering,

Future Parks, sales, and architectural designs—it is not only consolidating the strength and penetration of each individual category but also nurturing a network of mutually supportive businesses.

What seems missing from this network of subsidiaries are teamLab’s art businesses, which are core components of teamLab’s identity and practices. Not only does the group operate a separate art page (https://www.teamlab.art/) from its regular corporate website

(https://www.team-lab.com/) as I indicate previously, but the art page also lists “Future Park” and “Architect” as its sub-tabs. In fact, teamLab has been actively producing artwork since its

12 This thesis assumes that teamLab Kids Co., Ltd. manages teamLab Future Parks on the basis that the former’s profile is listed under the latter’s website. “Company Profile,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://futurepark.teamlab.art/company/. 13 “Projects,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://architects.team-lab.com/projects/.

21 founding. The earliest dated piece archived on https://www.teamlab.art/ is an interactive digital installation titled Message Tree (2001). It was the highlight of the pop-up venue “THE FIRST

LIGHT X’mas 2001” (December 22, 2001) at the Ginza Shiseido Building in Tokyo, Japan. To understand such artistic endeavors, rather than following the group’s four business lines at face value, a more effective way is to trace teamLab’s artistic creations and its profit generation methods from such creations, which constitute the focus of the following sub-section.

Figure 1. teamLab, Message Tree, 2001. Interactive Digital Installation. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.teamlab.art/w/messagetree/.

3.2 teamLab’s Art Businesses

In light of Section Two, teamLab currently operates both product and service businesses in the art world. The former—teamLab’s product businesses—refers to its creation and sales of artwork. On one hand, these artwork can be self-conceived creations and commissions from individuals as well as corporate clients such as Gucci, Bellagio, and Onitsuka Tiger. On the other hand, I propose to organize these artwork into two umbrella groups—stand-alone pieces and digitized environment. Examples of the former are light sculptures and two-dimensional panels.

22 Those of the latter include large-scale, mixed-media installations14, “digitized nature”

(installations in natural landscapes) and “digitized city” (installations in urban environments).

The distinction between the two groups are particularly subtle. Yet, there is one critical differentiator. In the former case, the artwork are physical; they are the stand-alone pieces themselves. In the latter case, the artwork are experiential; they are the transformed spaces as a result of artistic arrangements. For instance, while a stand-alone piece could have a concrete

“body” in the form of a sculpture, a digitized environment might be a light projection that casts images of a seascape onto an exhibition room—that is, the work itself may be “bodiless” but it finds the venue as its body. In this way, what is artistic about stand-alone pieces is their physical presence as aesthetic objects that are visually engaging; what is artistic about digitized environment is their ability to create aesthetic spaces that foster stimulating experiences.

The sales of these artwork are now represented by three galleries— Pace Gallery, Martin

Browne Contemporary, and Ikkan Art Gallery—that give teamLab international exposure. In this case, teamLab functions as an artist studio that supplies artwork to the market, while these galleries assume the role of distributors. It is worth noting that such sales contain both B2C and

B2B transactions. While wealthy individuals and corporates purchase teamLab’s artwork for their own enjoyment, museums could acquire the group’s creations to strengthen their collection and grow attendance. In fact, teamLab’s artwork are collected by major museums—including

Asian Art Museum in San Francisco, Asia Society Museum in New York, and National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne—which has given teamLab institutional recognition and reversely increased teamLab’s market value.15

14 The term “installation” refers to a category of artwork that are “large-scale, mixed-media constructions, often designed for a specific place or for a temporary period of time,” as defined by Tate Modern. “Installation art,” Tate Modern, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/i/installation-art. 15 “Biography,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/about/.

23 In addition to such product businesses, teamLab operates service businesses in the art industry by creating temporary events and permanent exhibitions. It merits attention that while teamLab outsources its artwork sales—or at least a part of such sales—to distributors, the group could have organized both temporary events and permanent exhibitions under its own functions, particularly teamLab Future Park. Specifically, teamLab’s temporary events and permanent exhibitions are mostly scattered across three sites: https://www.teamlab.art/w/ (the “Works” tab of teamLab’s art page), https://www.teamlab.art/e/ (the “Exhibitions” tab of teamLab’s art page) and https://futurepark.teamlab.art/places/ (the “Venue” section of teamLab Future Park’s page).

This organizational structure gives two indications. First, teamLab Future Park is an integral part of the group’s artistic practices. Second, as teamLab takes temporary events and permanent exhibitions under its own wing, services could be core components of the group’s art businesses.

teamLab’s temporary events are oftentimes orchestrated for business entities including museums, hotels, and airports. Examples of these events include “Kabuki Spectacle: Koi

Tsukami (Fight with a Carp)” (2015), a hologram projection of a koi fish onto a water screen at

Fountains of Bellagio in Las Vegas and “Resonating Forest–Shiseido Forest Valley at Jewel

Changi Airport” (2019) in Singapore, a public artwork that could interact with visitors by projecting lights and varying the colors of these lights on real trees. It is worth noticing that both creations are listed as “past works” on teamLab’s art page (https://www.teamlab.art/), rather than past exhibitions on the website of teamLab Future Park (https://futurepark.teamlab.art/). As teamLab remains a private company, its profit generation models from such artwork remain unclear. However, despite this lack of information, it is unlikely that the group would have transferred its ownership of these artwork to the other businesses. In fact, the issue of ownership is worth discussing. Considering that these artwork are ephemeral, the ownership of these

24 artwork does not refer to that of any physical creation but intellectual properties with respect to issues such as copyrights. In this way, the possible collaboration model between teamLab and its corporate clients may be that of commissioned productions—namely, the group would produce temporary events upon the clients’ requests. Without the transaction of ownership, these temporary events may demonstrate one branch of teamLab’s service businesses as the creation of tailored artistic experiences. These services may carry a B2B undertone as they help the clients to grow their businesses. For instance, a hotel could use teamLab’s installations to increase its bookings, as an airport could deploy such artwork to raise its travelers’ satisfaction rate.

However, it is questionable whether teamLab would benefit financially from its clients’ profits.

Granted, the group could charge the hotel and the airport for using its services and even add contingent bonuses for its services based on their performance. Yet, the direct impact of such services may be difficult to measure; similar protocols are also rare by industry standards. Hence, while these temporary events may appear to be products and B2B practices on the surface, they are closer to services and B2B approaches in nature for two reasons. First, teamLab is unlikely to transfer the ownership of these artwork to the clients; second, teamLab’s returns are unlikely to be linked to its clients’ profits.

Figure 2. teamLab. “KABUKI Spectacle at FOUNTAINS OF BELLAGIO Koi-Tsukami ‘Fight with a Carp’”, 2015. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.teamlab.art/w/koi_tsukami/.

25 Figure 3. teamLab. “Resonating Forest – Shiseido Forest Valley at Jewel Changi Airport”, 2019. Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Shiseido. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.teamlab.art/w/resonatingforest-jewel/.

With respect to permanent exhibitions, teamLab functions similarly to a museum. In

2008, it established its own museum “MORI Building DIGITAL ART MUSEUM: teamLab

Borderless” (hereafter referred to as “teamLab Borderless”). This museum was laboriously installed with hundreds of digital devices and reputed as the world’s first dedicated digital art museum. The expansion of teamLab’s roles in this process merits attention: traditionally, creating artwork and profiting from their sales have rendered teamLab a supplier of artwork in product businesses; however, by opening its museum, the group has also entered service businesses and become a producer of exhibitions. In this new role as a service provider, teamLab functions similarly to a conventional museum in two ways. On one hand, it charges the audience’s experiences of its artwork in the form of admission. Tickets were first discounted to

2,400 yen (US$21.67) for adults in the first month after the opening of teamLab Borderless and have been priced at 3,200 yen for adults and 1,000 yen for children ever since. On the other hand, external contributions and fundraisings have been critical to the establishment and operations of teamLab Borderless. According to Zhou (Zhou 2018)16, while it took teamLab

16 Xin Zhou, “Open Borders,” Wallpaper* China edition, November issue, 2018, 126.

26 three years to find a venue, the group ultimately received not only a space but also funding from the family-owned Japanese property management firm Mori Building. Additionally, it later gained support from the Japanese electronics company Epson. Following the establishment of teamLab Borderless in Tokyo, teamLab launched teamLab Borderless Shanghai on November 5,

2019. Details of external contributions and fundraisings for these two establishments are mostly unknown to the public. Yet, teamLab’s act to expand its museum practices suggests the viability of these businesses—especially that of a bipartite revenue structure hinged on both general admission and external support.

Based on such product and services businesses in the art industry, teamLab has gained the reputation as an industry leader in digital art with its strong productivity, viewership and market values. In terms of productivity, teamLab’s artwork creation has grown at an average rate of 33% per year from a single piece in 2001 to sixty-six works in 2019.17 With respect to viewership, its first museum teamLab Borderless became the most popular single-artist destination worldwide in its inaugural year with an attendance record of 2.3 million viewers, surpassing the Van Gogh Museum (Rea 2019). Lastly, while there is insufficient public information for one to draw a price trend of teamLab’s artwork, the group’s market value is proved by its connection with Pack Gallery, a global art powerhouse, and its auction records. The fact that Pace Gallery’s artist profile ranges from Pablo Picasso to David Hockney has undoubtedly put the group along the line of leading international artists and added its cachet in the fine art industry. In auctions, teamLab’s digital artwork Ever Blossoming Life—Gold (2014) was sold at Christie’s New York in May 2018 for $225,000, more than two times of its high

17 This thesis draws its data of teamLab’s artwork from the group’s art page (https://www.teamlab.art/), which do not include artwork that are undocumented on this site or those that lack information of their creation years. See Appendix A for details.

27 estimate at $100,000.18 All such records testify to teamLab’s success in grabbing public, institutional and market attention in the art industry.

As one examines teamLab’s artistic products and services with respect to its four subsidiaries, it appears that teamLab Kids Co., Ltd. (which manages teamLab Future Parks), teamLab Sales Co., Ltd. (which possibly handles artwork sales), and teamLab Architects Co.,

Ltd. (whose portfolio contains construction projects of its own museums) contribute more to the group’s art businesses than teamLab Engineering Co., Ltd. Such an organizational structure demonstrates art and engineering as teamLab’s twin pillars. While it is unclear which pillar takes priority, this dual focus of teamLab’s business activities gives two indications that will be explored in detail in Section Four. First, teamLab’s two-pronged focus on engineering and art allows the group to marry traits of both disciplines in its artwork creation. Second, teamLab could be developing these two areas in an integrative way—using engineering as a distinct tool to create art and art as a unique approach to practice engineering. In this way, engineering and art have become threads that interweave teamLab’s four divergent yet overlapping functions.

In this way, an overview of teamLab’s general business practices and its art businesses underlines the group’s commercial focuses on art and engineering. Specifically, on the general business side, the group has established four subsidiaries—teamLab Engineering Co., Ltd, teamLab Kids Co., Ltd., teamLab Sales Co., Ltd., and teamLab Architects Co., Ltd. This is an act characteristic of Japanese businesses at large, which allows the group to develop each business line at its best interest and to construct a network of mutually supportive businesses. On the art business side, the group offers both products and services that are connected to all of these subsidiaries but primarily fall under the latter three. With respects to products, teamLab engages

18 “Lot 863,” Christie’s, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.christies.com/lotfinder/Lot/teamlab-est-2001-ever- blossoming-life--6142016-details.aspx.

28 in the creation and sales of artwork. In terms of services, teamLab produces temporary events and permanent exhibitions. While the group may follow the B2B models when dealing with institutional purchases of artwork and commercial collaborations of temporary events, teamLab’s art businesses are primarily B2C in nature. By virtue of such artistic endeavors, the group has established the reputation as an industry leader in digital art by virtue of its strong productivity, viewership and market values.

4. An Examination of teamLab in Light of Design Thinking

This section uses design thinking as a tool to examine teamLab’s evolution. It sheds light on the tension between art and design-related industries as well as the opportunities for innovations emerged from the marriage between the two. First, I will give an overview of design thinking and underline its two critical qualities—user-centric and problem-solving. Second, I will trace the growth of teamLab’s art businesses over time and focus on the turning point at which the group’s key products and early services emerged. Third, I will continue the analysis in

Section Three to understand the importance of art to teamLab’s business practices—to demonstrate that on one hand, art and engineering are teamLab’s twin pillars to develop its businesses on all fronts; on the other hand, the unique combination of these two elements has distinguished teamLab from professional artists and allowed it to naturally explore new offerings and business models.

In 2005, design thinking as a framework emerged at Stanford University to train engineers and scientists to become innovators (Plattner, Meinel, and Leifer 2011, v). It codifies respected practices in design-related fields into a highly iterative and non-linear process that can be applied to other industries. This process is mainly characterized by six components:

29 empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test. These components have the following goals: know the audience, uncover the problem, design possible solutions, productize solutions, and assess their efficacy in the real world. Essentially, design thinking has two critical qualities: user-centric and problem-solving. The former underlines the start and the end of a design in the human users.

It encourages designers to reframe problems by following the users’ perspectives rather than their own professional intuition or industry guidelines. As Plattner, Meinel, and Leifer (ibid., xv) suggest, “it is imperative to solve technical problems in ways that satisfy human needs and acknowledge the human element in all technologists and managers”. However, understanding problems is not sufficient. The latter quality—problem-solving—emphasizes functionality. That is, a designer does not simply create for the sake of creativity but aims at an impact. In a nutshell, these two qualities set up a sphere that gives rise to meaningful innovations, which are neither a designer’s brainchildren or his or her daydreams but concrete and revolutionary ways to kill the constituency’s pain.

Figure 4. The Stanford d.school. The Design Thinking Process. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://medium.com/stanford-d-school/lets-stop-talking-about-the-design-process-7446e52c13e8.

Before delving into teamLab, it is worth underlining the nuance between design thinking and art making. That is, a designer’s approach to innovate fundamentally differs from a professional artist’s mindset of creativity. Oftentimes, a designer first discovers needs and then

30 creates, yet an artist first creates before seeking demands. That is, if the former is user-centric and problem-solving, the latter is the opposite—it is first person-centric and aesthetics-primary.

Art historians have written extensively on the latter, especially artists’ attitudes toward outside demands. Many argued that the Renaissance was a period when artists started to acquire a large degree of liberty from such demands. According to Wittkower (Wittkower 1961, 297–298),

It is an undeniable achievement of Renaissance artists that they raised art from the level of a mechanical to that of an intellectual occupation. By allying art to science, they drove a wedge between the arts and the crafts and, at the same time, rose in their own eyes and those of the world to the level of an elite. For the first time the artists were also capable of seeing their art as an act of self-expression. And although the modern concept of genius belongs to a later period, statements about that artists are born. For the first time in western history the initiated public bowed before the artist and acknowledged his special place in society. During his lifetime Michelangelo was called “divine” and ranked above the princes of the blood. Never before had such honors been accorded to an artist.

Despite the validity of this argument, the distinction between artists and craftsmen in

Wittkower’s description offers two insights. First, the creation of artwork upon requests—be them from religious entities, wealth individuals, or public institutions—used to be the norm of art making. Second, the artists’ act of self-expression before demands has been a relatively modern phenomenon. Along such line, what this art historical development reflects is the divergence between design-related industries and fine art. While a designer would be considered closer to a

“mechanical” or “craftsman”, an artist is more akin to an “intellectual” or “elite”. In fact, the latter’s priority of their own visions remains true even in commissioned works—after all, a patron seeks not simply any solution but a solution with an idiosyncratic concept and style. As

Wittkower (ibid., 291) aptly states, “Without the pedigree or the signature, these works would sometimes hardly be worth the paper they are drawn on.” That is, to a patron, while a designer’s labor outweighs his or her identity, the reverse is true for an artist. Hence, in contrast to a

31 designer’ sensitivity to the clients’ needs, an artist’ creations are reflective of his or her own experiences, perceptions and values.

It is worth noticing that this divergence between the two modes of art making—self- expressions versus upon requests—reflects the distinction between the B2C models and the B2B models in the product businesses of the art industry. In the B2C models, artists’ self-expressions take priority. Such expressions can be the artists’ unique styles or subject matters. It is these expressions that attract consumers and encourage their purchases for personal enjoyment. In the

B2B models, the clients’ demands take precedence. These demands can be expectations of specific outcomes or the use of given tools in the creation process. They instruct artists to produce works in certain ways for businesses to achieve their goals. Hence, art making under the

B2C models differs from that under the B2B models. While the former centers on an artistic vision, the latter services a request. Consequently, to gross compare the two, the B2C artwork are more conceptual and creator primary, while the B2B ones are more utilitarian and client led.

With this dichotomy in mind, it merits attention that teamLab’s core members come from disciplines native to design thinking instead of art making. As I indicate in Section Three, the group’s CEO and Directors— Toshiyuki Inoko, Daisuke Sakai, Yuzuru Yoshimura, Tetsuya

Tamura, and Kenichi Watanabe—constitute a pool of talent in areas including engineering, product design, and robotics. Specifically, Inoko studied natural language processing and art during his graduate studies, while the rest conducted academic researches respectively on wearable remote-control systems for humanoid robots, the development of a dinosaur-type biped robot, attitude control by backstepping, and product design.19 The influence of these members’ background is evident in the strong engineering and design flavors carried by the group’s early

19 Technology x Creative,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.team-lab.com/about/.

32 works. In light of the differences between design thinking and art making, one could argue that the group’s early artworks are reminiscent of art making upon requests and the B2B models in art creation. Specifically, these artwork have two characteristics. First, they show a heavy emphasis on functionality. For example, “One World Clock” (2004) is a working clock that tells the time of twelve cities and “MEMODESK” (2005) is a desk whose surface is a physical notepad for drawings. Second, such early works possibly emerged from commercial collaborations. For instance, two of teamLab’s earliest documented art installations, "Message

Tree” (December 22, 2001) and “Ginza Firefly” (June 22 – July 19, 2002) were both exhibited inside the Tokyo Ginza Shiseido Building, a cultural hub that highlights the eponymous brand’s cosmetic products and a range of haute experiences from upscale restaurants to art. Even though the lack of information on these works obscures their concepts and visual effects, their location seems to hint at teamLab’s connection with Shiseido as a reason for such creations. It is even possible that these early artwork reflect a B2B business model rather than a B2C approach. In this way, to a certain degree, the affinity of such artwork to engineering and design reflects teamLab members’ intention to address existing problems (e.g. telling time and leaving notes) and to grow the clients’ businesses (e.g. enriching shoppers’ experiences).

It merits attention that from its root in engineering, teamLab as a group has developed a spectrum of artwork that range from being aesthetic to functional and focused on those that carry both traits. To understand this spectrum, one could examine the composition of teamLab’s artwork, which I abstract into two scales—from stand-alone artwork to digitized environment and from non-interactive to interactive works.

33 Non-interactive Interactive Stand-alone artwork Digital work Interactive digital work Light sculpture Interactive light sculpture Digitized environment Digital installation Interactive digital installation Digitized nature Interactive digitized nature Digitized city Interactive digitized city Table 1. Organization of teamLab’s Artwork Categories into Two Scales: Stand-Alone Artwork Versus Digitized Environment; Non-Interactive Works Versus Interactive Works.

Placing teamLab’s artwork on these two scales, one could detect that the group has put

stronger efforts to create digitized environment (versus stand-alone artwork) and interactive

works (versus non-interactive ones). With respect to the first scale, digitized environment

numbers nearly 70% of teamLab’s annual creations in 2019, and within this group of artwork,

the category of interactive digitized installations occupies the highest percentage of 29%. In

terms of the second scale, in 2019, interactive works constitute 55% of teamLab’s art production,

preceded by 67% in 2018 and 57% in 2017. It is critical to mention that teamLab’s focus on

interactive works has been a recent phenomenon. Apart from a single work in 2001, no

interactive piece was produced from 2002 to 2009. Yet, the percentage of these works in

teamLab’s oeuvre rose from 25% in 2010 to 55% in 2019 and peaked at 81% in 2015.

Percentages of Interactive Digital Installations and All Interactive Works in teamLab's Art Creations by Year 100 80 60 40 20 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Percentages of Interactive Digital Installations Percentages of All Interactive Works Linear (Percentages of Interactive Digital Installations) Linear (Percentages of All Interactive Works )

Figure 5. Percentages of Interactive Digital Installations and All Interactive Works in teamLab’s Art Creations by Year (Original compilation of data from https://www.teamlab.art/. See Appendix A for details).

34 What’s more important, by putting these two scales together, one could further discover teamLab’s concentration on developing interactive digitized environment. Specifically, the group’s strongest focus consistently remains interactive digital installations, the category of artwork that occupies the highest percentage of teamLab’s annual production not only in 2019 but across the period from 2013 to 2019. Such works manifest a strong integration of engineering and art. They have three key features, as I will explain by using the example Universe of Water

Particles on a Rock where People Gather (2018). The first feature is the ability of such artwork to interact with the viewers, as their name “interactive digital installations” suggests. This feature is significant, since it allows these artwork to be adaptable to the audience’s actions. In the example, the installation occupies an entire room where a waterfall is projected onto a wall and falls on top of an irregular, elevated platform that evokes a rock. As flower petals flow in the waterfall, the installation invites viewers to stand on the rock and to touch the waterfall, allowing the artwork to transform in real time due to such interactions. In addition to this interactive capacity and adaptability, the second feature of these interactive digital installations is their lack of time indicators by being “endless” or in “continuous loops”. Such is the case with the example. What this lack of time indicators create are continuous, uninterrupted visual experiences. Such experiences allow the audience to participate in the creations without a clear marked beginning or ending and regardless of time. Finally, the third feature of this artwork category—and in fact, of teamLab’s oeuvre at large—is its adoption of a flat Japanese spatial system. This spatial system serves as an antithesis of the linear perspective in Western art. The latter visualizes spatial environment to reflect the optic reality, yet the former immerses the viewer in the pictorial reality by functioning similarly to a collage of frontal views. The result of this immersion in the pictorial reality is the erasure of the fourth wall—the conceptual barrier

35 between the realities inside and outside the artwork. In this way, to summarize the three features and their impact, one could notice that by being interactive, teamLab’s interactive digital installations are adaptable to the visitors’ actions; by being “endless” or in “continuous loops”, they make the visitors’ experiences visually continuous; and by adopting the flat Japanese spatial system, they erase the fourth wall and blend the optic reality with the pictorial reality.

Figure 6. teamLab, Universe of Water Particles on a Rock where People Gather, 2018, Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi. https://www.teamlab.art/w/iwa-waterparticles/.

From an engineering perspective, these features address challenges with two art viewing—the discomfort of collective viewing and the lack of creative input from the audience to artwork. teamLab defines the first problem as such: "Artwork is based on a relationship with an individual viewer. For the majority of art up until now, the presence of other viewers tends to constitute a hindrance. If you happen to find yourself alone at an exhibition, you would consider yourself to be very lucky.”20 With respect to the second problem, teamLab underlines a contradiction: the future importance of creativity in society and the current deterrence against it.

In the group’s words, while “In a future society, traits that only humans can possess—such as the

20 “Relationships Among People,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/concept/relationships/.

36 ability to think and act creatively—will become increasingly more important”, Today, in education and everyday life…creativity is suppressed rather than encouraged.”21

The three features of teamLab’s interactive digital installations offer solutions to these two challenges. Essentially, the three features—which are respectively the artwork’s adaptability to external actions, their visual continuity, and their erasure of the fourth wall—render such creations user-, time-, and space-agnostic. That is, these installations could freely engage with any visitor, perform at any hour, and transform any physical space into immersive, pictorial realms. In this way, what these features foster is connection—the connection of artwork with anyone, at any time, and in any environment. As the audience are able to perceive the installations from any angle and at any moment, these artwork deny a single vantage point that eases the discomfort of collective viewing. In addition, as the installations are interactive, they can encourage the audience’s creative input by responding to their gestures.

From an artistic perspective, these features are highly conceptualized. By welcoming interactions, removing time indicators, and conflating the optic reality with the pictorial reality, teamLab embraces the concepts of impermanence, infinity, and universality. It lets go predestined orders, chronology, and physics. What these concepts underline is a philosophic sense of connection—that people, time, and space are all interconnected. teamLab’s aim to achieve such connection is manifested in own words—to “change the relationships among people” 22, “explore the boundary in the perception of the long continuity of time”23, and “remove the boundaries between artwork”24 as well as those “between the body and the artwork”25. In this

21 “Co-Creation,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/concept/co-creation/. 22 “Relationships Among People,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/concept/relationships/. 23 “Time Continuity,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/concept/time-continuity/. 24 “Transcending Boundaries,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/concept/transcending- boundaries/. 25 “Body Immersive,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/concept/body-immersive/.

37 way, teamLab has used its distinct artistic styles—aesthetics in an optic sense—to communicate its worldviews—aesthetics in a philosophic sense.

With a simultaneous focus on functionality and aesthetics, teamLab not only creates art for the sake of making an impact but also with the goal of articulating a vision. This two-pronged focus requires a delicate balance between functionality and aesthetics—to address needs without the expense of styles and to develop styles while meeting needs. Granted, the divergence of the two directions brings tension, as the group walks the fine line between engineering and art. Yet, this divergence does not create conflict, as teamLab’s engineering-driven approach is fundamentally aligned with its artistic pursuit. Namely, the former is the tool while the latter is the concept. It is this integration of functionality and aesthetics that renders teamLab’s artwork a coherent whole. Hence, it is important for one to understand that teamLab concentrates its efforts on marrying both ends of the spectrum and on developing works with a range of characteristics rather than a particular feature. As a result, teamLab’s interactive digital installations are rarely purist—cleanly mechanical or stylized—but eclectic in nature.

In addition to their strong integration of engineering and art, teamLab’s development of interactive digital installations as a key category of artwork has influenced the group’s business models. The year 2013 merits attention. From the product business side, this year is significant in two ways. First, as I previously indicate, it marks the turning point at which interactive digital installations began to dominate teamLab’s oeuvre. Second, it preludes teamLab’s international expansion of product sales, as the group was debuted in the United States by Pace Gallery, New

York in the following year that paved the ground for the two’s commercial collaborations.26

From the service business side, the year 2013 was a milestone for the establishment of teamLab

26 “teamLab: Ultra Subjective Space,” teamLab, accessed May 26, 2020, https://www.teamlab.art/e/pacegallery-ny/.

38 Future Park, as its first documented iteration took place in Ryubo, Naha, Okinawa (November

12–November 25, 2013). In this iteration, teamLab operated a tiered pricing system: regular tickets were 1,200 Yen for adults and 600 Yen for children, while advance prices were respectively 1,000 Yen and 500 Yen. By charging the public for their experiences of the artwork, teamLab has adopted a B2C business model, in which the services flow from the group as the artwork and exhibition producer to the audience. In this way, I want to mark the year 2013 as a watershed moment in teamLab’s evolution—as the group began to focus its art creation on a key category and to use its artwork to construct exhibition experiences. As a result, teamLab has not only expanded its product businesses but also launched service businesses in the art industry.

This concurrence is not coincidental. In fact, interactive digital installations constitute a high percentage of artwork in teamLab’s exhibitions. For example, in teamLab Borderless

Tokyo, interactive digital installations constitute thirty out of the venue’s sixty-one artwork

(49%).27 What this concurrence demonstrates are two critical points. First, teamLab’s development of products and services is highly iterative and mutually reliant. Second, teamLab’s product and service practices has formed a symbiotic relationship that allows the group to build a business ecosystem at large and to distinguish itself from professional artists.

It is worth noticing that offering services is an intuitive path for teamLab, but not to professional artists. Outlining teamLab’s path of growth reveals a three-step process: first, in the early days, the group created artwork that reflect their engineering background; second, it began to develop a spectrum of artwork that range from being functional to aesthetic and focused on those that marry both traits; third, it used such artwork to offer new exhibition services to address

27 The data here is compiled from the webpage of teamLab Borderless (https://borderless.teamlab.art/) that catalogues the artwork at the exhibition venue. See Appendix B for details. “Borderless World,” teamLab Borderless, accessed May 26, 2020, https://borderless.teamlab.art/.

39 the challenges with art viewing. In other words, the first step indicates teamLab’s expansion from design related industries to fine art; the second step illustrates the group’s consolidation of art product businesses; and the third step shows its establishment of art service businesses.

However, what professional artists lack is the link between the first step and the second step— the balance between a user-centric, problem-solving mindset and a first-person centric, aesthetics primary outlook. Along this line of thought, one could notice that on one hand, it is teamLab’s root in engineering—instead of art—that has differentiated the group and encouraged it to innovate. By marrying the two fields, teamLab has effectively integrated the utilitarian, client led

B2B model of art creation with the conceptual, creator primary B2C model. On the other hand, this integration has allowed teamLab to produce exhibitions from its artwork, to develop services businesses from product businesses. Hence, in a nutshell, the group has straddled the boundaries between design related industries and fine art, between the B2B and the B2C models of art creation, and between product businesses and service businesses in the art space. In other words, marrying design thinking and art making has allowed teamLab to create highly original art products, art services, and business models.

In this way, reviewing teamLab’s evolution, one could notice the intricate connections between teamLab’s engineering root and its artistic pursuit. In the early years of teamLab’s development, its members’ background in engineering equipped the group with a customer- centric, problem-solving mindset that has remained core to its artistic approach at large. Over time, this distinct artistic approach has fostered a growing concentration of teamLab’s artwork on interactive digital installations. It is this category of artwork that has then impacted on the group’s business model, as teamLab’s expanded its product businesses and launched services businesses. In introspection, teamLab has not only maintained its engineering practices but also

40 developed a distinct style among artists and operated a unique business model—as both a supplier of artwork and a producer of exhibition experiences.

5. Conclusion: New Perspectives on Innovations in Art and Beyond

This thesis has used teamLab as a case study to explore patterns of innovations in art. It has examined on one hand, the two major types of art businesses, offering respectively products and services; and on the other hand, the dynamics between art and design-related industries.

Accordingly, the thesis demonstrates teamLab’s innovations on three levels—products, services, and business models. First, the group grew from creating utilitarian, commercial pieces in the early days to a spectrum of artwork that range from being functional to aesthetic. This evolution reflects the group’s transition from a B2B to a B2C approach to art making. Its innovation lies in its efforts to marry a user-centric, problem-solving mindset of design thinking with a professional artist’s first person-centric, aesthetics primary outlook to create new art products.

Second, teamLab has used such artwork to address challenges with art viewing. It has developed exhibitions that connect with the audience physically and conceptually, which reflects a design thinking mindset. Its innovation lies in its creation of these new experiences as service businesses in the art world. Third, in this process, teamLab extended its businesses from being a player outside fine art, to a product supplier inside fine art, and eventually to a service provider inside fine art. In effect, it has expanded from a B2B business in engineering, to a B2C art product business, and finally to a B2C art service business. Its innovation lies in its development of a composite business model—which on one hand, covers design-related fields and art; and on the other hand, within art, combines product businesses and service businesses. In this way, teamLab has straddled the boundaries between design related industries and art, between the

41 B2B and the B2C models for art creation, and between product businesses and service businesses in the art space. In other words, marrying design thinking and art making has allowed teamLab to create highly original artwork, exhibitions, and business models.

Following these patterns, one could learn a critical lesson from teamLab—innovations are not necessarily groundbreaking inventions but can be new combinations of existing elements.

This lesson applies to both inside and outside the art world. Outside the art world, such leapfrog innovations have already percolated the everyday life. Though they may not be Thomas Edison’s light bulbs, they are iPads, whose functions combine those of a cell phones with those of a laptop; Airbnb, which transforms a home into a temporary hotel; and Netflix, which replaces the offline rental model with an online streaming services for personal entertainment consumption.

Inside the art world, these adaptive innovations range from the composite order of classical architecture, which integrates the volutes of the Ionic order capital with the acanthus leaves of the Corinthian order; to Duchamp’s readymades, which give everyday objects the title of art; and to Jackson Pollock’s strip paintings, which infuse art making with acts of performance.

In fact, the focus on user experiences—fundamental to design thinking—has already become a rising trend in the art industry. For example, this trend is evident in the increasing popularity of multi-media, immersive artwork, such as James Turrell’s light installations, Yayoi

Kusama’s Infinity Mirror Rooms, and Olafur Eliasson’s environmentalist creations. In these cases, the experiential component—especially the full sensual perception—of the artwork outweighs their visual elements. It is worth noting that Kusama, like teamLab, has opened her own eponymous museum in 2017—even one year prior to the establishment of teamLab

Borderless.28 She offers another example that artists began to expand their role from being

28 “About,” Yayoi Kusama Museum, accessed May 26, 2020, https://yayoikusamamuseum.jp/en/about/museum/.

42 artwork suppliers to exhibition producers. It is thus possible that the growing popularity of such artists’ experiential creations and the increasing number of artist-founded museums could motivate more artists to profit from not only the sales but also the viewership of their creations.

In this way, teamLab may not be an anomaly but a tip of an emerging iceberg. It remains unclear whether this iceberg is a paradigm shift in the art industry or a movement belonging to a particular historical episode, nor is it obvious whether teamLab has influenced other artists as a pioneer or it has simply been an active participant, just like its peers. In other words, even though teamLab is an industry leader in digital art, it is still early to evaluate the group’s role in the overall art environment and its legacy. Nonetheless, teamLab’s success offers a proven path of bringing innovations to the art world and beyond—one that could be followed and inspire more fruits of creativity.

43 Bibliography

Adam, Georgina. 2014. Big bucks: the explosion of the art market in the 21st century.

Burlington: Lund Humphries, 2014. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10882932.

Art Basel. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.artbasel.com/.

Baia Curioni, Stefano, Laura Forti, and Ludovica Leone. “Making Visible: Artists and Galleries

in the Global Art System.” In Cosmopolitan canvases: the globalization of markets for

contemporary art, edited by Olav Velthuis and Stefano Baia Curioni. Oxford; New York,

NY: Oxford University Press, 2015.

Bowley, Graham. “At Art Basel, a Powerful Jury Controls the Market.” The New York Times,

June 14, 2015. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/15/arts/design/at-art-basel-a-powerful-

jury-controls-the-market.html.

Christie’s. “Lot 863.” Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.christies.com/lotfinder/Lot/teamlab-

est-2001-ever-blossoming-life--6142016-details.aspx.

Clark, Rodney. The Japanese company. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979.

Jenie, Asih. “5 Minutes With… teamLab!” Indesignlive.SG. September 21, 2018.

https://www.indesignlive.sg/people/5-minutes-with-teamlab-singapore.

LuxArtAsia. “At the edge of creativity, teamLab breaks free from frames.” Accessed May 26,

2020. https://www.luxartasia.com/2018/04/at-edge-of-creativity-teamlab-breaks.html.

Plattner, Hasso, Christoph Meinel, and Larry J. Leifer. Design thinking: understand, improve,

apply. Heidelberg: Springer, 2011.

Rea, Naomi. “teamLab’s Tokyo Museum Has Become the World’s Most Popular Single-Artist

Destination, Surpassing the Van Gogh Museum.” Accessed May 26, 2020.

https://news.artnet.com/exhibitions/teamlab-museum-attendance-1618834.

44 Sotheby’s Institute. “The Business Model of the Nonprofit Museum.” Accessed May 26, 2020.

https://www.sothebysinstitute.com/news-and-events/news/the-business-model-of-the-

nonprofit-museum.

Tarmy, James. “Art Fairs Are Popping Up Everywhere. Do They Make Any Money?”

Bloomberg, March 6, 2018. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-06/art-

fairs-are-popping-up-everywhere-who-profits.

Tate Modern. “Installation art.” Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-

terms/i/installation-art. teamLab. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.teamlab.art/. teamLab. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.team-lab.com/. teamLab Architects. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://architects.team-lab.com/. teamLab Borderless. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://borderless.teamlab.art/. teamLab Future Park. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://futurepark.teamlab.art/.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art. “Annual Report for the Year 2018–2019.” Accessed May 26,

2020. https://www.metmuseum.org/-/media/files/about-the-met/annual-reports/2018-

2019/annual-report-2018-19.pdf.

Wittkower, Rudolf. “Individualism in Art and Artists: A Renaissance Problem.” Journal of the

History of Ideas, vol. 22, no. 3 (July–September 1961): 291–302.

Yayoi Kusama Museum. Accessed May 26, 2020. https://yayoikusamamuseum.jp/en/home/.

Zhou, Xin. “Open Borders.” Wallpaper* China edition. November issue, 2018.

Zorloni, Alessia. “Structure of the Contemporary Art Market and the Profile of Italian Artists.”

International Journal of Arts Management, vol. 8, no. 1 (Fall 2005): 61-71.

45 Appendix A: teamLab’s Artwork by Year

Numbering and chronological ordering (from the most recent) are by the author. Dates, artwork titles, and medium are drawn from https://www.teamlab.art/, accessed May 26, 2020.

No. Year Title Medium 1. 2021 Crystal Forest Interactive Installation of Light Sculpture, LED, Endless 2. 2020 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Wisteria LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 3. 2020 Valley of Flowers and People: Interactive Digital Installation, Lost, Immersed and Reborn Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 4. 2020 Ever Blossoming Life Rock Wall Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki - Mt. Shiun Takahashi 5. 2020 Proliferating Immense Life Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 6. 2020 Continuous Life in Cubes of Light Interactive Digital Installation - Copper 7. 2020 Life is Continuous Light - Kansui Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Pond Hideaki Takahashi 8. 2020 Massless Clouds Between n/a Sculpture and Life 9. 2020- Hopscotch for Geniuses: Bounce Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: on the Water Hideaki Takahashi 10. 2020- Sketch Ocean Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, teamLab 11. 2019 Black Waves in the Tokyo Sky Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 12. 2019 The Way of Birds in the Tokyo Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Sky - Colors of Life Hideaki Takahashi 13. 2019 Reversible Rotation in the Tokyo Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Sky - Black in White Takahashi 14. 2019 The Way of the Sea, Lost, Interactive Digital Installation, Immersed and Reborn - Colors of Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Life 15. 2019 People Create Space and Time, at Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: the Confluence of their Spacetime Hideaki Takahashi New Space and Time is Born 16. 2019 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Digital Installation, Borders, Transcending Space Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 17. 2019 Flowers and People - Giant Interactive Digitized City, Sound: Lattice Mass, A Whole Year per Hideaki Takahashi Hour

46 18. 2019 Autonomous Resonating Life on Interactive Digital Installation, the Water and Resonating Trees - Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Dragonfly Lake 19. 2019 Birth Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 20. 2019 Tunnel into the Void Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 21. 2019 Ice Nucleus of Life, Nucleus of Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Life Takahashi

22. 2019 The Sculpture of Time Distortion Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki in a Mirror Takahashi 23. 2019 Crystal of Light Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 24. 2019 Chromatic Light Wall Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 25. 2019 Emerging Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 26. 2019 Grid Spaces II Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 27. 2019 Red in the Blue II Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 28. 2019 Light Vortex III Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 29. 2019 Light Evaporating with People II Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 30. 2019 Light Cave II Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 31. 2019 Sea of Clouds Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 32. 2019 Aurora Lights III, Aurora Vortex Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 33. 2019 Reversible Rotation, Flying Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Beyond Borders - One Stroke, Takahashi Cold Light 34. 2019 Crows are Chased and the Interactive Digital Installation, 4min Chasing Crows are Destined to be 20sec, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Chased as well, Transcending Space - Seated Contemplation, Continuous Small Universe 35. 2019 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Borders, Transcending Space - Hideaki Takahashi Seated Contemplation, Continuous Small Universe 36. 2019 The Way of the Sea, Transcending Interactive Digital Installation, Space - Seated Contemplation, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

47 Continuous Small Universe, Colors of Life 37. 2019 Microcosmoses Interactive Installation, LED, Endless, Sound: teamLab 38. 2019 The Columns Interactive Digital Installation 39. 2019 Black Waves of Kochi Castle Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 40. 2019 Sharing Rock Mass, Transcending Interactive Digital Installation Space 41. 2019 Reversible Rotation in Water Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 42. 2019 teamLab Interactive Fishing Party: Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Spin your Fishing Reel - Water Hideaki Takahashi Screen 43. 2019 Water Scrolls: Genpei Yashima Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Battle Takahashi, Biwa, Narration: Yoshiko Sakata 44. 2019 Born from the Water, a Loving Sisyu + teamLab, Interactive Digital and Beautiful World Installation, Endless, Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 45. 2019 Reversible Rotation - Black in Digital Work, Single channel, 7 White channels, Continuous Loop 46. 2019 Light Forest Orchestra Interactive Installation, Sound: Kenta Matsukuma, teamLab 47. 2019 Reversible Rotation - Cold Light Digital Work, Single channel, 7 channels, Continuous Loop 48. 2019 Butterflies Dancing in the Depths Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki of the Underground Ruins, Takahashi Transcending Space 49. 2019 Flowers and People - Tokyo, A Interactive Digital Work, 5 channels, Whole Year per Year Endless 50. 2019 Autonomous Resonating Life on Interactive Digital Installation, the Water Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 51. 2019 Megaliths in the Bath House Interactive Digital Installation Ruins 52. 2019 Floating Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Summer Forest at Night LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 53. 2019 Floating Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Fire LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 54. 2019 The Floating Tree Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 55. 2019 Resonating Forest in the Ravine Interactive Digitized Nature, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

48 56. 2019 Continuous Life and Death at the Interactive Digital Installation, Now of Eternity, Cannot be Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Controlled but Live Together 57. 2019 Resonating Forest – Shiseido Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Forest Valley at Jewel Changi Hideaki Takahashi, Shiseido (Shown Airport as Figure 3 in this thesis) 58. 2019 Forest and Spiral of Resonating Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Lamps in the Forest - One Stroke, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Hydrangea Takahashi 59. 2019 Weightless Forest of Resonating Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Life - Flattening 3 Colors and 9 Hideaki Takahashi Blurred Colors 60. 2019 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Borders, Transcending Space - Hideaki Takahashi Floating Nest 61. 2019 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Azalea LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 62. 2019 Forest and Spiral of Resonating Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Lamps in the Forest - One Stroke, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Azalea Takahashi

63. 2019 Forest and Spiral of Resonating Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Lamps in the Forest - One Stroke, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Cherry Blossoms Takahashi

64. 2019 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Hydrangea LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 65. 2019 Flutter of Butterflies, Born from Interactive Digital Installation, Endless Hands 66. 2019 Four Seasons Kishoza - A Stage Digital Installation, Endless Curtain Spun from Time 67. 2019 Flowers and People in the Tokyo Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Sky – A Whole Year per Hour Hideaki Takahashi 68. 2019 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Spring Mountain Fields LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 69. 2019 Continuous Life in a Beautiful Interactive Digital installation, World Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 70. 2019 Continuous Life and Death at the Digital Work, 12 channels, Endless Now of Eternity II 71. 2019 Forest and Spiral of Resonating Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Lamps in the Forest - One Stroke, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Spring Mountain Fields Takahashi

49 72. 2019 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Cherry Blossoms LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 73. 2019 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Snow LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 74. 2019 Universe of Water Particles in the Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Tank, Transcending Boundaries Hideaki Takahashi 75. 2019 Black Waves: Lost, Immersed and Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Reborn Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 76. 2019 Enso - Gold Light Digital Work, Single channel, Continuous Loop 77. 2018- Waterfall Droplets, Little Drops Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Cause Large Movement Hideaki Takahashi 78. 2018- Aerial Climbing through a Flock Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: of Colored Birds DAISHI DANCE 79. 2018- Light Forest Three-dimensional Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Bouldering DAISHI DANCE 80. 2018- Multi Jumping Universe Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: DAISHI DANCE 81. 2018- Inverted Globe, Giant Connecting Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Block Town Hideaki Takahashi 82. 2018 The Haze II Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 83. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Digital Installation, Endless Borders, Ephemeral Life Born from People 84. 2018 Forest and Spiral of Resonating Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Lamps in the Forest - One Stroke, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Snow and Winter Camellia Takahashi 85. 2018 Gold Waves - Continuous Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 86. 2018 The Tree of Resonating Colors of Interactive Installation, Endless, H: Life 8000 mm W: 6000 mm D: 6000 mm, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 87. 2018 Flowers Bombing Interactive Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 88. 2018 Reversible Rotation - Continuous, Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Black in White Takahashi

89. 2018 Reversible Rotation - Continuous, Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Cold Light Takahashi 90. 2018 Resisting and Resonating Ovoids: Interactive Installation, Endless, Lost, Immersed and Continuous Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

50 91. 2018 Reversible Rotation - Continuous, Digital Work, 9 channels, Continuous Cold Light Loop 92. 2018 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Ice Cave LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 93. 2018 Waves of Light Digital Work, 4 channels, 6 channels, 8 channels, 12 channels, Continuous Loop 94. 2018 Tea Tree Interactive Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 95. 2018 Waves of Light of Kochi Castle Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 96. 2018 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Autumn Mountain LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

97. 2018 Animals of Flowers, Symbiotic Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Lives in the Stone Wall – Kochi Hideaki Takahashi Castle 98. 2018 Reversible Rotation - Black in Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki White Takahashi

99. 2018 Forest and Spiral of Resonating Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Lamps in the Forest - One Stroke, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Autumn Mountain Takahashi 100. 2018 Graffiti Nature: Lost, Immersed Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: and Reborn Hideaki Takahashi 101. 2018 Forest and Spiral of Resonating Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Lamps in the Forest - One Stroke, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Summer Forest Takahashi

102. 2018 Vortex of Light Particles Digital Installation, Continuous Loop

103. 2018 Resonating Mt. Mifuneyama Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 104. 2018 Living Things of Flowers, Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Symbiotic Lives in the Botanical Hideaki Takahashi Garden 105. 2018 Animals of Flowers, Symbiotic Digital Installation Lives in the Botanical Garden 106. 2018 Waterfall of Light Particles at the Digital Installation Top of an Incline 107. 2018 The Infinite Crystal Universe Interactive Installation of Light Sculpture, LED, Endless, Sound: teamLab

51 108. 2018 Forest and Spiral of Resonating Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Lamps in the Forest - One Stroke LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 109. 2018 The Haze Light Sculpture - Fog 110. 2018 Reversible Rotation - Continuous, Digital Installation, 9 channels Divided, Black in White 111. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Installation of Light Borders in the Crystal World Sculpture, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 112. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Borders, Intersections Create Life Takahashi - 1 Butterfly where 64 Light Rays Cross 113. 2018 Crows are Chased and the Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Chasing Crows are Destined to be Takahashi Chased as well, Transcending Space - Floating Nest 114. 2018 Walk, Walk, Walk: Free Infinity Interactive Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka

115. 2018 Memory of Topography Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 116. 2018 The Way of the Sea, Flying Interactive Digital Installation, Beyond Borders - Colors of Life Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

117. 2018 Flowers - Layered Ultrasubjective Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Space Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka 118. 2018 Wander through the Crystal World Interactive Installation of Light Sculpture, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 119. 2018 Resonating Forest and Interactive Digital Installation, Autonomous Resonating Life - Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Tadasu Forest at Shimogamo Shrine 120. 2018 Enso - Cold Light Digital Work, Single channel, Continuous Loop 121. 2018 Paper Plane Music Airfield n/a 122. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Digital Installation, Endless Borders, Layered Ultrasubjective Space 123. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Digital Installation, Endless Borders, Ephemeral Life born in Au-delà des limites

52 124. 2018 The Way of the Sea in the Interactive Digital Installation, Memory of Topography - Colors Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi of Life 125. 2018 Crows are Chased and the Digital Installation, 4min 20sec, Chasing Crows are Destined to be Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Chased as well, Layered Ultrasubjective Space 126. 2018 Universe of Water Particles on a Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Rock where People Gather Hideaki Takahashi (Shown as Figure 6 in this thesis) 127. 2018 Weightless Forest of Resonating Interactive Digital Installation, Life Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 128. 2018 Spirits of the Flowers Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 129. 2018 Universe of Water Particles on Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Au-delà des limites Hideaki Takahashi 130. 2018 Born From the Darkness a Sisyu + teamLab, Interactive Digital Loving, and Beautiful World Installation, Endless, Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

131. 2018 Forest of Autonomous Resonating Interactive Installation, Endless, Life Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 132. 2018 Impermanent Life: People Create Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Space and Time, at the Hideaki Takahashi Confluence of their Spacetime New Space and Time is Born 133. 2018 The Way of the Sea in the Crystal Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: World Hideaki Takahashi 134. 2018 Walk, Walk, Walk: Search, Interactive Digital Installation, Deviate, Reunite Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka 135. 2018 Impermanent Life, at the Digital Work, 4 channels, Continuous Confluence of Spacetime New Loop Space and Time is Born 136. 2018 The Way of the Sea, Transcending Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Space - Gold Light, the Nest Hideaki Takahashi 137. 2018 Animals of Flowers, Symbiotic Interactive Digital Installation, Lives - Layered Ultrasubjective Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Space 138. 2018 Crows are Chased and the Interactive Digital Installation, Chasing Crows are Destined to be Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Chased as well, Flying Beyond Borders 139. 2018 Future Park Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Sketch Airplane Kenta Matsukuma

53 140. 2018 The Way of the Sea, Transcending Interactive Digital Installation, Space - Colors of Life Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 141. 2018 Expanding Three-Dimensional Interactive Installation, Endless, Existence in Transforming Space - Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Flattening 3 Colors and 9 Blurred Colors, Free Floating 142. 2018 Abstract and Concrete - Forest Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Entrance Hideaki Takahashi 143. 2017 Universe of Water Particles on a Digitized Nature Sacred Rock 144. 2017 Floating, Resonating Spheres - Interactive Installation, Endless, Omura Shrine Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 145. 2017 Resonating Forest and Castle Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Ruins - Kushimazaki Tree Flora Hideaki Takahashi

146. 2017 Resonating Forest and Sculpture Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 147. 2017 Lotus Elephant Digital Work, single channel, Randomized video loop, 3 sequences, 5 min 20 sec, each 148. 2017 Peony Peacock Digital Work, single channel, Randomized video loop, 3 sequences, 5 min 20 sec, each 149. 2017 Sunflower Phoenix Digital Work, single channel, Randomized video loop, 3 sequences, 5 min 20 sec, each 150. 2017 Chrysanthemum Tiger Digital Work, single channel, Randomized video loop, 3 sequences, 5 min 20 sec, each 151. 2017 Life is Continuous Light - Azalea Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Valley Hideaki Takahashi 152. 2017 - Giant Connecting Block Town Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 153. 2017 - Play! Programming for Geniuses Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, SCRAMBLES 154. 2017 - Graffiti Nature - Still Mountains Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: and Movable Lakes Hideaki Takahashi

155. 2017 - Sketch Kusaji Odori Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 156. 2017 - A Musical Wall where Little Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: People Live teamLab 157. 2017 - Graffiti Nature - Living in the Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Ruins of a Bathhouse, Red List Hideaki Takahashi 158. 2017 Forest of Flowers and People: Interactive Digital Installation, Lost, Immersed and Reborn Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

54 159. 2017 teamLab Ball on the Sea Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: teamLab 160. 2017 Strokes of Life Interactive Digital Installation + Light Sculpture, 4 min 6 sec, H: 19800 mm W: 15000 mm D: 15000 mm, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 161. 2017 Nature’s Rhythm Interactive Digital Installation + Light Sculpture, Endless, H: 19800 mm W: 15000 mm D: 15000 mm, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 162. 2017 Strokes of Life - Birthday / Interactive Digital Installation + Light Anniversary / Marriage Proposal Sculpture, Happy Birthday:1 min 22 sec, Happy Anniversary / Will You Marry Me?: 1 min 44 sec, H: 19800 mm W: 15000 mm D: 15000 mm, Sound: DAISHI DANCE 163. 2017 Serpenti Sparkle teamLab, 2017, Interactive Light Sculpture, LED, Endless 164. 2017 Resisting and Resonating Ovoids Interactive Digital Installation, and Trees and Breathing Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Resonating Stone Wall - Fukuoka Castle Ruins 165. 2017 Spatial Calligraphy in a Stone Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Wall - Fukuoka Castle Ruins Takahashi 166. 2017 Universe of Water Particles on the Digital Installation, LED, Endless, H: Living Wall - Gold 11810 mm W: 1920 mm, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 167. 2017 Floating, Resonating Spheres on Interactive Digital Installation, the Sea - Chura Sun Beach Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 168. 2017 Resonating Botanical Garden Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 169. 2017 Floating in the Falling Universe of Digital Installation, 10min, Sound: Words - Immersive Room Hideaki Takahashi

170. 2017 Continuous Life and Death at the Digital Work, 9 channels, Endless Now of Eternity 171. 2017 Enso in the Qing Dynasty Wall Digital Work, 18min 30sec (loop)

172. 2017 Autonomous Resonating Life Interactive Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 173. 2017 Life is the Light that Resonates in Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: the Dark Hideaki Takahashi 174. 2017 Graffiti Nature - Living in the Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Botanical Garden Hideaki Takahashi

55 175. 2017 WASO Tea House - Flowers Interactive Digital Installation, Bloom in an Infinite Universe Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi inside a Teacup 176. 2017 Ever Blossoming Life Rock Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 177. 2017 Rock Wall Spatial Calligraphy, Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Continuous Life - Five Hundred Takahashi Arhats 178. 2017 Memory of Continuous Life Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 179. 2017 Sea of Rocks of Oblivion Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 180. 2017 Cut out Continuous Life - Forest Digitized Nature Canopy 181. 2017 People, Resonating Trees and Interactive Light Sculpture, LED, Crystal Fireworks Digitized Nature, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, teamLab 182. 2017 Floating in the Falling Universe of Sisyu + teamLab, Digital Words Installation(ø16m), 10min, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 183. 2017 Crows are Chased and the Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Chasing Crows are Destined to be Takahashi Chased as well, Life on Collision - 1 Crow where 16 Light Rays Cross 184. 2017 Crows are Chased and the Interactive Digital Installation, 4min Chasing Crows are Destined to be 20sec, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Chased as well, Transcending Space 185. 2017 Universe of Water Particles on Interactive Digital Installation, H: Bunkanomori Park 10500 mm W: 10000mm D: 5000mm, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 186. 2017 An Office Where Animals Live n/a 187. 2017 The Way of Birds - Seated Interactive Digital Installation, Contemplation Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 188. 2017 Universe of Water Particles on the Digital Installation, LED, Endless, H: Living Wall 11810 mm W: 1920 mm 189. 2017 Gold Waves Digital Work, 4 channels, 6 channels, 8 channels and 12 channels, Continuous Loop 190. 2017 Sound Ritual Interactive Light Sculpture - Line ＋ Co-Creative Music, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 191. 2017 Sound Shapes Interactive Light Sculpture - Line ＋ Co-Creative Music, Sound: The Puh

56 192. 2017 Moving Creates Vortices and Interactive Digital Installation, Vortices Create Movement Endless, Sound: teamLab 193. 2017 Cut out Continuous Life - Forest Digitized Nature Path 194. 2017 Animals of Flowers, Symbiotic Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Lives Hideaki Takahashi 195. 2017 Flowers and People, Cannot be Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Controlled but Live Together - Hideaki Takahashi Transcending Boundaries, A Whole Year per Hour 196. 2017 Impermanent Life Digital Work, 4 channels, 10 min (loop) 197. 2017 Impermanent Life Digital Work, Single channel, 10 min (loop) 198. 2017 Flowers Bloom on People Digitized Nature, Endless 199. 2017 Enso Digital Work, Single channel, 18min 30sec (loop) 200. 2017 Universe of Water Particles, Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Transcending Boundaries Hideaki Takahashi

201. 2017 Animals of Flowers, Symbiotic Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Lives in the Stone Wall - Fukuoka Hideaki Takahashi Castle Tower Ruins 202. 2017 Resonating Forest - Cherry Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Blossoms and Maple Hideaki Takahashi 203. 2017 Light Shell Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 204. 2017 Split Rock and Enso Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 205. 2017 Resonating Trees and Interactive Digital Installation, Autonomous Resonating Life Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 206. 2016 - Floating in the Falling Universe of Interactive Digital Installation, 2018 Flowers Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 207. 2016 - Drawing on the Water Surface Interactive Digital Installation, 2018 Created by the Dance of Koi and Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi People - Infinity 208. 2016 - Soft Black Hole - Your Body Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 2018 Becomes a Space that Influences Another Body 209. 2016 - Ever Blossoming Life Waterfall - Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki 2017 Deep in the Mountains of Shikoku Takahashi 210. 2016 - Waterfall of Light Particles - Deep Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki 2017 in the Mountains of Shikoku Takahashi

57 211. 2016 - Flowers Bloom on the Waterfall - Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki 2017 Deep in the Mountains of Shikoku Takahashi 212. 2016 - Graffiti Nature - High Mountains Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: and Deep Valleys Hideaki Takahashi 213. 2016 - Sliding through the Fruit Field Interactive Digital Installation 214. 2016 - Graffiti Nature - Mountains and Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Valleys Hideaki Takahashi 215. 2016 - Connecting! Block Town Interactive Digital Installation, Wooden blocks, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 216. 2016 - Graffiti Nature Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 217. 2016 Sketch Animals Papercraft Paper 218. 2016 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 219. 2016 What a Loving, and Beautiful Interactive Digital Installation, World - ArtScience Museum Endless, Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 220. 2016 Light Vortex Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 221. 2016 Light Cave Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 222. 2016 Spatial Calligraphy: Line, Space, Digital Installation, 3min Overlap, Continuous and Uncontinuous, 2 sets of 5 screens - Gold and Silver in White 223. 2016 Circulum Formosa II Interactive Digital Installation + Light Sculpture, LED, Endless, H: 14700mm W: 17200mm D: 16865mm, Concept design, production and execution supervisor: DEM inc. 224. 2016 Resonating Trees – Forest of Interactive Digitized Nature, Endless, Tadasu at Shimogamo Shrine Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 225. 2016 BACARDÍ Jungle Bar n/a 226. 2016 Light Chords Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 227. 2016 Message Pillar Interactive Digital Installation, H: 4000mm 228. 2016 Sparkling Dream Tree by teamLab Interactive Digital Work, Endless

229. 2016 Black Waves, 2 sets of 5 screens Digital Installation, Continuous Loop

230. 2016 Dark Waves Digital Work, 4 channels, 6 channels, 8 channels and 12 channels, Continuous Loop

58 231. 2016 Sparkling Dream Tree by teamLab Interactive Digital Work, Endless 232. 2016 Black Waves, 2 sets of 5 screens Digital Installation, Continuous Loop

233. 2016 Dark Waves Digital Work, 4 channels, 6 channels, 8 channels and 12 channels, Continuous Loop 234. 2016 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Digital Installation, Borders, Ephemeral Life Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 235. 2016 Enso / Mugenso Digital Work, Single channel, Endless 236. 2016 Story of the Forest Interactive Digital installation, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 237. 2016 Floating, Resonating Spheres - Interactive Installation, Endless, Shinobazu Pond Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 238. 2016 Flowers Bloom under the Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Waterfall in the Gorge ― Ōboke Takahashi Koboke 239. 2016 Interactive Magnetic Field Theater Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: by teamLab Kengo Tokusashi 240. 2016 Universe of Water Particles – Digital Work, 5 channels, Continuous Gold Loop

241. 2016 Flowers in the Sandfall - Interactive Digital Installation, LED, Tokushima Endless, H: 5210 mm W: 1280 mm D: 160mm 242. 2016 Digital Provence Theater by Sound: Hideaki Takahashi teamLab 243. 2016 teamLab Lamps Interactive Lamp, Murano Glass, LED 244. 2016 Forest of Resonating Lamps - One Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, Stroke, Metropolis LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 245. 2016 Shimmering River of Resonating Interactive Installation, Endless, Spheres Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 246. 2016 Resonating Forest in the Castle Interactive Digitized Nature, Endless, Ruins Mountain Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 247. 2016 Dancing People Hidden among Digital Installation Flowers, 2 sets of 5 screens 248. 2016 Wander through the Crystal Interactive Installation of Light Universe Sculpture, LED, Endless, Sound: teamLab 249. 2016 Sketch Smart Town Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 250. 2016 Time-blossoming Flowers Digital Work, Endless 251. 2016 Flowers Bloom in an Infinite Interactive Digital Installation, Universe inside a Teacup Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

59 252. 2016 Flowers Bloom on People - work Digitized Nature, Endless in progress 253. 2016 Spatial Calligraphy, Infinity Circle Digital Work, endless 254. 2016 Floating, Resonating Spheres - Interactive Installation, Endless, Shimogamo Shrine Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 255. 2016 Flowers and People, 2 sets of 5 Digital Installation screens - Gold and Dark 256. 2016 Water Spatial Calligraphy: Line Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki and Koi - Fountains of Bellagio Takahashi (Shown as Figure 2 in this thesis) 257. 2016 teamLab Interactive Fishing Party: Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Spin your "GURU GURU Fishing Takahashi Reel" - The Fountains of Bellagio 258. 2016 Resonating Forest Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 259. 2016 Flutter of Butterflies and Cherry Digital Installation, 3min Blossoms in Hemp Ornament, 2 sets of 5 screens 260. 2016 Music Festival, teamLab Jungle n/a 261. 2016 The Tale of the Heike [n/a] Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Waterscreen Scrolls: Genpei Hideaki Takahashi, Biwa, Narration： Yashima Battle - Fountains of Yoshiko Sakata Bellagio 262. 2016 Black Waves Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 263. 2016 Crows are Chased and the Interactive Digital Installation, 4min Chasing Crows are Destined to be 20sec, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Chased as well, Blossoming on Collision - Light in Space 264. 2016 Flowers and People on the Water - Interactive Digital Installation, Spring of Herbal Flowers Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 265. 2016 Ever Blossoming Life II - A Digital Work, 4 channels, Endless Whole Year per Hour, Gold 266. 2016 Ever Blossoming Life II - A Digital Work, 4 channels, Endless Whole Year per Year, Dark 267. 2016 Ever Blossoming Life II - A Digital Work, 4 channels, Endless Whole Year per Year, Gold 268. 2016 Black Waves in Infinity Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 269. 2016 Flowers and People, Cannot be Interactive Digital Installation, Controlled but Live Together – A Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Whole Year per Year 270. 2016 The Void Digital Work, 4 channels 271. 2016 Spatial Calligraphy: Line, Space, Digital Installation, 3 min (loop) Overlap, Continuous and

60 Uncontinuous, 2 sets of 5 screens - Black in White 272. 2016 Light Sculpture of Flames Interactive Light Sculpture, Endless, H: 2500 mm, W: 2500 mm, D: 2500 mm, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 273. 2016 Black Waves Digital Work, Single channel, 4 channels, 6 channels, 8 channels and 12 channels, Continuous Loop 274. 2016 Circle, Infinity Circle - VR Interactive VR Installation, Endless 275. 2016 Ever Blossoming Life II – A Digital Work, 4 channels, Endless Whole Year per Hour, Dark 276. 2016 Four Seasons, a 1000 Years, Digital Work, 6 channels, 1000 years Terraced Rice Fields - Tashibunosho 277. 2015 - Sketch Animals Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 278. 2015 - Sketch People & Animals Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 279. 2015 - Sketch Town Papercraft Paper 280. 2015 - Sketch Piston - Playing Music n/a

281. 2015 - Create! Hopscotch for Geniuses Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: teamLab 282. 2015 Drawing on the Water Surface Interactive Digitized Nature, 13min Created by the Dance of Koi and 24sec, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Boats – Mifuneyama Rakuen Pond 283. 2015 Worlds Unleashed and then Interactive Digital Installation, Connecting Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 284. 2015 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Digital Installation, Endless Borders 285. 2015 Flowers and People, Cannot be Interactive Digital Installation, Controlled but Live Together – A Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Whole Year per Hour 286. 2015 HARMONY, Japan Pavilion, Interactive Digital Installation, 6 min, Expo Milano 2015 Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 287. 2015 Crystal Universe Interactive Installation of Light Sculpture, LED, Endless, Sound: teamLab 288. 2015 Flowers and People – Dark Interactive Digital Work, 3–8 channels, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 289. 2015 Dancing People 8 Screens Interactive Digital Installation, 6min (loop), Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 290. 2015 Light Wave Canal Interactive Digitized City, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

61 291. 2015 Interactive Ocean Bar Interactive Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: teamLab 292. 2015 Spatial Calligraphy: Line, Fish, Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki and Shinkai2000 Takahashi 293. 2015 Flowers in the Sandfall - Time Interactive Digital Installation, Endless

294. 2015 Ieyasu and teamLab: Night Sumpu Interactive Installation, Endless, Castle Ruins and Tower of Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Floating Light 295. 2015 Floating, Resonating Spheres Interactive Installation, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 296. 2015 Resonating Spheres and Night Interactive Installation, Endless, Fish Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 297. 2015 Small Resonating Sea Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: 298. 2015 Flowers and Fish- Enoshima Interactive Digitized City, Endless, Aquarium Big Sagami Bay Tank Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 299. 2015 KABUKI Spectacle at n/a (Shown as Figure 2 in this thesis) FOUNTAINS OF BELLAGIO Koi-Tsukami "Fight with a Carp" 300. 2015 Universe of Water Particles on the Digitized City, 20min, H: 18000mm Grand Palais W: 60000mm, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 301. 2015 DIVERSITY, Japan Pavilion, Interactive Digital Installation, Expo Milano Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 302. 2015 Falling Universe of Flowers Digital installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 303. 2015 Floating Flower Garden; Flowers Interactive Kinetic Installation, and I are of the same root, the Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Garden and I are one 304. 2015 Flowers and People, Cannot be Interactive Digital Installation, Controlled but Live Together – Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Dark 305. 2015 Worlds Unleashed and then Interactive Digital Installation, Connecting - Arita Ware Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 306. 2015 Flowers and People – Gold Interactive Digital Work, 3–8 channels, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 307. 2015 Worlds Unleashed and then Interactive Digital Installation, Connecting Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 308. 2014 - A blackboard where Little People Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Live teamLab 309. 2014 - Sketch Town Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 310. 2014 - Sketch Christmas Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

62 311. 2014 - Sketch People Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 312. 2014 - teamLab Crystal Fireworks Interactive Installation of Light Sculpture, LED, Endless, Sound: teamLab 313. 2014 - Step onto the Endless Runway – n/a 2015 GUCCI Fall/Winter 2014-2015 Collection 314. 2014 Infinity of Dancing People on the Interactive Digital Installation, Wayside Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka 315. 2014 Circulum Formosa Interactive Digital Installation + Light Sculpture, LED, Endless, H: 14700mm W: 17200mm D: 3840mm, Concept design, production and execution supervisor: DEM inc. 316. 2014 Flowers and People, Cannot be Interactive Digital Installation, Controlled but Live Together, for Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Eternity – Tokyo 317. 2014 Sketch Town Sisyu + teamLab, Interactive Digital Story of the time when the Gods Installation, Endless, Calligraphy: First Descended Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 318. 2014 teamLabStudio Spatial Painting! n/a 319. 2014 pixiv Canteen n/a 320. 2014 pixiv's Great Big Animated n/a Sketch Stage in the Sky 321. 2014 The light orchestra with Pepper n/a 322. 2014 Flowers and People – Gold and Interactive digital installation, Sound: Dark Hideaki Takahashi 323. 2014 Future Arita porcelain cafe Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 324. 2014 Resonating Trees Interactive Digitized Nature, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 325. 2014 Infinity of Flowers Interactive digital installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 326. 2014 Entrance Wall n/a 327. 2014 Mirror Cube n/a 328. 2014 Sketch Wall n/a 329. 2014 teamLab & Kagawa Rally: Spin Sound: Hideaki Takahashi your reel round 'n' round and haul in a fish from the Inland Sea! 330. 2014 Universe of Water Particles under Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Satellite’s Gravity – Gold H: 19000 mm 331. 2014 teamLab 360°studio n/a

63 332. 2014 Flowers and People, Cannot be Interactive Digital Installation, Controlled but Live Together – Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Kunisaki Peninsula 333. 2014 A downpour of words, a dance of Shishu + teamLab, Digital Installation, flowers-summer Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 334. 2014 Water Spatial Calligraphy: Beauty Calligraphy: Sisyu Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 335. 2014 Universe of Water Particles under Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Satellite’s Gravity H: 19000 mm 336. 2014 3D Printing of Kawasaki City: A n/a Smart City's Interactive Landscape 337. 2014 The Tale of the Heike waterscreen Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki scrolls: Genpei Yashima battle - Takahashi, Biwa, Narration：Yoshiko Seto Inland Sea Sakata 338. 2014 Vortex of Water Particles Digital Work 339. 2014 The Dancing People on the Interactive Digital Installation Wayside (work in progress) 340. 2014 The Land of Peace and Bliss Digital Work, 6 channels, 10 min 30 sec (loop), Sound: AO Shigetake, Supervising Director: Seigo Matsuoka 341. 2014 The Dancing Person in the Library Digital Installation 342. 2014 Crows are Chased and the Digital Work, 5 channels, 4 min 20 sec Chasing Crows are Destined to be (loop), Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Chased as well – Black in White 343. 2014 Cold Life Digital Work, 7 min 15 sec. (loop), Calligraphy: Sisyu 344. 2014 Crows are chased and the chasing Digital Installation, 7 channels, 4 min crows are destined to be chased as 20 sec (loop), Sound: Hideaki well, Division in Perspective – Takahashi Light in Dark 345. 2014 Ever Blossoming Life – Dark Digital Work, Endless 346. 2014 Ever Blossoming Life – Gold Digital Work, Endless 347. 2014 Time-blossoming Flowers Digital Work 348. 2013 - Sketch Aquarium Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 349. 2013 - Connecting! Train Block Interactive Digital Installation, Wooden blocks, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 350. 2013 - Hopscotch for Geniuses Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 351. 2013 - Story of the Time when Gods Sisyu + teamLab, Interactive Digital were Everywhere Installation, Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 352. 2013 - A Table where Little People Live Interactive Digital Installation

64 353. 2013 - Light Ball Orchestra Interactive Installation, Sound: teamLab 354. 2013 - teamLab Crystal Tree Interactive Installation of Light Sculpture, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 355. 2013 - Peace can be Realized Even Interactive Digital Installation, 2018 without Order Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka 356. 2013 Nirvana Digital Work, 8 channels, 6 min 20 sec. (loop) 357. 2013 teamLabDisplayBase n/a 358. 2013 The Waterfall on Audi R8 Digital Installation, 4min, H: 16000mm 359. 2013 Homogenizing and Transforming Interactive Installation, Endless, World Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 360. 2013 teamLabStudio n/a 361. n/a LinkedCandle n/a 362. 2013 Interactive 4D Vision n/a 363. 2013 The Waterfall on Saga Castle Digital Installation, 3min, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 364. 2013 100 Years Sea - Saga Castle Digital Installation, 10min, Sound: Version Hideaki Takahashi 365. 2013 Interactive Projection Mapping at Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Saga Castle! Hop, Step Jump! Kengo Tokusashi teamLabTrampolineCannon！ 366. 2013 Sefuri ILC High school! n/a 367. 2013 Demi Voo Beach by teamLab Digital Signage 368. 2013 Universe of Water Particles Digital Work, 5 channels, Continuous Loop 369. 2013 United, Fragmented, Repeated and Interactive Digital Work, Endless, 8 Impermanent World channels, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 370. 2013 teamLabBody Kazuomi Sugamoto (Orthopedist, Professor of Osaka University) + teamLab, 2013, Application 371. 2012 - Media Block Chair Interactive Installation 372. 2012 Flower and Corpse Set of 12 12 channels, Digital Work, 1min 25sec (loop) 373. 2012 koi on Clouds Digitized Nature 374. 2012 Flutter of Light Birds in the Forest Digitized Nature 375. 2012 Graffiti @ Clouds Digitized Nature 376. 2012 DLabHook n/a 377. 2012 Nirvana – Dome Version Digital Work, 6min 10sec (Φ30m), Sound: [SHIIYA Haleo (Sound

65 Director) + AO Shigetake (Sound creator)] 378. 2012 Spirit Waterfall Sisyu + teamLab, Interactive Digital Installation, Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 379. 2012 Flower and Corpse Glitch Digital Work, 19min 25sec (loop) 380. 2012 Play with Onitsuka Tiger by 50sec teamLab＠KITH BROOKLYN 381. 2012 Real Sketch Piston × Animation, Interactive Installation teamLabCamera for paryco 382. 2012 teamLabSocialInstrument n/a

383. 2012 100 Years Sea Animation Digital Installation, 10min, Diorama - Cyclorama Φ12000mm, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 384. 2012 Flowers are Crimson – Cyclorama Digital Installation, 10min 20sec (Φ12m), Sound: Tsukasa Yamaguchi & Yukihito Endo, Bamboo Flute: Yutaro Nagao 385. 2012 Peace can be Realized Even Interactive Digital Installation, without Order - Diorama Smartphones, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Voice: Yutaka Fukuoka 386. 2012 Flower and Corpse Glitch Set of 12 channels, Digital Work, 2 min 12 (loop)

387. 2012 100 Years Sea Animation Digital Installation, 1min 30sec (12:1 Diorama – Media Poles Version ×12), Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

388. 2012 Play with Onitsuka Tiger by 58sec teamLab＠Onitsuka Tiger Omotesando 389. 2012 NHK Sports Japan teamLab, NHK, Sports Japan, opening Animation, 40sec, Dance/Choreography; Kastumi Sakakura NHK WORLD “Sports Japan” opening Animation (c) teamLab/NHK 390. 2012 SHANGHAI RUNWAY 2012 n/a SPRING / SUMMER earth music&ecology Fashion show 391. 2012 Street Fighter x teamLab Ultra- Poster, B1 (728mm × 1030mm) high information content Poster ©CAPCOM U.S.A., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

66 392. 2012 The TOKYO SKYTREE mural Digital Work + High-performance Inkjet on Wall, H: 3000 mm W: 40000 mm 393. 2012 Graffiti@Google Online Project, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 394. 2011 - Digitized Cafe n/a 395. 2011 What a Loving, and Beautiful Sisyu + teamLab, Interactive Digital World Installation, Endless, Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 396. 2011 Spatial Calligraphy bi – Dome Digital Installation, 33sec (Φ30m), Version Calligraphy: Sisyu 397. 2011 AYABIE 『Ryusei』 MV Music Video, 5min 54sec 398. 2011 What a Loving, and Beautiful Sisyu + teamLab, Interactive Digital World Installation, Endless, Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 399. 2011 Spatial Calligraphy bi – Dome Digital Installation, 33sec (Φ30m), Version Calligraphy: Sisyu 400. 2011 AYABIE 『Ryusei』 MV Music Video, 5min 54sec 401. 2011 Life Survives by the Power of Life Digital Work, 6 min 23 sec. (loop), Calligraphy: Sisyu 402. 2011 Life is the light that shines in the Digital Work, 1600 x 1200 pixels, darkness 3min 15sec(loop), Calligraphy: Sisyu

403. 2011 Flower and Corpse triple channel Animation, 12min 28sec (16:9 × 3) 404. 2011 Taichi Saotome and teamLab, Animation, 2min 32sec, Produce: Special New Year Performance of UBON, Cooperation: SJK Dragon and Peony, Sword Dance and Shadowgraph. 405. 2010 - teamLabCamera Interactive Installation 406. 2010 - teamLabHanger Interactive Hanger 407. 2010 teamLabOximeter Interactive installation, Cooperation: YUKAI Engineering Nobukazu Kuriki + teamLab, Live Performance and installation 2012 (in planning). 408. 2010 Block Chair Chair 409. 2010 Spatial Calligraphy APEC Japan Digital Work, 4min 20sec, 2010 Calligraphy: Sisyu 410. 2010 Animation installation for iida on Installation 66 displays 411. 2010 Spatial Calligraphy Cool Japan Digital Work, 43sec (Φ30m), Animation Logo Calligraphy: Sisyu

412. 2010 DIGITAL SHOW WINDOW n/a system 413. 2009 - Sketch Piston Web

67 414. 2009 100 Years Sea Animation Digital Installation, 10min 00sec, Diorama Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 415. 2009 100 Years Sea Animation Digital Installation, 10 min, Sound: Diorama - Dome Version Hideaki Takahashi 416. 2009 100 Years Sea Animation Digital Installation, 10min 00sec, Diorama Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 417. 2009 100 Years Sea Animation Digital Installation, 10 min, Sound: Diorama - Dome Version Hideaki Takahashi 418. 2009 teamLabBall Interactive Ball 419. 2009 100 Years Sea [running time: 100 Digital Work, 5 channels, 100 years years] 420. 2008 Spatial Calligraphy: 12 Hanging Digital Installation, LED, 4 min 17 sec Scrolls of Light (loop), H: 2700 mm, Sound: Sound: Yuji Katsui (Electric Violin) 421. 2008 Spatial Calligraphy: 12 Hanging Digital Installation, LED, 4 min 17 sec Scrolls of Light (loop), H: 2700 mm, Sound: Sound: Yuji Katsui (Electric Violin) 422. 2008 Flower and Corpse Animation Digital Installation, LED, 12 channels, Diorama 12 min 28 sec (loop), H: 2700 mm, Sound: Haleo Shiiya (Sound Director) + Shigetake Ao (Compose & Mixing & Recording) + Keiichiro Shibuya (The third term music) + Fuyuki Yamakawa (Khoomei) + Shuri (Voice) + Tomoko Takeda (Shinobue) + Tetsuro Naito (Wadaiko) + Koyasan Shingon Buddhism Sohonzan Kongobuji, Koyasan Wakayama (Field REC)

423. 2008 Spatial Calligraphy kansei 12 Digital Work, 1min 40sec Hanging Scrolls of Light 424. 2008 eyes on you Installation 425. 2007 Last Days Music Video, 6min 25sec, Sound: Shinichi Osawa 426. 2007 Spatial Calligraphy KAKERU Digital Work, 1min 45sec, Calligraphy: Yozan Ohashi 427. 2007 Spatial Calligraphy: Line and Digital Work,1min 54sec Carp 428. 2006 TOKYO EMAKI n/a 429. 2006 TOKYO EMAKI TANA Shelf 430. 2005 Shigemi Curtain Curtain 431. 2005 UTSUROIRO Digital Work, 2min 58sec 432. 2005 Flowers are Crimson Digital Work, 10min 20sec, Sound: Tsukasa Yamaguchi & Yukihito Endo, Bamboo Flute: Yutaro Nagao

68 433. 2005 MEMODESK Desk 434. 2004 Flowers are Crimson – Dome Digital Installation, 11min 1sec Version (Φ30m), Sound: Tsukasa Yamaguchi & Yukihito Endo, Bamboo Flute: Yutaro Nagao 435. 2004 ONE WORLD CLOCK teamLab, Clock 436. 2002 Ginza Firefly Digitized Nature 437. 2001 Message Tree Interactive Digital Installation (Shown as Figure 1 in this thesis) 438. n/a MicroAd Big data n/a 439. n/a FaceTouch Software 440. n/a teamLab TOKYO Lab n/a 441. n/a Flower and Corpse (Sound Director) + Shigetake Ao (Compose & Mixing & Recording) + Keiichiro Shibuya (The third term music) + Fuyuki Yamakawa (Khoomei) + Shuri (Voice) + Tomoko Takeda (Shinobue) + Tetsuro Naito (Wadaiko) + Koyasan Shingon Buddhism Sohonzan Kongobuji, Koyasan Wakayama (Field REC) 442. n/a teamlab Shanghai n/a 443. n/a OSAKA GAS Research Institute n/a of Behavior Observation

69 Appendix B: Artwork at teamLab Borderless Tokyo

Numbering and chronological ordering (from the most recent) are by the author. Dates, artwork titles, medium and categories are drawn from https://borderless.teamlab.art/, accessed May 26,

2020.

No. Year Title Medium Category 1: Borderless World 1. 2019 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Borders, Transcending Space - Hideaki Takahashi Floating Nest 2. 2019 Sharing Rock Mass, Interactive Digital Installation Transcending Space 3. 2018 Universe of Water Particles on Interactive Digital Installation a Rock where People Gather 4. 2018 Walk, Walk, Walk: Free Interactive Digital Installation, Infinity Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka 5. 2018 The Way of the Sea, Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Transcending Space - Gold Hideaki Takahashi Light, Floating Nest 6. 2018 Wander through the Crystal Interactive Installation of Light World Sculpture, LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 7. 2018 Memory of Topography Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 8. 2018 Animals of Flowers Born in Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: the Flower Forest, Symbiotic Hideaki Takahashi Lives 9. 2018 Born From the Darkness a Sisyu + teamLab, 2018, Interactive Loving, and Beautiful World Digital Installation, Endless, Calligraphy: Sisyu, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 10. 2018 The Way of the Sea, Interactive Digital Installation, Transcending Space - Colors Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi of Life 11. 2018 Forest of Flowers and People: Interactive Digital Installation, Lost, Immersed and Reborn Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 12. 2018 Crows are Chased and the Interactive Digital Installation, Chasing Crows are Destined to Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi be Chased as well, Flying Beyond Borders

70 13. 2018 The Way of the Sea, Flying Interactive Digital Installation, Beyond Borders - Colors of Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Life 14. 2018 The Way of the Sea in the Interactive Digital Installation, Memory of Topography - Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Colors of Life 15. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Installation of Light Sculpture, LED, Borders in the Crystal World Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 16. 2018 The Way of the Sea in the Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Crystal World Hideaki Takahashi 17. 2018 Peace can be Realized Even Interactive Digital Installation, without Order Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka 18. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Digital Installation, Borders, Ephemeral Life Born Endless from People 19. 2018 Crows are Chased and the Digital Installation, 4min 20sec, Chasing Crows are Destined to Sound: Hideaki Takahashi be Chased as well, Layered Ultrasubjective Space 20. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Interactive Digital Installation, Borders in Layered Endless Ultrasubjective Space 21. 2018 Crows are Chased and the Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Chasing Crows are Destined to Takahashi be Chased as well, Transcending Space - Floating Nest 22. 2018 Animals of Flowers, Symbiotic Interactive Digital Installation, Lives in Layered Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Ultrasubjective Space 23. 2018 Flowers - Layered Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Ultrasubjective Space Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka 24. 2018 Flowers Bombing Digital Installation, Endless 25. 2018 Walk, Walk, Walk: Search, Interactive Digital Installation, Deviate, Reunite Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, Voices: Yutaka Fukuoka, Yumiko Tanaka 26. 2018 Red People in the Blue Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 27. 2018 Aurora Lights II Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 28. 2018 The Haze Light Sculpture - Fog, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

71 29. 2018 Grid Spaces Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 30. 2018 Descent of the Gods Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 31. 2018 Light Shell II Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 32. 2018 Light Vortex II Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahash 33. 2018 Light Evaporating with People Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 34. 2018 Crows are Chased and the Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Chasing Crows are Destined to Hideaki Takahashi be Chased as well, Intersections Create Life - 1 Crow where 16 Light Rays Cross 35. 2018 Flutter of Butterflies Beyond Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Borders, Intersections Create Hideaki Takahashi Life - 1 Butterfly where 64 Light Rays Cross 36. 2018 Barrier Light Sculpture - Line, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 37. 2018 Reversible Rotation - Digital Work, 9 channels, Continuous Continuous, Black in White Loop 38. 2018 Impermanent Life, at the Digital Work, 4 channels, Continuous Confluence of Spacetime New Loop Space and Time is Born 39. 2017 Peony Peacock Digital Work, single channel, Randomized video loop, 3 sequences, 5 min 20 sec, each 40. 2017 Chrysanthemum Tiger Digital Work, single channel, Randomized video loop, 3 sequences, 5 min 20 sec, each 41. 2017 Sunflower Phoenix Digital Work, single channel, Randomized video loop, 3 sequences, 5 min 20 sec, each 42. 2017 Lotus Elephant Digital Work, single channel, Randomized video loop, 3 sequences, 5 min 20 sec, each 43. 2017 Crows are Chased and the Interactive Digital Installation, 4min Chasing Crows are Destined to 20sec, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi be Chased as well, Transcending Space

44. 2016 The Void Digital Work, 4 channels

72 45. 2016 Black Waves - Continuous Digital Installation, Continuous Loop, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 46. 2016 Light Cave Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Category 2: Athletics Forest 47. 2018- Multi Jumping Universe Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: DAISHI DANCE 48. 2018- Waterfall Droplets, Little Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Drops Cause Large Movement Hideaki Takahashi 49. 2018- Aerial Climbing through a Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Flock of Colored Birds DAISHI DANCE 50. 2018- Light Forest Three- Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: dimensional Bouldering DAISHI DANCE 51. 2018- Inverted Globe, Giant Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Connecting Block Town Hideaki Takahashi 52. 2018 Weightless Forest of Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Resonating Life Hideaki Takahashi 53. 2016- Graffiti Nature - High Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Mountains and Deep Valleys, Hideaki Takahashi Red List Category 3: Future Park 54. 2017- A Musical Wall where Little n/a People Live

55. 2016- Sliding through the Fruit Field Interactive Digital Installation 56. 2013- Sketch Aquarium Interactive Digital Installation, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi, teamLab 57. 2013- A Table where Little People Interactive Digital Installation Live Category 4: Forest of Lamps 58. 2016 Forest of Resonating Lamps - Interactive Installation, Murano Glass, One Stroke, Fire LED, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi Category 5: En Tea House 59. 2019 Enso - Gold Light Digital Work, Single channel, Continuous Loop 60. 2018 Tea Tree Interactive Digital Installation, Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi 61. 2016 Flowers Bloom in an Infinite Interactive Digital Installation, Universe inside a Teacup Endless, Sound: Hideaki Takahashi

73