BIO
Curt Cloninger is an artist, writer, and Associate Professor of New Media at the University of North Carolina Asheville. His art undermines language as a system of meaning in order to reveal it as an embodied force in the world. His art work has been featured in the New York Times and at festivals and galleries from Korea to Brazil. Exhibition venues include Centre Georges Pompidou (Paris), Granoff Center for The Creative Arts (Brown University), Digital Art Museum [DAM] (Berlin), Ukrainian Institute of Modern Art (Chicago), Black Mountain College Museum + Arts Center, and the internet. He is the recipient of several grants and awards, including commissions for the creation of new artwork from the National Endowment for the Arts (via Turbulence.org) and Austin Peay State University's Terminal Award.
Cloninger has written on a wide range of topics, including new media and internet art, installation and performance art, experimental graphic design, popular music, network culture, and continental philosophy. His articles have appeared in Intelligent Agent, Mute, Paste, Tekka, Rhizome Digest, A List Apart, and on ABC World News. He is also the author of eight books, most recently One Per Year (Link Editions). He maintains lab404.com, playdamage.org , and deepyoung.org in hopes of facilitating a more lively remote dialogue with the Sundry Contagions of Wonder.
Cloninger has written on a wide range of topics, including new media and internet art, installation and performance art, experimental graphic design, popular music, network culture, and continental philosophy. His articles have appeared in Intelligent Agent, Mute, Paste, Tekka, Rhizome Digest, A List Apart, and on ABC World News. He is also the author of eight books, most recently One Per Year (Link Editions). He maintains lab404.com, playdamage.org , and deepyoung.org in hopes of facilitating a more lively remote dialogue with the Sundry Contagions of Wonder.
re: after rhizome?
Fame and net art world domination have been theorized (nay, asserted) as motivating factors for the OUTRAGEOUS $0.014/day tax , but I think Mark is mostly in it for the ladies:
http://www.mteww.com/rhiz_benefit_feb_03/index-Pages/Image37.html
I know this to be so since (presumptuous and absurd as it may seem) I am able see into his true heart from afar, rightly discerning (and revealing to all with itching ears) what drives this man, this MONSTER!!!
your better mousetrap awaits:
http://www.lab404.com/rhizome/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
p. luining wrote:
they could well trigger a new debate on some Rhizome issues, as for example free access for people that have work in the artbase, or issues regarding the Rhizome membership agreement.
http://www.mteww.com/rhiz_benefit_feb_03/index-Pages/Image37.html
I know this to be so since (presumptuous and absurd as it may seem) I am able see into his true heart from afar, rightly discerning (and revealing to all with itching ears) what drives this man, this MONSTER!!!
your better mousetrap awaits:
http://www.lab404.com/rhizome/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
p. luining wrote:
they could well trigger a new debate on some Rhizome issues, as for example free access for people that have work in the artbase, or issues regarding the Rhizome membership agreement.
size does matter
from my referrer logs, 11 march 2003:
325 visitors from http://www.bd4d.com (linked to some old conference pics)
54 visitors from http://www.rhizome.org (linked to the rhizome.rock paradoy)
1 visitor from http://netartreview.net (linked to the rhizome.rock parody)
MARTY: The last time Tap toured America, they were booked into 10,000
seat arenas, and 15,000 seat venues, and it seems that now, on their
current tour they're being booked into 1,200 seat arenas, 1,500 seat
arenas, and I was just wondering, does this mean the popularity of
the group is waning?
IAN: Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no...no, no, not at all. I, I, I just
think that the.. uh.. their appeal is becoming more selective.
_
_
_
325 visitors from http://www.bd4d.com (linked to some old conference pics)
54 visitors from http://www.rhizome.org (linked to the rhizome.rock paradoy)
1 visitor from http://netartreview.net (linked to the rhizome.rock parody)
MARTY: The last time Tap toured America, they were booked into 10,000
seat arenas, and 15,000 seat venues, and it seems that now, on their
current tour they're being booked into 1,200 seat arenas, 1,500 seat
arenas, and I was just wondering, does this mean the popularity of
the group is waning?
IAN: Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no...no, no, not at all. I, I, I just
think that the.. uh.. their appeal is becoming more selective.
_
_
_
Re: rhizome got a brand new bag
as you wish. visit again and check under "community."
Rachel Greene wrote:
>I want to be geezerbutler@rhizome.org in this delightful dimension!!
>
>
> > http://lab404.com/rhizome/
> >
> > if life were only like this.
> >
> > _
> > _
> > _
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
Rachel Greene wrote:
>I want to be geezerbutler@rhizome.org in this delightful dimension!!
>
>
> > http://lab404.com/rhizome/
> >
> > if life were only like this.
> >
> > _
> > _
> > _
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
Re: New Media /Multimedia
Hi Roger,
A lot of it is semantics.
Lev Manovich points out that the term "digital" is pretty much useless as a distinguisher. What today isn't digitizable? So I have The White Album on cassette and CD. The CD is digital art, and the cassette is analog art? That's a facile distinction, just based on the banal technical nature of storage media.
also net art != new media. maybe it's a subset of new media, depending on how you define net art. But there are lots of forms of new media that aren't internet related.
* digital media is media stored digitally (no big deal).
* multimedia is media made up of more than one medium (a movie with a soundtrack is multimedia).
* new media is media that's new. Some would say post-film. Databases, networks, software, and reactive interaction may or may not be involved.
so multimedia (and new media for that matter) may or may not be digital. not all multimedia is new media, and not all new media is multimedia. If you call NN's or Mez Breeze's newslist posts new media (and many would), then they are just text, which is monomedia. Attack of the Clones is digital and multimedia, but I wouldn't call it new media.
"Interactive" to me is also a pretty useless term. Talking to my wife is interactive. Eating food is interactive. Even watching a movie is interactive (I turn up the volume, it gets louder).
"reactive," "autogenerative," "programmable" -- these seem like more specific terms. even "non-linear" is open to a great deal of interpretation. Every web site with more than one link on its home page is non-linear. If I change television channels by punching in #53, then #21 -- that's non-linear.
http://www.afsnitp.dk/onoff/Texts/broggernetart,we.html
might be useful to you.
good luck,
curt
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
roger wrote:
> Hello all
I am currently writing an article on New Media art for a one-off, small publication in New Zealand. I have done a fair amount of research but am still puzzelled by something quite elementry: What distinction (if any) is there between New Media art and Multimedia?
I have identified the current usage of 'New Media' in relation to Multimedia as
-refering to the newest form of digital media- web art.
-closely related to, but not the same as multimedia.
-Developing out of multimedia a short time after the birth of the internet? Sharing a common lineage.
-More than work presented on the web, New Media art is made for the web, providing its primary context.
-emphasising the active role of the viewer/user
If anyone has anything to add, or a reading to point me to I would be grateful. Some texts I have read use New Media and Multimedia interchangably as with other terms such as Digital media, New Medium, Non-linear art, interactive art and web or net art.
I see that saying New Media emerged OUT OF Multimedia is problematic given that Multimedia by definition is interdisciplinary and inclusive...
Thanks
Roger Bymolt
A lot of it is semantics.
Lev Manovich points out that the term "digital" is pretty much useless as a distinguisher. What today isn't digitizable? So I have The White Album on cassette and CD. The CD is digital art, and the cassette is analog art? That's a facile distinction, just based on the banal technical nature of storage media.
also net art != new media. maybe it's a subset of new media, depending on how you define net art. But there are lots of forms of new media that aren't internet related.
* digital media is media stored digitally (no big deal).
* multimedia is media made up of more than one medium (a movie with a soundtrack is multimedia).
* new media is media that's new. Some would say post-film. Databases, networks, software, and reactive interaction may or may not be involved.
so multimedia (and new media for that matter) may or may not be digital. not all multimedia is new media, and not all new media is multimedia. If you call NN's or Mez Breeze's newslist posts new media (and many would), then they are just text, which is monomedia. Attack of the Clones is digital and multimedia, but I wouldn't call it new media.
"Interactive" to me is also a pretty useless term. Talking to my wife is interactive. Eating food is interactive. Even watching a movie is interactive (I turn up the volume, it gets louder).
"reactive," "autogenerative," "programmable" -- these seem like more specific terms. even "non-linear" is open to a great deal of interpretation. Every web site with more than one link on its home page is non-linear. If I change television channels by punching in #53, then #21 -- that's non-linear.
http://www.afsnitp.dk/onoff/Texts/broggernetart,we.html
might be useful to you.
good luck,
curt
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
roger wrote:
> Hello all
I am currently writing an article on New Media art for a one-off, small publication in New Zealand. I have done a fair amount of research but am still puzzelled by something quite elementry: What distinction (if any) is there between New Media art and Multimedia?
I have identified the current usage of 'New Media' in relation to Multimedia as
-refering to the newest form of digital media- web art.
-closely related to, but not the same as multimedia.
-Developing out of multimedia a short time after the birth of the internet? Sharing a common lineage.
-More than work presented on the web, New Media art is made for the web, providing its primary context.
-emphasising the active role of the viewer/user
If anyone has anything to add, or a reading to point me to I would be grateful. Some texts I have read use New Media and Multimedia interchangably as with other terms such as Digital media, New Medium, Non-linear art, interactive art and web or net art.
I see that saying New Media emerged OUT OF Multimedia is problematic given that Multimedia by definition is interdisciplinary and inclusive...
Thanks
Roger Bymolt