Re: RHIZOME RAW: The boomerang effect of the Capitalism
> Capitalism triumphes around the world, on the exact moment when United
> States will loose the planetary control.
control is an illusion
> Paradoxical, United States are
> victimes of the system that was globaly spread from America.
"cyclical" is a more appropriate description. most societies grow, peak and
wane/collapse. if the american "empire" is waning/collasing (i doubt it)
then so be it. i'm sure life will be much better under a south american
dictator.
> They will
> defeat by they own game that the rest of the world didn't choose.
are you the one that will choose the next "game"? please tell me what the
new "game" will be like? pretty please ... TELL ME!
> Well, it's
> a free market and accordind to the concurrence laws, America can't stand
up
> much longer! Her comercial deficit it's aproximate of 1.200.000.000
dolares
> by day!
once we have fallen ... will you help us back up?
> And iraq war will be the last demonstration of imperialism from a
> Nation that have no longer the power of the world!
the "power of the world"? what in the fuck are you talking about? the
power to do what? BE SPECIFIC!!!
> A desperate strategy
> comdemned to fail.
what strategy? to free up $300 trillion in OIL RESERVES? i disagree, that
is likely to succeed.
> You see, that's the boomerang effect of the capitalism
> and it already did a complete tour all around the world. Now it comes back
> at the depart point, to force down the same that did it throw away.
and what will happen to us, Joao? will we deserve it? what will YOU and
YOUR COUNTRY do to help the poor americans?
david goldschmidt
>
> Joao
> oliveirapereira1@sapo.pt
>
>
>
>
> + 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
>
> States will loose the planetary control.
control is an illusion
> Paradoxical, United States are
> victimes of the system that was globaly spread from America.
"cyclical" is a more appropriate description. most societies grow, peak and
wane/collapse. if the american "empire" is waning/collasing (i doubt it)
then so be it. i'm sure life will be much better under a south american
dictator.
> They will
> defeat by they own game that the rest of the world didn't choose.
are you the one that will choose the next "game"? please tell me what the
new "game" will be like? pretty please ... TELL ME!
> Well, it's
> a free market and accordind to the concurrence laws, America can't stand
up
> much longer! Her comercial deficit it's aproximate of 1.200.000.000
dolares
> by day!
once we have fallen ... will you help us back up?
> And iraq war will be the last demonstration of imperialism from a
> Nation that have no longer the power of the world!
the "power of the world"? what in the fuck are you talking about? the
power to do what? BE SPECIFIC!!!
> A desperate strategy
> comdemned to fail.
what strategy? to free up $300 trillion in OIL RESERVES? i disagree, that
is likely to succeed.
> You see, that's the boomerang effect of the capitalism
> and it already did a complete tour all around the world. Now it comes back
> at the depart point, to force down the same that did it throw away.
and what will happen to us, Joao? will we deserve it? what will YOU and
YOUR COUNTRY do to help the poor americans?
david goldschmidt
>
> Joao
> oliveirapereira1@sapo.pt
>
>
>
>
> + 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: Karei & Neosim & Ninja Burger
pretty good marc, but KAREI is more like a "ninja" ... consider this ...
-go to KAREI's domain http://zaphod.terminal.org
-scroll down to the bottom and click on Ninja Burger
-click on "food"
-then look to the left and click on "forum"
read through some of the posts and i think you'll come to understand KAREI's
approach.
for examlpe, here is a post i found on the forum from kitten champion ...
"A hearty hello to all of you people. I am a new person that has decided to
begin posting here during my travels as I wander from town to town, hunting
down and viciously slaughtering my enemies. My cat Sprinkles turned up
missing one day, and I can only assume from the vast number of infidels
jealous of his martial arts school, that foul play is the case. Although I
have no proof, I will nonetheless kill and maim all who have ever posed a
discontent for Sprinkles. Thus, I travel across the world, seeking out the
shameful individuals who stand against the warrior skills my mighty pet once
displayed.
While I am certain that none of the users here are responsible for the quest
I am bound to, I must keep a watchful eye for those who dishonor the kitten
clan, lest they begin posting here and spread their inky tendrils to other
honorable ninjas! While I may be considered insane or possibly off my
"squash" as the American novels say, I will regardless continue my hunt
across the globe, in memory of and vengance for my combat-trained cat.
__________________
All involved shall pay for the death of my cat Sprinkles. It is the will of
his kitten ninja clan."
.............fyi - here is the url to the forum
http://aetherealforge.com/aeforum/forumdisplay.php?s'6e788e5896be369ec5e65
b1bd461f4&forumid=4
david goldschmidt
----- Original Message -----
From: "marc.garrett" <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>
To: <list@rhizome.org>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 1:58 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Karei & Neosim
> Karei & Neoism.
>
> Your insistent function reminds me of some of my 'neoist' friends in the
UK.
> In fact percieved alienation seems to be part of the acquired make-up,
> changing whatever is discussed or said by others on its head. Language is
> the medium and where ever there is cohesive communication amongst others,
or
> the act of it, is fertile ground for disruption via Neoist
rules-principles.
>
> A conscious act of dismantling distinction is part of the
> intellectual-isolatory
> game, and it is a competitive activity or sport with rules that others are
> not supposed to be aware of, or the actual purity of it will not work as
> well as intended.
>
> The 'Neoist', acts like a mason, a secret agent, who has vowed never to
> declare who they are, for that breaks the whole position and power ratio
> down. It would weaken the power of this consciously post-realization
> collective, compromising its (very active) position to disrupt. It is
mainly
> a male dominated sect, harboring the likes of 'Stuart Home' a real person,
> and there are invented names also such as 'Monty Catsin', 'Karen Elliot' &
> loads more. Although 'Maris Kundzins', a Lithuanian puppet player (of
> course, more interested with playing with real people instead) was I
believe
> one of the originators of Neoism. Although 'Karei', can correct me on this
> one. Are you Maris? I know, it is a secret.
>
> Neosim is a contrary thing, it seems to resolve contradictions by
> reinforcing them, and pertaining the golden rule of putting personal
agendas
> aside. Even though the act of putting personal agendas aside does come
from
> being in an emotional state, it is also 'literally' irrational, yet
> objective. It is relational yet not part of the stream of (assumed)
> consciousness that we might consider ourselves sharing. The Neoist is
> seperate, an alien, deliberately; defying the urge to get personally
> involved with anyone (even if they like them) on a list such as this, if
> they did, they would break the golden rule.
>
> A structuralist function, using generative actions & and an objective tool
> that anyone can use, as long as they stick to the rules of not telling
> anyone. For instance Rhizome and their crew, or at least, some of them; I
am
> sure know about this, hence their hesitant reaction to 'Karei's' actions
on
> the list. So that means that Rhizome also know personally, some 'neoists'.
> Being a Neoist, is probably the most underground state of being on the
> planet, because it never gets assimilated into the mediated haze, an
> impressive thing really. Lists are a perfect place for such activity to
> flourish, or propogate, for it is text based and relies on the users, to
use
> language.
>
> For someone like 'Karei', who seems to use Neoist rules, text and identity
> are the same thing, it has no identity. There is a real person there,
typing
> but they do not allow themselves to break the stream of un-conscious
> deliberations. A Neoist can change their invented persona to personas, as
> did 'Karei'. There is no such thing as truth, only the function, and that
is
> part of the basis of their deconstruction, which can be the closest to a
> 'Neoist's' truth; if there is such a thing. Yet that would not be declared
> of course. For part of the non reasoning or intention is to not get caught
> up in psychology (its personalization) mutualist environments. Not
believing
> in specific commonly-held opinions, such as the value of capitalist social
> relations, or belief in metaphysical abstractions, or anything anyone
might
> possibly agree on is all part of the entities action. A play with dialect,
> which is termed as 'dialectical immaterialism'.
>
> The Neoist tool is not really about communication, in fact the process of
> clashing with commuincation seems to stunt it, causing confusion; which
has
> its own qualities but also can possess negativities at the same time.
Which
> is of no concern to a Neoist, by default. A Neoist usually does not judge,
> merely (although Karei seems to break that rule) just acts. 'Karei', knows
> that what is not said, is just as important as what is said, if one
bothers
> to stroll through past threads in relation to 'Karei's' way of using
> language; you begin to realize that similarities do crop up. Certain
> repetitive txt based responses do occur; this not because 'Karei' is
stupid
> by any stretch of the imagination, it is because, as a Neoist, there are
> certain rules that must be put in place. An opposite to what has been
> mentioned, such as in the case of Joseph and Karei. Karei does not hate
> Joseph, but must create friction, that is the whole point, comply to the
> rules accordingly, hence contrarily.
>
> The only enemy of a Neoist is their own ego, and everyone else's. By the
> way, the term Neoist was not created by the original Neoist suppozedly, in
> fact they say that their enemies created the name; yet at the same time
they
> are their own enemies. Are you getting the drift at all now?
>
> The Neoist believes that Art is a false idol, a misrepresentation of
space,
> in fact it is seen as a form of propaganda. Artists, or rather their
> artistic contributions are consumerized fodder, made for the capitalist
> machine to gulp; it is eaten and then spat out as waste, till the monster
of
> capitalism chooses its next meal. And there are plenty out there for it to
> eat. The Neoist respects artists grudgingly but holds contempt for their
> ever increasingly desire to be known, and how they prostitute themselves
to
> get where they feel they are supposed to be. Also, a Neoist would feel
that
> I was actually becoming one of them, just by thinking on their terms. May
be
> I already am to some degree - yet I have never had a term or word for such
> feelings.
>
> 'To produce art in a strictly formal way. Refine it to a craft of
technical,
> aesthetic and mathematical precision. The old cliche of art for art's
sake,
> and why not? The problem only occurs when the structure of society
detaches
> the by-product of an individual period of creativity, maybe with the
> artist's connivance, and institutes it as a sterile husk, a coinage.' This
> statement is a good example of a term that I myself would use, in respect
of
> 'coinage', I would use currency, it means the same in the context of
> culturalization of creativity, sucked in by institutional systems.
>
> I would rather that Art (which is such a small word) was so everyday that
> institutional dominance decided that there was no control value in it.
Thus,
> it is reclaimed via the process of merely expounding our imaginings as
> something we declare and share, rather than imposed via already tired
> 'art-run' insitutionally linear structures. The act of imagining is a
> freedom that is too readily ignored by many, art does not have to always
be
> out there; it can be part of everything and exist without that 'self
> cosciously' dictated label called 'art', that is where its potential
freedom
> lies. To have freedom is not know that you've got it.
>
> My own personal decision is to always keep a political stance within my
> imaginative 'squeak's, as part of my action and shaky reasoning, this
keeps
> me grounded; yet this would never rest within the rules of a Neoist.
Because
> they would say that I am still playing with the same rules, someone else's
> thus not being realistic. Yet my own illusion, is my decision, whatever
> rules one was to impose or suggest; I am one of those entities who learn
by
> experience and not just by other people's writings, for I believe that no
> one can understand what exactly I am or what I want to be; and who cares
> anyway? No one. So to invest in an alternative consciousness would
> disintegrate my emotional and intuitive state and sensibilities. Much like
> when one unfurls their identity in an institution for learning, throw away
> the individual's gunk and replace it with a new skin; educational
> environments act by this process; this I have always been suspicious of.
>
> So, this is now the best place to stop - hope those who were not aware are
> more aware; and those who dared not declare will now declare...
>
>
>
> respect to all - marc
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> + 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
>
-go to KAREI's domain http://zaphod.terminal.org
-scroll down to the bottom and click on Ninja Burger
-click on "food"
-then look to the left and click on "forum"
read through some of the posts and i think you'll come to understand KAREI's
approach.
for examlpe, here is a post i found on the forum from kitten champion ...
"A hearty hello to all of you people. I am a new person that has decided to
begin posting here during my travels as I wander from town to town, hunting
down and viciously slaughtering my enemies. My cat Sprinkles turned up
missing one day, and I can only assume from the vast number of infidels
jealous of his martial arts school, that foul play is the case. Although I
have no proof, I will nonetheless kill and maim all who have ever posed a
discontent for Sprinkles. Thus, I travel across the world, seeking out the
shameful individuals who stand against the warrior skills my mighty pet once
displayed.
While I am certain that none of the users here are responsible for the quest
I am bound to, I must keep a watchful eye for those who dishonor the kitten
clan, lest they begin posting here and spread their inky tendrils to other
honorable ninjas! While I may be considered insane or possibly off my
"squash" as the American novels say, I will regardless continue my hunt
across the globe, in memory of and vengance for my combat-trained cat.
__________________
All involved shall pay for the death of my cat Sprinkles. It is the will of
his kitten ninja clan."
.............fyi - here is the url to the forum
http://aetherealforge.com/aeforum/forumdisplay.php?s'6e788e5896be369ec5e65
b1bd461f4&forumid=4
david goldschmidt
----- Original Message -----
From: "marc.garrett" <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>
To: <list@rhizome.org>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 1:58 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Karei & Neosim
> Karei & Neoism.
>
> Your insistent function reminds me of some of my 'neoist' friends in the
UK.
> In fact percieved alienation seems to be part of the acquired make-up,
> changing whatever is discussed or said by others on its head. Language is
> the medium and where ever there is cohesive communication amongst others,
or
> the act of it, is fertile ground for disruption via Neoist
rules-principles.
>
> A conscious act of dismantling distinction is part of the
> intellectual-isolatory
> game, and it is a competitive activity or sport with rules that others are
> not supposed to be aware of, or the actual purity of it will not work as
> well as intended.
>
> The 'Neoist', acts like a mason, a secret agent, who has vowed never to
> declare who they are, for that breaks the whole position and power ratio
> down. It would weaken the power of this consciously post-realization
> collective, compromising its (very active) position to disrupt. It is
mainly
> a male dominated sect, harboring the likes of 'Stuart Home' a real person,
> and there are invented names also such as 'Monty Catsin', 'Karen Elliot' &
> loads more. Although 'Maris Kundzins', a Lithuanian puppet player (of
> course, more interested with playing with real people instead) was I
believe
> one of the originators of Neoism. Although 'Karei', can correct me on this
> one. Are you Maris? I know, it is a secret.
>
> Neosim is a contrary thing, it seems to resolve contradictions by
> reinforcing them, and pertaining the golden rule of putting personal
agendas
> aside. Even though the act of putting personal agendas aside does come
from
> being in an emotional state, it is also 'literally' irrational, yet
> objective. It is relational yet not part of the stream of (assumed)
> consciousness that we might consider ourselves sharing. The Neoist is
> seperate, an alien, deliberately; defying the urge to get personally
> involved with anyone (even if they like them) on a list such as this, if
> they did, they would break the golden rule.
>
> A structuralist function, using generative actions & and an objective tool
> that anyone can use, as long as they stick to the rules of not telling
> anyone. For instance Rhizome and their crew, or at least, some of them; I
am
> sure know about this, hence their hesitant reaction to 'Karei's' actions
on
> the list. So that means that Rhizome also know personally, some 'neoists'.
> Being a Neoist, is probably the most underground state of being on the
> planet, because it never gets assimilated into the mediated haze, an
> impressive thing really. Lists are a perfect place for such activity to
> flourish, or propogate, for it is text based and relies on the users, to
use
> language.
>
> For someone like 'Karei', who seems to use Neoist rules, text and identity
> are the same thing, it has no identity. There is a real person there,
typing
> but they do not allow themselves to break the stream of un-conscious
> deliberations. A Neoist can change their invented persona to personas, as
> did 'Karei'. There is no such thing as truth, only the function, and that
is
> part of the basis of their deconstruction, which can be the closest to a
> 'Neoist's' truth; if there is such a thing. Yet that would not be declared
> of course. For part of the non reasoning or intention is to not get caught
> up in psychology (its personalization) mutualist environments. Not
believing
> in specific commonly-held opinions, such as the value of capitalist social
> relations, or belief in metaphysical abstractions, or anything anyone
might
> possibly agree on is all part of the entities action. A play with dialect,
> which is termed as 'dialectical immaterialism'.
>
> The Neoist tool is not really about communication, in fact the process of
> clashing with commuincation seems to stunt it, causing confusion; which
has
> its own qualities but also can possess negativities at the same time.
Which
> is of no concern to a Neoist, by default. A Neoist usually does not judge,
> merely (although Karei seems to break that rule) just acts. 'Karei', knows
> that what is not said, is just as important as what is said, if one
bothers
> to stroll through past threads in relation to 'Karei's' way of using
> language; you begin to realize that similarities do crop up. Certain
> repetitive txt based responses do occur; this not because 'Karei' is
stupid
> by any stretch of the imagination, it is because, as a Neoist, there are
> certain rules that must be put in place. An opposite to what has been
> mentioned, such as in the case of Joseph and Karei. Karei does not hate
> Joseph, but must create friction, that is the whole point, comply to the
> rules accordingly, hence contrarily.
>
> The only enemy of a Neoist is their own ego, and everyone else's. By the
> way, the term Neoist was not created by the original Neoist suppozedly, in
> fact they say that their enemies created the name; yet at the same time
they
> are their own enemies. Are you getting the drift at all now?
>
> The Neoist believes that Art is a false idol, a misrepresentation of
space,
> in fact it is seen as a form of propaganda. Artists, or rather their
> artistic contributions are consumerized fodder, made for the capitalist
> machine to gulp; it is eaten and then spat out as waste, till the monster
of
> capitalism chooses its next meal. And there are plenty out there for it to
> eat. The Neoist respects artists grudgingly but holds contempt for their
> ever increasingly desire to be known, and how they prostitute themselves
to
> get where they feel they are supposed to be. Also, a Neoist would feel
that
> I was actually becoming one of them, just by thinking on their terms. May
be
> I already am to some degree - yet I have never had a term or word for such
> feelings.
>
> 'To produce art in a strictly formal way. Refine it to a craft of
technical,
> aesthetic and mathematical precision. The old cliche of art for art's
sake,
> and why not? The problem only occurs when the structure of society
detaches
> the by-product of an individual period of creativity, maybe with the
> artist's connivance, and institutes it as a sterile husk, a coinage.' This
> statement is a good example of a term that I myself would use, in respect
of
> 'coinage', I would use currency, it means the same in the context of
> culturalization of creativity, sucked in by institutional systems.
>
> I would rather that Art (which is such a small word) was so everyday that
> institutional dominance decided that there was no control value in it.
Thus,
> it is reclaimed via the process of merely expounding our imaginings as
> something we declare and share, rather than imposed via already tired
> 'art-run' insitutionally linear structures. The act of imagining is a
> freedom that is too readily ignored by many, art does not have to always
be
> out there; it can be part of everything and exist without that 'self
> cosciously' dictated label called 'art', that is where its potential
freedom
> lies. To have freedom is not know that you've got it.
>
> My own personal decision is to always keep a political stance within my
> imaginative 'squeak's, as part of my action and shaky reasoning, this
keeps
> me grounded; yet this would never rest within the rules of a Neoist.
Because
> they would say that I am still playing with the same rules, someone else's
> thus not being realistic. Yet my own illusion, is my decision, whatever
> rules one was to impose or suggest; I am one of those entities who learn
by
> experience and not just by other people's writings, for I believe that no
> one can understand what exactly I am or what I want to be; and who cares
> anyway? No one. So to invest in an alternative consciousness would
> disintegrate my emotional and intuitive state and sensibilities. Much like
> when one unfurls their identity in an institution for learning, throw away
> the individual's gunk and replace it with a new skin; educational
> environments act by this process; this I have always been suspicious of.
>
> So, this is now the best place to stop - hope those who were not aware are
> more aware; and those who dared not declare will now declare...
>
>
>
> respect to all - marc
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> + 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: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In New Media Art
dude, i was just giving you shit because your conclusion was ridiculous.
personally, i also get frustrated at the lack of replies to my posts. at
the lack of critiques regarding my project. sometimes i think its because
there is so much to see on rhizome. its nearly impossible to keep up.
apologies. no hard feelings.
david goldschmidt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Young" <danielyoung@rcn.com>
To: "David Goldschmidt" <david@personify.tv>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In New
Media Art
> With all due respect if Manovich is the answer then I repeat that there is
> no traditional and healthy judgmental criticism in this area. He's
primarily
> a historian with a heavy concentration on cinematic antecedents.
> And it's sad that Rhizome Raw participants are so quick to piss on each
> other and so slow to answer a serious question.
> Young
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Goldschmidt" <david@personify.tv>
> To: <young@newzoid.com>; <list@rhizome.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:30 PM
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In
New
> Media Art
>
>
> > here is another, more accurate, conclusion: NOONE FELT LIKE REPLYING TO
> YOU
> >
> > try "The Language of Newmedia" by Lev Manovich ... its more history,
> theory
> > and philosophy but i loved it. he's a very smart guy.
> >
> > david goldschmidt
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <young@newzoid.com>
> > To: <list@rhizome.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 8:32 PM
> > Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In New
> > Media Art
> >
> >
> > >
> > > WHEREAS
> > > I have made two postings of the question set out below and,
> > > WHEREAS
> > > I have not received a single response from those reading Rhizome Raw
> and,
> > > WHEREAS
> > > Rhizome Raw is representative of those involved in the new media,
> > > I HEREBY reach the conclusion that no critical writing, i.e.,
"judgments
> > and
> > > recommendations in accordance with articulated standards," is being
done
> > in the
> > > area of new media art.
> > >
> > >
> > > The Question Set Out Below:
> > >
> > > Can anyone recommend critical writing in the field of new media art?
> > >
> > > I mean criticism in the sense of judgments and recommendations in
> > accordance
> > > with articulated standards - like movie or theater critics or like
some
> > > critics in the areas of painting and sculpture.
> > >
> > > Or, second best, critical writings from the standpoint of theory and
> > > philosophy about what new media art should be and what qualities or
> > > standards might be used to distinguish the wheat from the chaff?
> > >
> > > Daniel Young
> > > young@newzoid.com
> > > + 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
> > >
> >
>
>
personally, i also get frustrated at the lack of replies to my posts. at
the lack of critiques regarding my project. sometimes i think its because
there is so much to see on rhizome. its nearly impossible to keep up.
apologies. no hard feelings.
david goldschmidt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Young" <danielyoung@rcn.com>
To: "David Goldschmidt" <david@personify.tv>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In New
Media Art
> With all due respect if Manovich is the answer then I repeat that there is
> no traditional and healthy judgmental criticism in this area. He's
primarily
> a historian with a heavy concentration on cinematic antecedents.
> And it's sad that Rhizome Raw participants are so quick to piss on each
> other and so slow to answer a serious question.
> Young
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Goldschmidt" <david@personify.tv>
> To: <young@newzoid.com>; <list@rhizome.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:30 PM
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In
New
> Media Art
>
>
> > here is another, more accurate, conclusion: NOONE FELT LIKE REPLYING TO
> YOU
> >
> > try "The Language of Newmedia" by Lev Manovich ... its more history,
> theory
> > and philosophy but i loved it. he's a very smart guy.
> >
> > david goldschmidt
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <young@newzoid.com>
> > To: <list@rhizome.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 8:32 PM
> > Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In New
> > Media Art
> >
> >
> > >
> > > WHEREAS
> > > I have made two postings of the question set out below and,
> > > WHEREAS
> > > I have not received a single response from those reading Rhizome Raw
> and,
> > > WHEREAS
> > > Rhizome Raw is representative of those involved in the new media,
> > > I HEREBY reach the conclusion that no critical writing, i.e.,
"judgments
> > and
> > > recommendations in accordance with articulated standards," is being
done
> > in the
> > > area of new media art.
> > >
> > >
> > > The Question Set Out Below:
> > >
> > > Can anyone recommend critical writing in the field of new media art?
> > >
> > > I mean criticism in the sense of judgments and recommendations in
> > accordance
> > > with articulated standards - like movie or theater critics or like
some
> > > critics in the areas of painting and sculpture.
> > >
> > > Or, second best, critical writings from the standpoint of theory and
> > > philosophy about what new media art should be and what qualities or
> > > standards might be used to distinguish the wheat from the chaff?
> > >
> > > Daniel Young
> > > young@newzoid.com
> > > + 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: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In New Media Art
here is another, more accurate, conclusion: NOONE FELT LIKE REPLYING TO YOU
try "The Language of Newmedia" by Lev Manovich ... its more history, theory
and philosophy but i loved it. he's a very smart guy.
david goldschmidt
----- Original Message -----
From: <young@newzoid.com>
To: <list@rhizome.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 8:32 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In New
Media Art
>
> WHEREAS
> I have made two postings of the question set out below and,
> WHEREAS
> I have not received a single response from those reading Rhizome Raw and,
> WHEREAS
> Rhizome Raw is representative of those involved in the new media,
> I HEREBY reach the conclusion that no critical writing, i.e., "judgments
and
> recommendations in accordance with articulated standards," is being done
in the
> area of new media art.
>
>
> The Question Set Out Below:
>
> Can anyone recommend critical writing in the field of new media art?
>
> I mean criticism in the sense of judgments and recommendations in
accordance
> with articulated standards - like movie or theater critics or like some
> critics in the areas of painting and sculpture.
>
> Or, second best, critical writings from the standpoint of theory and
> philosophy about what new media art should be and what qualities or
> standards might be used to distinguish the wheat from the chaff?
>
> Daniel Young
> young@newzoid.com
> + 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
>
try "The Language of Newmedia" by Lev Manovich ... its more history, theory
and philosophy but i loved it. he's a very smart guy.
david goldschmidt
----- Original Message -----
From: <young@newzoid.com>
To: <list@rhizome.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 8:32 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Conclusion: No Judgmental Criticism Exists In New
Media Art
>
> WHEREAS
> I have made two postings of the question set out below and,
> WHEREAS
> I have not received a single response from those reading Rhizome Raw and,
> WHEREAS
> Rhizome Raw is representative of those involved in the new media,
> I HEREBY reach the conclusion that no critical writing, i.e., "judgments
and
> recommendations in accordance with articulated standards," is being done
in the
> area of new media art.
>
>
> The Question Set Out Below:
>
> Can anyone recommend critical writing in the field of new media art?
>
> I mean criticism in the sense of judgments and recommendations in
accordance
> with articulated standards - like movie or theater critics or like some
> critics in the areas of painting and sculpture.
>
> Or, second best, critical writings from the standpoint of theory and
> philosophy about what new media art should be and what qualities or
> standards might be used to distinguish the wheat from the chaff?
>
> Daniel Young
> young@newzoid.com
> + 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: monetizing net.art ... don't sell it ... rent it!
received some strange replies to the original post so i'll try to clarify .=
..
most net.artists spend weeks, months or more on their projects ... for an a=
rtist to sell the creation (and make a decent living) the buyer would have =
to pay thousands of dollars. worse still ... the buyer may not leave it on=
line for others to see.
instead of selling it for thousands of dollars ... make it affordable. ren=
t access to your werks for a few days for a few bucks.
in effect ... there is no real difference between "selling" and "renting" i=
n the digital world ... it is a matter of semantics (or marketing). consum=
ers are used to renting videos for a few bucks (instead of buying). beside=
s content (net.art, hollywood movies, etc.) is coming and going at light sp=
eed. personally, i don't want to buy any of it if i can rent it (video gam=
es, movies, etc) and then return it. i can rent four movies for the price =
of buying one ... why would i buy one experience when i can rent four for t=
he same price.
owning content is becoming an outdated concept!!! (caveat: i still buy boo=
ks). besides even when one buys content ... you don't really OWN it. the =
copyright holder is the one that really OWNS it!
rhizome (or some other clever third party) should develop a kind of "newmed=
ia access pass" (akin to the blockbuster video membership card) that RENTS =
net.art.
i truly hope that net.artists figure out a way to get paid for their effort=
. it would really help the genre grow and develop.
david goldschmidt
----- Original Message -----
From: David Goldschmidt
To: list@rhizome.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:05 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: monetizing net.art ... don't sell it ... rent it!
Over the past couple of years I have followed several threads about gener=
ating revenue from net.art. I would like to offer my ideas for your consid=
eration. I have a decent business background and, more importantly, a love=
and respect for the net.art community.
1) Positioning Net.Art in the Marketplace
The first thing to keep in mind is that 99% of people CANNOT afford to bu=
y your work! And of the 1% that can afford it ... 99% of them DON"T GET IT=
! (note: this is a good thing. most people understand that they cannot aff=
ord to buy quality artwork ... but they do want to see it!!!)
STOP TRYING TO SELL YOUR WORK
Instead of selling it ... RENT IT!
Rent access to your premier werks for 30 days for a few bucks. Better ye=
t, partner with two or three of your peers, build a common splash page and =
allow someone to rent access to your werks for $4.99 for 30 days. DRM and =
Micropayment services can easily handle/manage the transactions.
I have a ton of ideas for this approach. Let me know what you guys think.
david goldschmidt
..
most net.artists spend weeks, months or more on their projects ... for an a=
rtist to sell the creation (and make a decent living) the buyer would have =
to pay thousands of dollars. worse still ... the buyer may not leave it on=
line for others to see.
instead of selling it for thousands of dollars ... make it affordable. ren=
t access to your werks for a few days for a few bucks.
in effect ... there is no real difference between "selling" and "renting" i=
n the digital world ... it is a matter of semantics (or marketing). consum=
ers are used to renting videos for a few bucks (instead of buying). beside=
s content (net.art, hollywood movies, etc.) is coming and going at light sp=
eed. personally, i don't want to buy any of it if i can rent it (video gam=
es, movies, etc) and then return it. i can rent four movies for the price =
of buying one ... why would i buy one experience when i can rent four for t=
he same price.
owning content is becoming an outdated concept!!! (caveat: i still buy boo=
ks). besides even when one buys content ... you don't really OWN it. the =
copyright holder is the one that really OWNS it!
rhizome (or some other clever third party) should develop a kind of "newmed=
ia access pass" (akin to the blockbuster video membership card) that RENTS =
net.art.
i truly hope that net.artists figure out a way to get paid for their effort=
. it would really help the genre grow and develop.
david goldschmidt
----- Original Message -----
From: David Goldschmidt
To: list@rhizome.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:05 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: monetizing net.art ... don't sell it ... rent it!
Over the past couple of years I have followed several threads about gener=
ating revenue from net.art. I would like to offer my ideas for your consid=
eration. I have a decent business background and, more importantly, a love=
and respect for the net.art community.
1) Positioning Net.Art in the Marketplace
The first thing to keep in mind is that 99% of people CANNOT afford to bu=
y your work! And of the 1% that can afford it ... 99% of them DON"T GET IT=
! (note: this is a good thing. most people understand that they cannot aff=
ord to buy quality artwork ... but they do want to see it!!!)
STOP TRYING TO SELL YOUR WORK
Instead of selling it ... RENT IT!
Rent access to your premier werks for 30 days for a few bucks. Better ye=
t, partner with two or three of your peers, build a common splash page and =
allow someone to rent access to your werks for $4.99 for 30 days. DRM and =
Micropayment services can easily handle/manage the transactions.
I have a ton of ideas for this approach. Let me know what you guys think.
david goldschmidt