Dirk Vekemans
Since 2005
Works in Kessel-Lo Belgium

ARTBASE (1)
PORTFOLIO (1)
BIO
born in 1962 in Lier, Belgium.
studied filology at Louvain, Belgium.

worked a lot in bars and restaurants before i became obsessivly addicted to producing stuff on computers.

i once won a design contest of cgi-magazine and they let me go to New York for four days, that was nice.

i think in terms of writing mostly (or programming, but those are very similar processes for me)

painting is a very different process and i'm very bad at it but i do it anyway because i like the differences it produces and i like the freshness of amateurism, i guess.

what i produce new media-wise is also very much influenced by my daily practice of webdesign and programming with its concerns of usability and the pragmatic approach it implies.

Discussions (292) Opportunities (0) Events (1) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

some Flash 8 video tests


<http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/cb.jsp>
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/cb.jsp#flashtest

2 FLASH 8 video test - 1x 2 draggable video layers in difference and screen
(with text)+ 1x3 in lighten/darken/subtract blend (without text).
(Cathedral Resident CB had a say in choosing the material...)
both 1800 kb - recent computer required and the new flash player ofcourse

greetings,
dv @ Neue Kathedrale des erotischen Elends <http://www.vilt.net/nkdee>
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee

DISCUSSION

NKdeE Newsletter extra: Seasonal Greetings -Eindejaarswensen


--------------------NEWSLETTER - NKdeE - NIEUWSBRIEF ------------
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/2006.html

Nederlands:

a

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic reviews Pixar exhibition at MoMA


anti-abusive bubbles would be anti-bubble denouncing their bubbleness when
inflated. some recent neoist negative constructs would qualify i suppose,
but Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite already had some apophatic bubbles
floating around in the 5th century. That's why i was wondering, jokingly.
Otherwise values bubble abusively because they only contain recursive
ideosynchronised instances of the bubble they are floating in and can thus
only abuse their surroundings by enforcing their meaning on them. Art is
aggressive, most noticably when shown in institutions that allegedly promote
art, but any art is de facto, by claiming itself to be art, abusive to other
bubbles, just like Bush brings freedom to Irak.

What you proposed sounded like reducing all art production to material
objects of culture, which to me is the same as negating art, denying the
activity itself, saying it never happened and that all the art garbage you
can find in museums just miraculously materialised, claiming what we're all
working on here is the mere production of sellable objects that can only be
promoted through market strategies. Now i see you have some very nice
paintings over at your site, i don't think you'd consider those to be merely
sellable objects, otherwise you could have suffised with running a webshop
selling acrylic paint in profitable portions. The activity is not abusive,
and if you want the anti-abusive: there it is/was happening. While art
happens, it outbubbles itself autopoetically.

All this rhetoric, discussions like these, although they tend to get tedious
because they're just bubbles within bubbles, are inescapable. It's part of
the art of art. You can't escape them by saying they're not (supposed to
be)about art. And they have some importance: some big bubble might explode
any second, others might shower in offering the illusion of an eternal
fabric of foam while some slippery youngsters glide to their 7,5 minutes of
fame. I think it's quite a spectacle seeing all these young talents
relishing in their creativity while producing in the service of power
institutions. Apparantly it's the choice of a part of a generation, and you
can't judge choices like that. But you can't attribute any other value to
them than what they proclaim themselves, within their industrial power
bubble, some iconic extra's perhaps or a few subversive gags from within the
system approved and nullified by the system, but not much more without being
insultingly aggressive to us very sanguine poetic worms stuck in the frozen
root of oblivion.

It's a fun thing though, gnawing at roots, just gotta look out for them
media seagulls going me me me all the time.

Happy nuyear 2u2, & btw: don't forget to extend your best wishes to the
world through Regina's map at http://arteonline.arq.br/mapa.htm. All of you
rhizomers should be there by now! 32 members! Shameful. Too busy are you?
Afraid it will affect your ahartistic careers adversely? Can't figure out
the Frappr app? Fearing you'll catch the virus formerly known as human
empathy? Come on!

dv, floating @ Neue Kathedrale des erotischen Elends
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Zev Robinson [mailto:zr@zrdesign.co.uk]
> Verzonden: dinsdag 20 december 2005 17:20
> Aan: Dirk Vekemans; 'Jim Andrews'; list@rhizome.org
> Onderwerp: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic
> reviews Pixar exhibition at MoMA
>
> no, not a mystic, thanks for asking, tho. an artist of sorts,
> maybe. you may be right that all values are bubbling with
> assumptions and mythologies, but I hope that you're wrong in
> saying that they are all abusive bubbles. could some bubbles
> not be anti-abusive?
>
> and if you are wrong, then sets are still available, but
> you'll have to make it yourself.
>
> merry xmas, happy holidays.
>
> Zev
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dirk Vekemans" <dv@vilt.net>
> To: "'Zev Robinson'" <zr@zrdesign.co.uk>; "'Jim Andrews'"
> <jim@vispo.com>; <list@rhizome.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 1:32 PM
> Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic reviews
> Pixar exhibition at MoMA
>
>
> > Are you a mystic of sorts Zev, 'cause personally i've never
> heard of
> > or seen a set of values that is *not* an abusive bubble of
> assumptions
> > and mythologies? So if you have such a set and it's still
> moderately
> > priced would you please wrap it up and send it over so i
> can give it
> > to myself for
> > xmas;- i think my family would be delighted to see that i'm finally
> > through with all the art nonsense...
> > Thanks,
> > dv
> >
> >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> >> Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org] Namens
> >> Zev Robinson
> >> Verzonden: dinsdag 20 december 2005 9:34
> >> Aan: Jim Andrews; list@rhizome.org
> >> Onderwerp: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic
> reviews Pixar
> >> exhibition at MoMA
> >>
> >> if you speak of art, Jim, it really can't be helped.
> >>
> >> but if you stop using the word art, and start using the
> word culture
> >> or cultures, and the objects found in them (paintings, films, TV
> >> programs, books, etc) then you get to look at things differently,
> >> more egalitarian and less hierarchal, pop that abusive bubble of
> >> assumptions and mythologies, and get a different set of
> values than
> >> MoMA and papa would have us believe.
> >>
> >> Zev
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>
> >> To: <list@rhizome.org>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:00 AM
> >> Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic reviews Pixar
> >> exhibition at MoMA
> >>
> >>
> >> > this thread has been very interesting. one thing that
> >> strikes me as odd
> >> > about it is that the thread, like so many others, is
> >> phrased in terms of
> >> > the
> >> > NYT, Pixar, and MoMA, large corporate or institutional
> >> bodies. as though
> >> > it
> >> > is hard to get peoples' attention if the conversation does
> >> not contain
> >> > discussion of these sorts of large bodies, as though
> they truly do
> >> > determine what is of value and what isn't in matters of art.
> >> >
> >> > ja
> >> > http://vispo.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > +
> >> > -> 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
> >> >
> >>
> >> +
> >> -> 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
> >>
> >
> >
> > +
> > -> 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
> >
>
>

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: NYT art critic reviews NKdeE exhibition in Kessel-lo


please continue

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org]
> Namens Ryan Griffis
> Verzonden: dinsdag 20 december 2005 16:17
> Aan: rhizome
> Onderwerp: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: NYT art critic reviews Pixar
> exhibition at MoMA
>
> sure you can.
> http://moma.org/support/corporate/membersroster.html
>
> On Dec 20, 2005, at 8:43 AM, Lee Wells wrote:
>
> > You cant pay for this type of advertising.
> >
> >
> > On 12/20/05 3:34 AM, "Zev Robinson" <zr@zrdesign.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> if you speak of art, Jim, it really can't be helped.
> >>
> >> but if you stop using the word art, and start using the
> word culture
> >> or cultures, and the objects found in them (paintings, films, TV
> >> programs, books, etc) then you get to look at things differently,
> >> more egalitarian and less hierarchal, pop that abusive bubble of
> >> assumptions and mythologies, and get a different set of
> values than
> >> MoMA and papa would have us believe.
> >>
> >> Zev
>
> +
> -> 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
>

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic reviews Pixar exhibition at MoMA


Are you a mystic of sorts Zev, 'cause personally i've never heard of or seen
a set of values that is *not* an abusive bubble of assumptions and
mythologies? So if you have such a set and it's still moderately priced
would you please wrap it up and send it over so i can give it to myself for
xmas;- i think my family would be delighted to see that i'm finally through
with all the art nonsense...
Thanks,
dv

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org]
> Namens Zev Robinson
> Verzonden: dinsdag 20 december 2005 9:34
> Aan: Jim Andrews; list@rhizome.org
> Onderwerp: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic
> reviews Pixar exhibition at MoMA
>
> if you speak of art, Jim, it really can't be helped.
>
> but if you stop using the word art, and start using the word
> culture or cultures, and the objects found in them
> (paintings, films, TV programs, books, etc) then you get to
> look at things differently, more egalitarian and less
> hierarchal, pop that abusive bubble of assumptions and
> mythologies, and get a different set of values than MoMA and
> papa would have us believe.
>
> Zev
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>
> To: <list@rhizome.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:00 AM
> Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic reviews Pixar
> exhibition at MoMA
>
>
> > this thread has been very interesting. one thing that
> strikes me as odd
> > about it is that the thread, like so many others, is
> phrased in terms of
> > the
> > NYT, Pixar, and MoMA, large corporate or institutional
> bodies. as though
> > it
> > is hard to get peoples' attention if the conversation does
> not contain
> > discussion of these sorts of large bodies, as though they truly do
> > determine
> > what is of value and what isn't in matters of art.
> >
> > ja
> > http://vispo.com
> >
> >
> > +
> > -> 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
> >
>
> +
> -> 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
>