> I understand it very clearly, it is merely a group of people closing a
door
> behind themselves - thats show biz!
>
Surely they are in:
> > a process of
> > 'self-historicising'.
:-)
Ivan
> > Does anyone understand this?
> > michael
> > --- matthew fuller <
matt@axia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The following interview is carried out in connection
> > > with opening of
> > > a show 'Art for Networks' starting now at Chapter
> > > Arts Centre,
> > > Cardiff, Wales. (It tours afterwards.) The show
> > > includes work by:
> > > Rachel Baker, Anna Best, Heath Bunting, Adam
> > > Chodzko, Ryosuke Cohen,
> > > Jeremy Deller, Jodi, Nina Pope and Karen Guthrie,
> > > Radio Aqualia,
> > > Stephen Willats, Talkeoke, Technologies to the
> > > People.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 6 Questions in search of a network
> > >
> > > 1. Matthew Fuller: In the original Art for Networks
> > > project you state
> > > that one of the motivations of the work was to
> > > discover another set
> > > of relations for art on the internet. What was
> > > argued against was
> > > the idea that network art could be categorised
> > > according to a certain
> > > chronology. This chronology slotted certain works
> > > into a history
> > > primarily on the basis of how closely they married
> > > themselves to
> > > technological developments. What was suggested
> > > instead was that there
> > > was a whole wider sense of networks that are being
> > > made and used by
> > > artists. Do you think that this statement of an
> > > alternate set of
> > > trajectories still holds true or polemically
> > > necessary?
> > >
> > > Simon Pope: The Art for Networks project was
> > > initially devised as a
> > > way of making sense of, and investigating how to
> > > move beyond,
> > > so-called 'net.art'. This definition was, as Heath
> > > Bunting (1) has
> > > said, 'a joke and a fake' anyway, but held sway in
> > > some circles.
> > >
> > > 'Net.Art' signified a technical art of the Internet
> > > or, more
> > > specifically, the Web. It was defined as a
> > > progression through
> > > clearly defined stylistic and technical phases: from
> > > an Avant Garde,
> > > through 'high period' Web-based net.art and
> > > interminable Mannerist
> > > replays, all the while waiting for the emergence of
> > > the new Avant
> > > Garde...
> > > This lame art historical approach denies wider or
> > > longer views of how
> > > artists and their work operate.
> > >
> > > The demand for a neat, linear art history becomes a
> > > real problem for
> > > anyone it implicates. As Jodi are quoted as saying
> > > "We never choose
> > > to be net.artists or not."(2) Pinned onto this
> > > restrictive and
> > > arbitrary time-line, artists have their destinies
> > > plotted for them.
> > > It was time to take Stewart Home's cue (3) and begin
> > > a process of
> > > 'self-historicising'. The exploration of more
> > > expansive definitions
> > > of 'network' is part of this, at first through
> > > interviews and
> > > presentations in 2000 and now through this
> > > exhibition.
> > >
> > > 2. MF: If the show works through various uses and
> > > creations of
> > > networks as art, were there any ways in which this
> > > focus inflected
> > > the way in which the show was curated? Can we
> > > imagine a curation for
> > > networks?
> > >
> > > SP: 'Network' isn't used here as an 'ideal concept'
> > > (4). It remains
> > > open to interpretation and ongoing enquiry by the
> > > participating
> > > artists. The network becomes a field, terrain or
> > > environment through
> > > which to operate on, in or through.
> > >
> > > Networks have been described in many ways, often at
> > > the moment where
> > > some phenomenon eludes an accepted form of
> > > classification: Landow
> > > reminds us that Foucault adopts the network when
> > > describing the means
> > > "...to link together a wide range of often
> > > contradictory taxonomies,
> > > observations, interpretations, categories, and rules
> > > of observation."
> > > (5). Jeremy Deller's work often exemplifies this,
> > > for example.
> > >
> > > Josephine Berry noted that "The term 'networks' has
> > > nearly become a
> > > cipher for saying 'everything' with the proviso that
> > > 'everything' be
> > > framed by technology" (6).
> > > Jodi's 'Wrong Browser' project continues their
> > > scrutiny of the
> > > conventions of the most popular of these
> > > technologies that link
> > > 'everything', the Web Browser. (7).
> > >
> > > Others artists are not concerned with technology as
> > > such. They
> > > investigate social networks, distributed knowledge
> > > or social
> > > protocols, for example.
> > >
> > > Together, all of the artists in this show help us
> > > speculate, with the
> > > widest possible scope, on what an art for networks
> > > might be.
> > >
> > > 3. MF: Perhaps it is useful to think about two of
> > > the modes of
> > > network that currently exist. There's the
> > > development of systems that
> > > take heterogeneous material and connect it through a
> > > unifying,
> > > reductive, measurable protocol. Another might be
> > > informatisation -
> > > that everything can be transposed into a
> > > transmissable and calculable
> > > numerical 'equivalent'. Perhaps these kinds of
> > > networking
> > > technologies are linked to the idea of a discovery
> > > of an ur-language,
> > > a code that precedes all codes.
> > > A different kind of network might be that which
> > > is deliberately
> > > non-compressible, that generates its own terms of
> > > composition as it's
> > > enacted; rather than reducing one thing to its
> > > intermediary, it
> > > focuses on inventing new connections, proximities,
> > > conjunctural
> > > leaps.
> > >
> > > SP: The unifying system forces homogeneity onto
> > > previously
> > > heterogeneous material and has plenty of historical
> > > precedents such
> > > as systematic classification in Zoology, the Dewey
> > > decimal system.
> > > Objectified matter is ordered, processed - the
> > > system aims for
> > > closure, completeness.
> > > In your second example, the subject resists
> > > classification or
> > > reduction to a cipher. For example, in
> > > organizations, there's always
> > > tension between structure - invariably hierarchical
> > > - and those who
> > > work within it. Despite the most ruthless
> > > line-management, the
> > > subject - individual or group - will find ways of
> > > subverting the
> > > structure. A common form of resistance is the
> > > 'gossip network'.
> > > Rachel Baker's 'Art of Work', for example, has
> > > previously inserted
> > > itself into this context. (8)
> > >
> > > I think Manuel De Landa's model (9) of meshworks and
> > > hierarchies is
> > > useful here and relates, (at least in my
> > > understanding of it), to the
> > > relationship between networks, hierarchies, agency
> > > and structure.
> > >
> > > Meshworks (networks) and hierarchies exist as a
> > > mixture. The meshwork
> > > formed as an aggregate of dissimilar, heterogeneous
> > > material, the
> > > hierarchy from similar, homogeneous material,
> > > forming strata. They
> > >
> > === message truncated ===
> >
> >
> > =====
> >
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
> >
http://sbc.yahoo.com> > + Well this is thoroughly depressing
> > -> 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> >
> >
>
>
> + Well this is thoroughly depressing
> -> 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>