ARTBASE (2)
BIO
Jim Andrews does http://vispo.com . He is a poet-programmer and audio guy. His work explores the new media possibilities of poetry, and seeks to synthesize the poetical with other arts and media.
libr-critique and Hortense Gauthier video interview with Joerg Piringer
Here is an interesting French site from Paris:
http://www.t-pas-net.com/libr-critique . It is mostly in French, but there's
a video interview with Joerg Piringer in English. Joerg is an Austrian
poet-programmer who did a terrific performance at the Epoetry conference in
Paris, recently. There are video interviews in French with the Epoetry
organizers Philippe Bootz, Patrick Burgaud, and Marc Verat. The site is by
Hortense Gauthier who also performed memorably at Epoetry.
ja
http://vispo.com
http://www.t-pas-net.com/libr-critique . It is mostly in French, but there's
a video interview with Joerg Piringer in English. Joerg is an Austrian
poet-programmer who did a terrific performance at the Epoetry conference in
Paris, recently. There are video interviews in French with the Epoetry
organizers Philippe Bootz, Patrick Burgaud, and Marc Verat. The site is by
Hortense Gauthier who also performed memorably at Epoetry.
ja
http://vispo.com
videos from epoetry conference in paris
here are some short excerpts from performances and presentations at the 2007
epoetry conference held recently in paris:
http://lucdall.free.fr/epoetry2007 . the videos stream in, but the
connection is a bit slow, so after you click a vid, minimize it and let it
load for a while before starting it.
it was a terrific event. the mornings and afternoons were spent at the u of
paris attending lectures and panel discussions by artists and scholars; the
evenings happened off campus in paris at venues for performance and
presentations. the first evening, at Le Divan du Monde, was devoted to
performances; the second evening, at Le Point Ephemere, concerned
interactive work; and the third evening, at Le Cube, concerned Web work.
the evenings were well attended not only by people from the conference but
by parisians. the evening events were totally packed cheek to jowl.
many thanks to philippe bootz, patrick burgaud, and loss glazier for their
excellent organization of this international event.
ja
http://vispo.com
epoetry conference held recently in paris:
http://lucdall.free.fr/epoetry2007 . the videos stream in, but the
connection is a bit slow, so after you click a vid, minimize it and let it
load for a while before starting it.
it was a terrific event. the mornings and afternoons were spent at the u of
paris attending lectures and panel discussions by artists and scholars; the
evenings happened off campus in paris at venues for performance and
presentations. the first evening, at Le Divan du Monde, was devoted to
performances; the second evening, at Le Point Ephemere, concerned
interactive work; and the third evening, at Le Cube, concerned Web work.
the evenings were well attended not only by people from the conference but
by parisians. the evening events were totally packed cheek to jowl.
many thanks to philippe bootz, patrick burgaud, and loss glazier for their
excellent organization of this international event.
ja
http://vispo.com
Re: Re: Re: Re: the unrepublic of art
> jacky sawatzky wrote:
>
> hi all,
>
> thanks for your insights all of you.
>
> I have to clarify myself when I am talking about juried and influence,
> I was predominantly talking about the historical context, art -history,
> to give an example of myself what I have been exposed for someone
> growing up and living in Holland Rembrandt, Vermeer, and not to forget
> Mondriaan. Or writing in english other then the language I grew up
> in dutch makes a big difference how I express myself and how I see the
> world.
>
> Being older I now have a choice which painting, media works, book,
> films, ext, I find interesting. Though this interest is formed by what
> I have been exposed to before and the content of this exposure was for
> a part determined by the school curriculum. (just an average public
> school) thus juried by the process of history (maybe if I was exposed
> to Duchamp in addition to the others I would have not disliked high
> school art so much. I found it stupid. ) It's a base I can't ignore
> even negating art-history means for me that I dealing with it.
>
> I am from opinion that independent thinking is acknowledging ones
> dependence, MAYBE it's because this dependence is unique,
> individualized, and so results in independent thought.
The notion of an independent artist intellectual does not involve the
assumption that we are free of influence. It means we are more interested in
'art' than 'community'. It means that we do not simply 'run with the pack'.
Concerning matters of decisions about art, it means we try hard to see
beyond friendships, enmity, and associations in the art we champion. It
means that rather than simply valuing institutions and purveyors of art, we
value the individual artists who dedicate their lives to the actual creation
of the art. It means trying to work toward poetics that counter barbarism
and the simple, witless admiration of conferred power.
> Maybe that was makes art so unique and so powerful at times, that each
> individual has an individual and a collective experiences and views and
> there own way of dealing with art-history. Art is complex dynamic of
> give and take, time and place, of history and no-history, a system that
> is in flux I don't know, really mostly I don't understand what makes
> me pause, but I do see art as something outside me (hmm sounds
> vague..)
I understand. And I agree with what you say, for the most part, Jacky. Also,
thanks for writing in English.
But, also, I think we easily surrender too much of art to something external
to ourselves. We impart more artistic power to the external than to
ourselves. One of the really interesting things I learned (or confirmed) in
computer science is that meaning is something we costruct. It isn't
available on a platter. We create it. Computers can parse language for
syntax easily. But not easily for semantics, for meaning. That involves
bringing a world view to bear on the language. Of course computers can sort
of do this now, but it is an extrordinarily rich process. Which isn't to say
that there is absolutely no meaning on the platter. But the degree to which
we construct it is high. Which is to say art is not simply to be absorbed
but, to an important extent, created and interpreted to be understood at
all. The act of really digging a work of art requires a creativity in
constructing the meaning at all. Also, it's usually a very ambiguous
process--that's why computers can't do it very well--so the 'meaning' can be
very different--though usually share common points--between people.
So, yes, it's sort of out there, external to us, but it is semi-meaningless
without creative, constructive perception and interpretation by others. Art
is irrelevant and a waste of time without creative apprehension. And when it
is creatively apprehended, it is not so much a case of 'message received' as
'creation in process'. though there's also some 'message received'.
> The current juried systems , would this be CC or Rhizome or some
> radical art group, interest me, more from the point of what kind of art
> is supported or not and through these choices understanding which
> criteria are underneath the selection. This understanding explains the
> political and social climate of different groups and countries.
>
> and Pall, for me what Jim said was not "bleedin' obvious" .
Message received?
I just got back from my first trip to Holland. Wow. Amsterdam and Haarlem
are fascinating.
ja
http://vispo.com
>
> hi all,
>
> thanks for your insights all of you.
>
> I have to clarify myself when I am talking about juried and influence,
> I was predominantly talking about the historical context, art -history,
> to give an example of myself what I have been exposed for someone
> growing up and living in Holland Rembrandt, Vermeer, and not to forget
> Mondriaan. Or writing in english other then the language I grew up
> in dutch makes a big difference how I express myself and how I see the
> world.
>
> Being older I now have a choice which painting, media works, book,
> films, ext, I find interesting. Though this interest is formed by what
> I have been exposed to before and the content of this exposure was for
> a part determined by the school curriculum. (just an average public
> school) thus juried by the process of history (maybe if I was exposed
> to Duchamp in addition to the others I would have not disliked high
> school art so much. I found it stupid. ) It's a base I can't ignore
> even negating art-history means for me that I dealing with it.
>
> I am from opinion that independent thinking is acknowledging ones
> dependence, MAYBE it's because this dependence is unique,
> individualized, and so results in independent thought.
The notion of an independent artist intellectual does not involve the
assumption that we are free of influence. It means we are more interested in
'art' than 'community'. It means that we do not simply 'run with the pack'.
Concerning matters of decisions about art, it means we try hard to see
beyond friendships, enmity, and associations in the art we champion. It
means that rather than simply valuing institutions and purveyors of art, we
value the individual artists who dedicate their lives to the actual creation
of the art. It means trying to work toward poetics that counter barbarism
and the simple, witless admiration of conferred power.
> Maybe that was makes art so unique and so powerful at times, that each
> individual has an individual and a collective experiences and views and
> there own way of dealing with art-history. Art is complex dynamic of
> give and take, time and place, of history and no-history, a system that
> is in flux I don't know, really mostly I don't understand what makes
> me pause, but I do see art as something outside me (hmm sounds
> vague..)
I understand. And I agree with what you say, for the most part, Jacky. Also,
thanks for writing in English.
But, also, I think we easily surrender too much of art to something external
to ourselves. We impart more artistic power to the external than to
ourselves. One of the really interesting things I learned (or confirmed) in
computer science is that meaning is something we costruct. It isn't
available on a platter. We create it. Computers can parse language for
syntax easily. But not easily for semantics, for meaning. That involves
bringing a world view to bear on the language. Of course computers can sort
of do this now, but it is an extrordinarily rich process. Which isn't to say
that there is absolutely no meaning on the platter. But the degree to which
we construct it is high. Which is to say art is not simply to be absorbed
but, to an important extent, created and interpreted to be understood at
all. The act of really digging a work of art requires a creativity in
constructing the meaning at all. Also, it's usually a very ambiguous
process--that's why computers can't do it very well--so the 'meaning' can be
very different--though usually share common points--between people.
So, yes, it's sort of out there, external to us, but it is semi-meaningless
without creative, constructive perception and interpretation by others. Art
is irrelevant and a waste of time without creative apprehension. And when it
is creatively apprehended, it is not so much a case of 'message received' as
'creation in process'. though there's also some 'message received'.
> The current juried systems , would this be CC or Rhizome or some
> radical art group, interest me, more from the point of what kind of art
> is supported or not and through these choices understanding which
> criteria are underneath the selection. This understanding explains the
> political and social climate of different groups and countries.
>
> and Pall, for me what Jim said was not "bleedin' obvious" .
Message received?
I just got back from my first trip to Holland. Wow. Amsterdam and Haarlem
are fascinating.
ja
http://vispo.com
Re: Re: Re: Re: the unrepublic of art
perhaps there are types of art where some sort of semi-concensus is possible and common, but the more adventurous the types of art under consideration, the less that's likely to be true. even if jurors do not simply reward their friends and contacts (which is reprehensible), the range of types and approaches to art typically under consideration in media art competitions is very wide. media/um x art(s) x technical level x millieu x subject matter x aesthetic x language x politics x experimental level x artist experience level... a forbidding cross product of considerations that may leave jury members shaking their heads about the differences in opinion they have about the relative value of the proposals and the art and the artists.
also, the more original the proposal, the harder it is to convey the value of the project when it's not finished to view, as is the case with proposals submitted to juries.
it's a crap shoot. it really is. the jury can be structured so that the jury ranges fairly widely in their backgrounds over the proposals (usually not) and then each juror has a say and they can talk until they're blue in the face, but it remains a relatively meaningless crap shoot.
that's the scary but fascinating reality of it.
to me, it highlights the existential individuality of art and the experience of art, erika and jacky. we are so similar and so different.
what you think and feel about art is as important as what i think and feel about art. even when an 'expert' has his/her say in the matter, it is bound to be very different from the next 'expert'. we all have things to teach each other, and we do well to try to listen to one another and learn from one another, but what is most powerfully meaningful to us, via the art experience, is ours and ours alone, however much we may learn from each other, and we treasure our own experiences of art and what makes it meaningful to us above what anyone else says, and rightly so.
also, artists put their blood sweat and tears into creating a situation where we can actually experience afresh. where we are challenged to abandon our preconceptions and experience afresh, rather than experience an easily categorized representation. The artists and audience alike seek out this befuddling multiplicity toward fresh experience and apprehension.
art challenges our categories rather than willingly conforming to them.
there's nothing wrong with placing value on individuality. it's ok. you can be an individual. individuation. it's ok.
ja
http://vispo.com
> Jacky is making some important points that seem to be ignored in
> these current posts.
> As "no man is an island" the same goes for art.
>
> As to my previous post on the b b b b b boringness of this topic
> the posts are always couched in a framework that has romantic
> tendencies, as well, there seems to be undertones of desperation
> and personal crisis. Perhaps the crisis is that, while
> maintaining these notions of art which are arrived at through
> the values of individuality, objectivity, and ownership, an art
> has emerged that does not fit into these criteria.
>
> To me a continual assertion of individualism denotes a desire for control.
also, the more original the proposal, the harder it is to convey the value of the project when it's not finished to view, as is the case with proposals submitted to juries.
it's a crap shoot. it really is. the jury can be structured so that the jury ranges fairly widely in their backgrounds over the proposals (usually not) and then each juror has a say and they can talk until they're blue in the face, but it remains a relatively meaningless crap shoot.
that's the scary but fascinating reality of it.
to me, it highlights the existential individuality of art and the experience of art, erika and jacky. we are so similar and so different.
what you think and feel about art is as important as what i think and feel about art. even when an 'expert' has his/her say in the matter, it is bound to be very different from the next 'expert'. we all have things to teach each other, and we do well to try to listen to one another and learn from one another, but what is most powerfully meaningful to us, via the art experience, is ours and ours alone, however much we may learn from each other, and we treasure our own experiences of art and what makes it meaningful to us above what anyone else says, and rightly so.
also, artists put their blood sweat and tears into creating a situation where we can actually experience afresh. where we are challenged to abandon our preconceptions and experience afresh, rather than experience an easily categorized representation. The artists and audience alike seek out this befuddling multiplicity toward fresh experience and apprehension.
art challenges our categories rather than willingly conforming to them.
there's nothing wrong with placing value on individuality. it's ok. you can be an individual. individuation. it's ok.
ja
http://vispo.com
> Jacky is making some important points that seem to be ignored in
> these current posts.
> As "no man is an island" the same goes for art.
>
> As to my previous post on the b b b b b boringness of this topic
> the posts are always couched in a framework that has romantic
> tendencies, as well, there seems to be undertones of desperation
> and personal crisis. Perhaps the crisis is that, while
> maintaining these notions of art which are arrived at through
> the values of individuality, objectivity, and ownership, an art
> has emerged that does not fit into these criteria.
>
> To me a continual assertion of individualism denotes a desire for control.
Re: ABC Invaders: digital poem invades monitor
Apologies, the link was bad. It should be
http://www.nokturno.org/tatu/ABC-invaders-high.html
> This is a poem by Tatu Pohjavirta & Eino Santanen; the old arcade
> game Space
> Invaders goes textual. Plays very well. Would be interested in a
> translation
> of the text, if possible.
>
> ja
http://www.nokturno.org/tatu/ABC-invaders-high.html
> This is a poem by Tatu Pohjavirta & Eino Santanen; the old arcade
> game Space
> Invaders goes textual. Plays very well. Would be interested in a
> translation
> of the text, if possible.
>
> ja