marc garrett
Since the beginning
Works in London United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

ARTBASE (1)
PORTFOLIO (3)
BIO
Marc Garrett is co-director and co-founder, with artist Ruth Catlow of the Internet arts collectives and communities – Furtherfield.org, Furthernoise.org, Netbehaviour.org, also co-founder and co-curator/director of the gallery space formerly known as 'HTTP Gallery' now called the Furtherfield Gallery in London (Finsbury Park), UK. Co-curating various contemporary Media Arts exhibitions, projects nationally and internationally. Co-editor of 'Artists Re:Thinking Games' with Ruth Catlow and Corrado Morgana 2010. Hosted Furtherfield's critically acclaimed weekly broadcast on UK's Resonance FM Radio, a series of hour long live interviews with people working at the edge of contemporary practices in art, technology & social change. Currently doing an Art history Phd at the University of London, Birkbeck College.

Net artist, media artist, curator, writer, street artist, activist, educationalist and musician. Emerging in the late 80′s from the streets exploring creativity via agit-art tactics. Using unofficial, experimental platforms such as the streets, pirate radio such as the locally popular ‘Savage Yet Tender’ alternative broadcasting 1980′s group, net broadcasts, BBS systems, performance, intervention, events, pamphlets, warehouses and gallery spaces. In the early nineties, was co-sysop (systems operator) with Heath Bunting on Cybercafe BBS with Irational.org.

Our mission is to co-create extraordinary art that connects with contemporary audiences providing innovative, engaging and inclusive digital and physical spaces for appreciating and participating in practices in art, technology and social change. As well as finding alternative ways around already dominating hegemonies, thus claiming for ourselves and our peer networks a culturally aware and critical dialogue beyond traditional hierarchical behaviours. Influenced by situationist theory, fluxus, free and open source culture, and processes of self-education and peer learning, in an art, activist and community context.
Discussions (1712) Opportunities (15) Events (175) Jobs (2)
DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking


Why not hack culture, you meet more people that way ;-)

m.

>>Just from my myopic standpoint, I think there is money out there for artists
>>
>>
>
>artists are *dead*
>
>the guys'n girls making 2Million a piece are out of this time and live on
>fetish for art and economical exploitation.
>
>make your money by hacking a bank ;) ... then do your netart
>
>salvatore
>
>
>
>
>>-- Original Message --
>>From: Patrick Lichty <voyd@voyd.com>
>>To: Zev Robinson <zr@zrdesign.co.uk>, marc <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>,
>> <list@rhizome.org>
>>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking
>>Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 16:08:40 -0500 (CDT)
>>Reply-To: Patrick Lichty <voyd@voyd.com>
>>
>>
>>A couple points to everyone:
>>
>>Just from my myopic standpoint, I think there is money out there for artists
>>
>>who can slide their work right into the media arts niche. In addition,
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>artists who can give nervous curators something that will take their
>>introduction to new media to their audiences just a step (like Simon,
>>Villareal, etc,) can do the museum circuit.
>>
>>I think the misnomer is that the art world has to take new Media on its
>>
>>
>terms.
>
>
>>Not so for our genre, or any other, really... For other avant-gardes, it
>>has
>>often taken years for the wave to enter the art world; should we be any
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>different?
>>
>>My hope is that there will be artists who will bridge the gap between awe
>>and
>>accessibility in New Media. The most amazing piece of work is often
>>considered an overpriced gee-gaw if it doesn't elicit a response.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>+
>-> 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: Digital Culture in Brazil


Thanks - will definately visit.

marc

>Digital Culture in Brazil:
>
>monochrom and the Austrian Green Party organized a panel discussion
>about Brazil's open source and digital rights programme.
>
>Guests:
>Claudio Prado, Coordinator of Digital Policy of the Ministry of Culture
>of Brazil
>Eva Lichtenberger, Member of European Parliament
>Marie Ringler, Member of the City Parliament of Vienna, Culture and
>Technology
>Host: Michel Reimon.
>
>Thanks to Radio Netwatcher the talk is now online.
>
>---> http://www.monochrom.at/digital-culture-in-brazil/
>
>
>+
>-> 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: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking


Hi Zev & all,

Well, perhaps there can be Node.NewYork, Node.Zagreb - a Node where ever...

At the moment there are plans for a Node.Stockholm, Node.Linz, Node.Sau
paulo (I think it's Sau paulo). Organized by people the who live in
those cities by consensus. Institutions, artists, galleries, techies,
curators - all work together.

I did a couple of postings on the list regarding Node.London, although
I've never discussed it on here. Mainly because it seemed that no one
was that interested on this list - which was quite surprising. Lauren &
Marisa were cool enough to have it shown on the Rhizome site.

I guess it's whether people really want something to happen or not. We
need to challenge this notion that artists are owed something and build
a way out of the trap of dependency somehow. It just takes people to
think outside of their own micro-situations for a bit.

We've proved that it can work, some of the more 'ahem' high culture
types, might be a bit snotty and distant about it but, we did it and it
was real and it worked, and it can happen elsewhere.

We, and other Node.London people, are currently visiting various cities
around the world giving talks on how it worked out for us. It was not
perfect, much can be improved and it was such a big project for everyone
involved, yet it changed the cultural future of London, for media arts
and the United Kingdom. And it got artist's work seen by plenty of new
audiences. On-line and off-line...

Have a look at the site and see for yourselves...
http://www.nodel.org/

text excerpt (if you are interested)

NODE.L is an experiment in structures and tools of cooperation as
invented or adapted by artists, activists and technologists, many (but
not all) of whom are committed to ideas of social change through their
practice. Aside from a very able project co-coordinator who was
appointed in July, the entire project is run by Voluntary Organisers
(VOs). Looking back, the most fundamentally challenging pre-established
rule was that of consensual management - no voting and no hierarchy to
take the strain (and responsibility) of decisions. We talked till we
agreed and in a meeting with 30 people this could take some time.

In the last six months this decision-making process has necessarily
evolved to incorporate additional self-assigned subgroups, with
responsibility for various tasks such as PR, finance and partnerships.
The public facing NODE.L wiki and forum
<http://smal.omweb.org/modules/wakka/HomePage>[2], combined with monthly
VO meetings, facilitates collaborative working within these groups,
supporting an experiment in transparent organisation. This process
throws up many hot potato issues that are beyond the scope of this text
but which would benefit from careful evaluation after March. Jo
Freeman’s seminal text, The Tyranny of Structurelessness
<http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm%3Cbr%20/%3E> [3], written
in the context of 1970’s Feminist, consciousness-raising meetings, was
much quoted at NODE.L meetings to provide an insight into some of the
limitations of undifferentiated lateral structures of organisation.

Before joining NODE.L, we were not aware of how many other people in
London were involved in creating and exhibiting media artwork, that
deployed electronic or digital technologies, and that were exploring art
in a socio-political context. In June, the idea of “Seed Nodes” (now
just called Nodes)[4] was born. This idea was a cross between an earlier
Wireless London <http://wirelesslondon.info/> [5] concept of a ‘Node in
Every Code’ (in which London’s free wireless hot-spots could be mapped)
and the popular annual Open House <http://www.londonopenhouse.org/>[6]
scheme (in which people open the doors of their homes to an
architecturally curious public).

With very small amounts of ‘seed money’, geographically and culturally
diverse arts venues and organisations (alternative, independent,
publicly funded, and commercial) act as hubs (Nodes) for activities in
their localities. Nodes connect with each other to provide opportunities
for sharing resources such as printers and physical spaces (for events,
presentations and exhibitions), whilst NODE.L provides technical
expertise and the benefits of a centralised (and distributed) PR
machine. It is intended that through this structure, Nodes promote
ongoing connections within their local communities whilst at the same
time developing productive links and healthy interdependencies with
clusters of other media-arts venues and practitioners in what was
previously a scattered and cliquey community with low visibility (often
even to itself).

http://www.nodel.org/

> various things have kept me from following this thread and what is
> going on very much, but I just wanted to add something to what Marc
> said. http://www.nodel.org/ (node.london) was great because people got
> together, worked together, lots got shown/performed, people were able
> to see a wide variety of shows, and it got a lot of publicity because
> of it. everyone participated in the manner and at the level they
> wanted or could. No one was voted best, no one voted at all except by
> attendence and opinion, and everyone gained.
>
> Zev
> Zev Robinson
> www.artafterscience.com
> www.zrdesign.co.uk
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "marc" <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>
> To: <list@rhizome.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 2:57 PM
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking
>
>
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> >One may ask quite validly, as Marc has, what voting does for a
>> community, but I confess I am less interested in community than I am
>> in art, am more interested in what voting supports as art.
>>
>> Yes- I understand and of course agree with your leaning to being more
>> interested in the art itself. I am extremely interested in the art as
>> well, as I know you know ;-)
>>
>> Although, because I am involved with art myself on various levels,
>> not just as an artist, but also from a www.furtherfield.org,
>> http://www.http.uk.net & http://www.nodel.org/ perspective, paradigms
>> tend to become more apparant.
>>
>> There is an awful lot to chew on, may be not necessarily for every
>> one here, or elsewhere for that matter - but it certainly interests
>> me, and perhaps some others (hopefully).
>>
>> marc
>>
>>
>>> I'm curious about what sort of art gets voted for.
>>>
>>> I haven't gone through the finalist list yet. Plan to, though, over
>>> the next
>>> few days.
>>>
>>> Has anybody done so and have any pithy obs on the type of things
>>> that got
>>> voted for?
>>>
>>> One may ask quite validly, as Marc has, what voting does for a
>>> community,
>>> but I confess I am less interested in community than I am in art, am
>>> more
>>> interested in what voting supports as 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: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking


Hi Jim,

>One may ask quite validly, as Marc has, what voting does for a
community, but I confess I am less interested in community than I am in
art, am more interested in what voting supports as art.

Yes- I understand and of course agree with your leaning to being more
interested in the art itself. I am extremely interested in the art as
well, as I know you know ;-)

Although, because I am involved with art myself on various levels, not
just as an artist, but also from a www.furtherfield.org,
http://www.http.uk.net & http://www.nodel.org/ perspective, paradigms
tend to become more apparant.

There is an awful lot to chew on, may be not necessarily for every one
here, or elsewhere for that matter - but it certainly interests me, and
perhaps some others (hopefully).

marc

>I'm curious about what sort of art gets voted for.
>
>I haven't gone through the finalist list yet. Plan to, though, over the next
>few days.
>
>Has anybody done so and have any pithy obs on the type of things that got
>voted for?
>
>One may ask quite validly, as Marc has, what voting does for a community,
>but I confess I am less interested in community than I am in art, am more
>interested in what voting supports as 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
>
>
>
>

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking


Hi Eryk,

Sorry for my 'abstract interjection'.

I definately agree with what you have mentioned below - my question is
coming more from a place of people re-evaluating the effects of voting
and what the real effects in respect social context, what does voting
really do for its communities, what it really means psychologically,
politically and culturally?

The process being used now, I see more as a pragmatic approach (period
before another perhaps) in getting something happening, which is
positive in its own right, so that people's works is seen, respected and
considered - and appropriated accordingly to the creativevalue of a
connected, networked arena at large.

Yet - Is there an argument or even a need for setting up a (this could
be a seperate working environment) forum, place for dialogues, where
those who are interested in moving beyond a traditional set of 'system
of competitive led', mannerist frameworks? Where a group can explore
other options, and test also them out?

marc

>I've been long advocating that rhizome integrate the community into any process it can; so voting seems like a very good idea to me. Anonymity in the process might have been good (nameless proposals) and it also would have been interesting if we,
>the community, chose some works to talk about online...
>
>The reality is that we're in an open system, it's not rhizome's fault if none of us are sure how to react to it. We'll get used to it eventually. There's some kinks in the process but overall I think it's a pretty nice effort of getting away from
>dry curational expertise in the grant process.
>
>So, bravo for that.
>
>-er.
>
>marc <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org> on Saturday, May 06, 2006 at 6:53 AM -0500 wrote:
>
>
>>why vote at all?
>>
>>marc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>+
>-> 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
>
>
>
>