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.
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.
'sometimes'
Thought that some might want to view sometimes, part of some new work that I
have been working on. The poem is called 'sometimes', it is about wondering
what it was like for my mother during my birth.
http://www.furtherfield.org/mgarrett/turmoil/docs/sometimesframe.htm
marc
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
have been working on. The poem is called 'sometimes', it is about wondering
what it was like for my mother during my birth.
http://www.furtherfield.org/mgarrett/turmoil/docs/sometimesframe.htm
marc
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
Re: after rhizome?
Re: RHIZOME_RAW: after rhizome?No offence taken,
Just for the record.
I am co-runnuing furtherfield.
Running a web design business & all the cash goes straight into funding fur=
therfield.
Setting up a project called skinstrip - a collaborative project.
Teaching Students how to write dissertations and marking them (40 of them) =
& written a curriculum introducing visual dissertations, marking 10 of them=
currently.
Writing articles for a couple of artists.
Making art - learning Pearl as well.
making music - ouch those monkeys.
Also apllying for grants - for furtherfield projects & netbehaviour & skins=
trip.
& I still make time to discuss with individuals for challenges my assumptio=
ns all the time, which is good for me - for it is very much part of art as =
well. Communication is good. Lateral creativity can feed into other places =
in life, it gives essence and quality & more...
Plus tomorrow night I will have an extremely very very wild & pleasurable e=
vening with friends on my birthday.
much respect - marc
No offence but I'm not going to answer this nor Marc Garrets post on the =
grounds that it would draw me into a discussion that I've already stated th=
at I am not interested in and that I feel doesn't warrant discussion. I'm b=
usy making art.
Pall
----- Original Message -----
From: miguel leal
To: Pall Thayer ; list@rhizome.org
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: after rhizome?
Maybe we just have better things to talk and think about. The fact th=
at
these complaints aren't generating any dialogue perhaps shows that the
issues are to minor to warrant in-depth discussion. Can we get back t=
o art
now?
Get back to art? Is there an inside and an outside when we speak of art=
? And is it rhizome a art for art sake node? That's not an argument and tha=
t's not a justification to leave any discussion, specially this one.
Most the arguments being used to criticize the new membership policy ar=
e purely demagogic, (when they try to scrutinize the rhizome staff payment=
s, for example). Any way, there is something interesting happening here (as=
we can see in discussions about this issue being held in other mailing lis=
ts), specially because this is a way to discuss the dangers of closed inst=
itutionalization (and not because of the $5) of formerly open communities, =
and their capacity to survive to such stressing aspects of their growing. =
Probably, and now i am arguing about this particular issue, the great dange=
r is a certain loss of their mobility and ability to adapt its tools of sur=
vival. Don't forget that rhizome was mainly supported by third-party foundi=
ng and it was growing since the beginning and only a few were worried about=
this issue until last year survival crisis (with the budget requirements a=
nd compromises that rhizome assumed until then). As I said before, I am her=
e also as an observer, trying to figure out the consequences of this change=
s...
best
miguel leal
[http://www.virose.pt]
Just for the record.
I am co-runnuing furtherfield.
Running a web design business & all the cash goes straight into funding fur=
therfield.
Setting up a project called skinstrip - a collaborative project.
Teaching Students how to write dissertations and marking them (40 of them) =
& written a curriculum introducing visual dissertations, marking 10 of them=
currently.
Writing articles for a couple of artists.
Making art - learning Pearl as well.
making music - ouch those monkeys.
Also apllying for grants - for furtherfield projects & netbehaviour & skins=
trip.
& I still make time to discuss with individuals for challenges my assumptio=
ns all the time, which is good for me - for it is very much part of art as =
well. Communication is good. Lateral creativity can feed into other places =
in life, it gives essence and quality & more...
Plus tomorrow night I will have an extremely very very wild & pleasurable e=
vening with friends on my birthday.
much respect - marc
No offence but I'm not going to answer this nor Marc Garrets post on the =
grounds that it would draw me into a discussion that I've already stated th=
at I am not interested in and that I feel doesn't warrant discussion. I'm b=
usy making art.
Pall
----- Original Message -----
From: miguel leal
To: Pall Thayer ; list@rhizome.org
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: after rhizome?
Maybe we just have better things to talk and think about. The fact th=
at
these complaints aren't generating any dialogue perhaps shows that the
issues are to minor to warrant in-depth discussion. Can we get back t=
o art
now?
Get back to art? Is there an inside and an outside when we speak of art=
? And is it rhizome a art for art sake node? That's not an argument and tha=
t's not a justification to leave any discussion, specially this one.
Most the arguments being used to criticize the new membership policy ar=
e purely demagogic, (when they try to scrutinize the rhizome staff payment=
s, for example). Any way, there is something interesting happening here (as=
we can see in discussions about this issue being held in other mailing lis=
ts), specially because this is a way to discuss the dangers of closed inst=
itutionalization (and not because of the $5) of formerly open communities, =
and their capacity to survive to such stressing aspects of their growing. =
Probably, and now i am arguing about this particular issue, the great dange=
r is a certain loss of their mobility and ability to adapt its tools of sur=
vival. Don't forget that rhizome was mainly supported by third-party foundi=
ng and it was growing since the beginning and only a few were worried about=
this issue until last year survival crisis (with the budget requirements a=
nd compromises that rhizome assumed until then). As I said before, I am her=
e also as an observer, trying to figure out the consequences of this change=
s...
best
miguel leal
[http://www.virose.pt]
Re: Re: About Rhizome...
I read this typo >punlished< as punished, may be there is a subconscious
need for such an action by all who feel betrayed.
marc
> >
> NOTE:
> i punlished this to the front page to help get eryk's concerns
heard...while I don't neccessarily agree with him, they are valid points,
and should be discussed....
>
> bliss
> l
>
> + 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
>
need for such an action by all who feel betrayed.
marc
> >
> NOTE:
> i punlished this to the front page to help get eryk's concerns
heard...while I don't neccessarily agree with him, they are valid points,
and should be discussed....
>
> bliss
> l
>
> + 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: after rhizome?
Hello Paul,
I have to disagree, this is more a reflection of how dry Net activism is on
this list - not a thing to proud of. Especially when Net activism was what
brought about Rhizome in the first place, or the sense of it anyway. Eyrk
has some very valid points, I do not agree with all of what he says but
definately understand his frustation on this matter...
marc
> > I found it useful enough to pay the five dollars. And I still have
> problems
> > with what is occuring. I am also dismayed that there has been no honest
> > dialogue about the complaints that have been raised. Instead there is a
> > chorus of "I like it, if you don't, then you can leave." Which I find
> > frightening.
> >
>
> Maybe we just have better things to talk and think about. The fact that
> these complaints aren't generating any dialogue perhaps shows that the
> issues are to minor to warrant in-depth discussion. Can we get back to art
> now?
>
> ps... Just a few days until a major new PANSE update (we're running on a
> brand spankin' new server now, bought and paid for by the Icelandic
Ministry
> of Culture!).
>
> Pall
>
> Pall Thayer
> artist/teacher
> Fjolbrautaskolinn vid Armula
> http://www.this.is/pallit
> http://www.this.is/pallit/isjs
> http://www.this.is/pallit/harmony
>
> + 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
>
I have to disagree, this is more a reflection of how dry Net activism is on
this list - not a thing to proud of. Especially when Net activism was what
brought about Rhizome in the first place, or the sense of it anyway. Eyrk
has some very valid points, I do not agree with all of what he says but
definately understand his frustation on this matter...
marc
> > I found it useful enough to pay the five dollars. And I still have
> problems
> > with what is occuring. I am also dismayed that there has been no honest
> > dialogue about the complaints that have been raised. Instead there is a
> > chorus of "I like it, if you don't, then you can leave." Which I find
> > frightening.
> >
>
> Maybe we just have better things to talk and think about. The fact that
> these complaints aren't generating any dialogue perhaps shows that the
> issues are to minor to warrant in-depth discussion. Can we get back to art
> now?
>
> ps... Just a few days until a major new PANSE update (we're running on a
> brand spankin' new server now, bought and paid for by the Icelandic
Ministry
> of Culture!).
>
> Pall
>
> Pall Thayer
> artist/teacher
> Fjolbrautaskolinn vid Armula
> http://www.this.is/pallit
> http://www.this.is/pallit/isjs
> http://www.this.is/pallit/harmony
>
> + 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: About Rhizome...
HI Eryk,
Good to chat again,
I see that Rhizome has kind of privatized itself. Moved away from a
democratic idea of things and has regrouped, centralized everything. And
yes, it is predictable and a very unimaginative thing to do, especially when
they have got so much information on how to do alternatives in their
databanks.
> I must have signed up after this announcement, but European expansion
seems
> a far cry from the hibernation mode that forced rhizome to charge us a fee
> out of neccessity, doesn't it?
Yes, I agree.
I believe that it is a political motivation and personally do not wish for
them to exploit the European talents.
And yes, I am disappointed (I am sure that I have said this somewhere
already) that they have not been more imaginative in their actions. I have
experienced a similar example when I used to run an arts studio with 2 other
people in the East end of London about eight years ago. That's why Ruth and
I left immediately and formed furtherfield, because we wanted to do
something that was special and not the same as all the art 'colonial has
beens who spend most of their time telling people what to do from top down.
It is boring and offers no real progressive solution to human interaction -
by example or by inspiration.
> Who are institutions built to serve? And who builds them? The people who
put
> very real energy into the creation of this place voluntarily, did not
create
> it so that the Rhizome brand could live on as banner for all things new
> media in the 21st century. It was created to facilitate the discussion and
> dissemination of work, later changing an emphasis to facilitating the
> creation of new work.
I have never believed that institutions were put in place to serve people. I
have never experienced such a thing other than when we had a decent Health
service in the UK, before (turd face) Thatcher privatized things over here,
now we have a rail and tube system that kills, and stops and starts due to
under funding and dodgy companies not wanting to invest.
Where there are people - there is exploitation.
I was watching an excellent program last night about Nelson Mandela, and his
ways of getting around issues. And I kind of warm to that sort of thinking,
not going for the obvious solution because the obvious solution usually
tends to be the lowest denominator. So privatizing Rhizome is not good for
Net Art and many of the artists who contributed, because it has denied to
creative and positive context of what it was all about. So in the ranks
upstairs a denial of what was of value has occurred so to make that
psychological shift themselves, justifying their decisions and actions.
> Under this guise, I had participated with the idea that I was building an
> archive- an archive of work, dialogue, and ideas. The end result is that
it
> is now a closed community where ideas are moderated through a litany of
> pre-approved censors ("superusers") chosen from the community who
volunteer
> and select works and discussions to be selected by thier own tastes. The
> irony is that these people serve the top level rhizome admins but don't
> actually profit themselves in any way.
Again, what you say is very true - I myself find it hard to swallow that
they have excellent Net Art writers and they are not looked after as well as
they could be, and are no longer paid for great writing. Centralizing again,
not generous.
But as usual this is what institutions do, boss people around and give
nothing in return.
There are new people here who have not experienced what you and I have here,
the productive, intuitive, imaginative and friendly mutualism that we feel
is important for a better world all round. Rhizome as I mentioned before is
no longer a nurturing entity. This is not good, but the way it is now.
> > More honest even - the delusion is our own, we
> > are not being conned. It is a fact of life. And it is a positive thing
for
> > we are
> > now no longer being fed by our own delusory desires to expect it to be
> > different.
>
> Arbeit Macht Frei. There is a difference between expecting something to be
> different because you were conned, and demanding that something changes
> because it has been attempting to con you.
I agree again, yet I meant (I suppose) that we could be conning ourselves to
expect anything different from those who wish for something different, and
they just so happen to be twiddling the knobs upstairs. We are not.
> > The bitterness that I have witnessed regarding Rhizome's actions has
> amazed
> > me. I have always declared my own misgivings about various issues on
this
> > list, but not with hate. Not like I would feel about someone as empty as
> > Bush,
> > Sharon, Hitler, Jane Seymour (don't you just hate Jane Seymour - yuk!).
>
> There isn't much difference between Bush, Sharon, Hitler and anyone on
this
> list, or any list, or inside of any home in any nation.
>
>
> They
> > are of their own making, their own missions and agendas, individuals,
they
> > cannot in anyway satisfy the impossible desires that have been demanded
on
> > them. It just ain't fair, and it is childish to expect it. Of course the
> > needs and
> > questions that everyone has asked or discussed regarding changes to
> Rhizome
> > were great, not just for the development of Rhizome but also ourselves.
>
>
> Speak for yourself. I have invested my own time and energy into Rhizome as
a
> space I wanted to perpetuate. It was asked of me. There is a mailing list
> for the discussion of ideas; I discussed ideas. I did interviews. I
> generated content. I created work. Now the community built upon that work
> has no place for me, and I cannot get my questions answered or my ideas
> listened to. This is not great for the development of rhizome, or for
> myself. It was extortion.
I understand, I was there with you. Discussing with you various ideas and
with others.
Your concerns are being heard, of course not by the knob twiddlers, for they
are safe and cozy from revolution now that it has all been officially privat
ized, and we have no shares in its growth.
> >
> > How often do you get a chance to experience actual change in an
> organization
> > as
> > interesting as Rhizome?
>
> Constantly.
Fair enough - I should of slipped in a past tense...
> This again strikes me as a sentimental overture to the acceptance of death
> within the "community" of rhizome, with the suggestion that we simply
> prepare for what will pass for "life" of the institutional incarnation.
> Perhaps you are relieved that the field is closing off, but I am not. I am
> "institutionalized" just before the trigger was getting pulled, but what
> about new media artists in 7 years? Look at fluxus if you don't believe a
> thriving sect of the arts can't wilt under its institutionalization.
You are right again, it is not sentimental, but an acceptance of death of
what Rhizome once was and probably (sadly) never will be again. But that's
their problem - the Internet world knows the deal now, the Rhizome team have
declared their colors and are not interested in its users needs at all. But
I have known this for a while and have emotionally adapted to redirect my
desires and needs elsewhere. It is their loss, not ours.
>
> It was not a privilidge to view the connections and idea exchanges on this
> list. It was Rhizomes privilidge for us to allow them to be the spot that
> facilitated it. The moment we believe otherwise we begin to believe in
> museums instead of artists. Perhaps I am being unreasonable, to me, the
> above quotation is unreasonable, and simply calls that we surrender the
life
> of an art form over to people who gave us the honor of letting them take
it
> and close it off when it best served them to do so.
It was a privilege for me to meet people like yourself online here, Eyrk,
not to be a Rhizome member but to meet interesting dudes who I believe are
real kool and creating some exceptional work. That is my real gist, sorry
for not being clearer...
> > Many of the people who have used this list and showed their work on
> Rhizome,
> > have put great links to their work here, I have valued all their energy;
> > even if I do
> > not immediately appreciate some of the comments, the styles. I have been
> > lucky to
> > know of them, sometimes be a part of them, shared issues around them -
> here.
>
> And without those people, what would be here? Without me, what would be
> here? Without you, what would be here? Without us, what would Mark Tribe
be
> getting his "resonable" salary for? Is this it, are we settling to be a
> culture of hobbyists, grateful to the forum leader for giving us a chance
to
> play?
You've got it - without those people Rhizome is nothing. We are the blood,
the food, the nourishment. No way am I settling to be a grateful hobbyist,
you have declared a valid pinot - but, I am with others creating
alternatives and I suggest you do the same. For our real futures reside
elsewhere, not here - this will end up a bulletin board with occasional
arguments, but nothing that special, for it will soon turn into that
traditional place where self-seeking artists get offended by explorative
ideas. Yes, we all want more - but it is not here.
>
>
> > It has
> > been magical - if we rush too quickly to condemn Rhizome, we will also
> kill
> > some of
> > the brilliant themes, discussions - some even legendary.
>
> I do not understand why you assume that rhizome was some sort of readymade
> collective. The ideas and discussions did not come from "rhizome", they
came
> from the individuals on rhizome. Many of the strongest threads in the past
> were lead by people who are nowhere to be found. Why do you think that is?
>
> >
> > Rhizome the 'entity' has become its contributors. This is why many are
> > disturbed by
> > Rhizome's more recent actions.
>
>
> But Rhizome is not us. We are rhizome. There is a difference.
No Eryk, we were Rhizome - this is the difference, it is privatized now.
> Organizations, such as corporations and non profit entities, are not
human.
> They are run by humans, and those humans are accountible for how they use
> thier time and energy. If that time and energy is dedicated to generating
> possibility then it is well spent, if it used to strangle possibility it
> then becomes irresponsible. The current movements Rhizome is engaging in
are
> aimed at reducing the pool of possibility to a smaller number of people. I
> believe we will see this continue until what is currently an unending
supply
> of possibility is slowly manipulated into a controlled, regulated system
> where demand is worth paying for. I expect this literally.
I agree, but I say again - we should use this place for what it has left,
and not for what it should and could be, now it makes no difference. For
they do not give a toss what we think, remember when Karei was let lose in
here? That was deliberate, a strategy - whether it was conscious or not does
not matter, they were happy to let it damage what we had, this was the start
of the rot.
> It means that there is more room for ourselves to get our own
> > alternative
> > adventures going out there and have a piece of the action on our own
> terms.
> This much is true, but if we are just building more institutions that are
> aimed at "monopolizing" an imaginary fixed portion then we are doing what
> rhizome has done. If we are going to be serious about building possibility
> for internet art then we have to look at how this model failed. I feel
like
> Mark Tribe and Rachel Greene need to take stock on this issue and
understand
> that Rhizome is failing, and come clean with themselves that they do not
> know how to fix this. How they can be oblivious to the current rhizome
> backlash is one thing, but mostly I am concerned with how they can be
> oblivious to the crushing of possibility that the current direction they
are
> taking is leading to.
Yes - look at how this model failed - exactly, I have made personal notes &
discuused with those concerned about Rhizome and its ways that we feel do
not benefit the users and their creative needs. And also what Rhizome has
not actively or positively supported, espeacially more recently.
Rule number 1 - it must be free!
> > I now, I have many a time declared my misgivings about many
institutions,
> > but this is the
> > first one where I have been aloud to have a voice.
>
>
> You're allowed to speak, now that you paid your dues [and I don't mean the
> five dollars.] Why settle for that?
I agree with you again, I am not settling for anything, I am adapting and
making changes and not relying on others to create what I believe should
happen. We know the deal now - we are fodder here for consumption, I have
been saying this for a while here, even before privatization. This is not a
positive situation, others don't mind this sort of thing because they are
used to being as such and do not know or wish for it to be different, such
as yourself and myself. But like Nelson Mandela said 'In the office
institution of I could only do so much', it is the same here. It is no
longer a public facility...more a simple business transaction.
The creative Revolution will not happen here - it was here once for a little
but it has been killed and reevaluated as part the 'Heroic Period'. There's
you answer...
much respect from marc
Good to chat again,
I see that Rhizome has kind of privatized itself. Moved away from a
democratic idea of things and has regrouped, centralized everything. And
yes, it is predictable and a very unimaginative thing to do, especially when
they have got so much information on how to do alternatives in their
databanks.
> I must have signed up after this announcement, but European expansion
seems
> a far cry from the hibernation mode that forced rhizome to charge us a fee
> out of neccessity, doesn't it?
Yes, I agree.
I believe that it is a political motivation and personally do not wish for
them to exploit the European talents.
And yes, I am disappointed (I am sure that I have said this somewhere
already) that they have not been more imaginative in their actions. I have
experienced a similar example when I used to run an arts studio with 2 other
people in the East end of London about eight years ago. That's why Ruth and
I left immediately and formed furtherfield, because we wanted to do
something that was special and not the same as all the art 'colonial has
beens who spend most of their time telling people what to do from top down.
It is boring and offers no real progressive solution to human interaction -
by example or by inspiration.
> Who are institutions built to serve? And who builds them? The people who
put
> very real energy into the creation of this place voluntarily, did not
create
> it so that the Rhizome brand could live on as banner for all things new
> media in the 21st century. It was created to facilitate the discussion and
> dissemination of work, later changing an emphasis to facilitating the
> creation of new work.
I have never believed that institutions were put in place to serve people. I
have never experienced such a thing other than when we had a decent Health
service in the UK, before (turd face) Thatcher privatized things over here,
now we have a rail and tube system that kills, and stops and starts due to
under funding and dodgy companies not wanting to invest.
Where there are people - there is exploitation.
I was watching an excellent program last night about Nelson Mandela, and his
ways of getting around issues. And I kind of warm to that sort of thinking,
not going for the obvious solution because the obvious solution usually
tends to be the lowest denominator. So privatizing Rhizome is not good for
Net Art and many of the artists who contributed, because it has denied to
creative and positive context of what it was all about. So in the ranks
upstairs a denial of what was of value has occurred so to make that
psychological shift themselves, justifying their decisions and actions.
> Under this guise, I had participated with the idea that I was building an
> archive- an archive of work, dialogue, and ideas. The end result is that
it
> is now a closed community where ideas are moderated through a litany of
> pre-approved censors ("superusers") chosen from the community who
volunteer
> and select works and discussions to be selected by thier own tastes. The
> irony is that these people serve the top level rhizome admins but don't
> actually profit themselves in any way.
Again, what you say is very true - I myself find it hard to swallow that
they have excellent Net Art writers and they are not looked after as well as
they could be, and are no longer paid for great writing. Centralizing again,
not generous.
But as usual this is what institutions do, boss people around and give
nothing in return.
There are new people here who have not experienced what you and I have here,
the productive, intuitive, imaginative and friendly mutualism that we feel
is important for a better world all round. Rhizome as I mentioned before is
no longer a nurturing entity. This is not good, but the way it is now.
> > More honest even - the delusion is our own, we
> > are not being conned. It is a fact of life. And it is a positive thing
for
> > we are
> > now no longer being fed by our own delusory desires to expect it to be
> > different.
>
> Arbeit Macht Frei. There is a difference between expecting something to be
> different because you were conned, and demanding that something changes
> because it has been attempting to con you.
I agree again, yet I meant (I suppose) that we could be conning ourselves to
expect anything different from those who wish for something different, and
they just so happen to be twiddling the knobs upstairs. We are not.
> > The bitterness that I have witnessed regarding Rhizome's actions has
> amazed
> > me. I have always declared my own misgivings about various issues on
this
> > list, but not with hate. Not like I would feel about someone as empty as
> > Bush,
> > Sharon, Hitler, Jane Seymour (don't you just hate Jane Seymour - yuk!).
>
> There isn't much difference between Bush, Sharon, Hitler and anyone on
this
> list, or any list, or inside of any home in any nation.
>
>
> They
> > are of their own making, their own missions and agendas, individuals,
they
> > cannot in anyway satisfy the impossible desires that have been demanded
on
> > them. It just ain't fair, and it is childish to expect it. Of course the
> > needs and
> > questions that everyone has asked or discussed regarding changes to
> Rhizome
> > were great, not just for the development of Rhizome but also ourselves.
>
>
> Speak for yourself. I have invested my own time and energy into Rhizome as
a
> space I wanted to perpetuate. It was asked of me. There is a mailing list
> for the discussion of ideas; I discussed ideas. I did interviews. I
> generated content. I created work. Now the community built upon that work
> has no place for me, and I cannot get my questions answered or my ideas
> listened to. This is not great for the development of rhizome, or for
> myself. It was extortion.
I understand, I was there with you. Discussing with you various ideas and
with others.
Your concerns are being heard, of course not by the knob twiddlers, for they
are safe and cozy from revolution now that it has all been officially privat
ized, and we have no shares in its growth.
> >
> > How often do you get a chance to experience actual change in an
> organization
> > as
> > interesting as Rhizome?
>
> Constantly.
Fair enough - I should of slipped in a past tense...
> This again strikes me as a sentimental overture to the acceptance of death
> within the "community" of rhizome, with the suggestion that we simply
> prepare for what will pass for "life" of the institutional incarnation.
> Perhaps you are relieved that the field is closing off, but I am not. I am
> "institutionalized" just before the trigger was getting pulled, but what
> about new media artists in 7 years? Look at fluxus if you don't believe a
> thriving sect of the arts can't wilt under its institutionalization.
You are right again, it is not sentimental, but an acceptance of death of
what Rhizome once was and probably (sadly) never will be again. But that's
their problem - the Internet world knows the deal now, the Rhizome team have
declared their colors and are not interested in its users needs at all. But
I have known this for a while and have emotionally adapted to redirect my
desires and needs elsewhere. It is their loss, not ours.
>
> It was not a privilidge to view the connections and idea exchanges on this
> list. It was Rhizomes privilidge for us to allow them to be the spot that
> facilitated it. The moment we believe otherwise we begin to believe in
> museums instead of artists. Perhaps I am being unreasonable, to me, the
> above quotation is unreasonable, and simply calls that we surrender the
life
> of an art form over to people who gave us the honor of letting them take
it
> and close it off when it best served them to do so.
It was a privilege for me to meet people like yourself online here, Eyrk,
not to be a Rhizome member but to meet interesting dudes who I believe are
real kool and creating some exceptional work. That is my real gist, sorry
for not being clearer...
> > Many of the people who have used this list and showed their work on
> Rhizome,
> > have put great links to their work here, I have valued all their energy;
> > even if I do
> > not immediately appreciate some of the comments, the styles. I have been
> > lucky to
> > know of them, sometimes be a part of them, shared issues around them -
> here.
>
> And without those people, what would be here? Without me, what would be
> here? Without you, what would be here? Without us, what would Mark Tribe
be
> getting his "resonable" salary for? Is this it, are we settling to be a
> culture of hobbyists, grateful to the forum leader for giving us a chance
to
> play?
You've got it - without those people Rhizome is nothing. We are the blood,
the food, the nourishment. No way am I settling to be a grateful hobbyist,
you have declared a valid pinot - but, I am with others creating
alternatives and I suggest you do the same. For our real futures reside
elsewhere, not here - this will end up a bulletin board with occasional
arguments, but nothing that special, for it will soon turn into that
traditional place where self-seeking artists get offended by explorative
ideas. Yes, we all want more - but it is not here.
>
>
> > It has
> > been magical - if we rush too quickly to condemn Rhizome, we will also
> kill
> > some of
> > the brilliant themes, discussions - some even legendary.
>
> I do not understand why you assume that rhizome was some sort of readymade
> collective. The ideas and discussions did not come from "rhizome", they
came
> from the individuals on rhizome. Many of the strongest threads in the past
> were lead by people who are nowhere to be found. Why do you think that is?
>
> >
> > Rhizome the 'entity' has become its contributors. This is why many are
> > disturbed by
> > Rhizome's more recent actions.
>
>
> But Rhizome is not us. We are rhizome. There is a difference.
No Eryk, we were Rhizome - this is the difference, it is privatized now.
> Organizations, such as corporations and non profit entities, are not
human.
> They are run by humans, and those humans are accountible for how they use
> thier time and energy. If that time and energy is dedicated to generating
> possibility then it is well spent, if it used to strangle possibility it
> then becomes irresponsible. The current movements Rhizome is engaging in
are
> aimed at reducing the pool of possibility to a smaller number of people. I
> believe we will see this continue until what is currently an unending
supply
> of possibility is slowly manipulated into a controlled, regulated system
> where demand is worth paying for. I expect this literally.
I agree, but I say again - we should use this place for what it has left,
and not for what it should and could be, now it makes no difference. For
they do not give a toss what we think, remember when Karei was let lose in
here? That was deliberate, a strategy - whether it was conscious or not does
not matter, they were happy to let it damage what we had, this was the start
of the rot.
> It means that there is more room for ourselves to get our own
> > alternative
> > adventures going out there and have a piece of the action on our own
> terms.
> This much is true, but if we are just building more institutions that are
> aimed at "monopolizing" an imaginary fixed portion then we are doing what
> rhizome has done. If we are going to be serious about building possibility
> for internet art then we have to look at how this model failed. I feel
like
> Mark Tribe and Rachel Greene need to take stock on this issue and
understand
> that Rhizome is failing, and come clean with themselves that they do not
> know how to fix this. How they can be oblivious to the current rhizome
> backlash is one thing, but mostly I am concerned with how they can be
> oblivious to the crushing of possibility that the current direction they
are
> taking is leading to.
Yes - look at how this model failed - exactly, I have made personal notes &
discuused with those concerned about Rhizome and its ways that we feel do
not benefit the users and their creative needs. And also what Rhizome has
not actively or positively supported, espeacially more recently.
Rule number 1 - it must be free!
> > I now, I have many a time declared my misgivings about many
institutions,
> > but this is the
> > first one where I have been aloud to have a voice.
>
>
> You're allowed to speak, now that you paid your dues [and I don't mean the
> five dollars.] Why settle for that?
I agree with you again, I am not settling for anything, I am adapting and
making changes and not relying on others to create what I believe should
happen. We know the deal now - we are fodder here for consumption, I have
been saying this for a while here, even before privatization. This is not a
positive situation, others don't mind this sort of thing because they are
used to being as such and do not know or wish for it to be different, such
as yourself and myself. But like Nelson Mandela said 'In the office
institution of I could only do so much', it is the same here. It is no
longer a public facility...more a simple business transaction.
The creative Revolution will not happen here - it was here once for a little
but it has been killed and reevaluated as part the 'Heroic Period'. There's
you answer...
much respect from marc