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.
Re: the scott baio litmus test
I did it again for someone else, I think I'll wait till I'm dead before I
settle in the hall of succesfulness, somehow I suspect success my desire for
success lies in life, with the one I love, not in a popularity contest - sod
everything else..
thanx for your "champ" advice...
marc
> try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> use the quotation marks!
>
> mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
>
>
>
>
> http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
> At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Wow, internet polling... is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
> >one and lost...
> >
> >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie...
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
e
> >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
i
> >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > >
> > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > >
> > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > >
> > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > >
> > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > >
> > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT --
> > >
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > the SBLT:
> > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > again in a couple of years.
> > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > >
> > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > >
> > > your friend,
> > > curt
> > >
> > > _
> > > _
> > > _
> > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > -> 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
> > >
> > >
>
>
settle in the hall of succesfulness, somehow I suspect success my desire for
success lies in life, with the one I love, not in a popularity contest - sod
everything else..
thanx for your "champ" advice...
marc
> try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> use the quotation marks!
>
> mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
>
>
>
>
> http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
> At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Wow, internet polling... is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
> >one and lost...
> >
> >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie...
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
e
> >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
i
> >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > >
> > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > >
> > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > >
> > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > >
> > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > >
> > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT --
> > >
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > the SBLT:
> > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > again in a couple of years.
> > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > >
> > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > >
> > > your friend,
> > > curt
> > >
> > > _
> > > _
> > > _
> > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > -> 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: the scott baio litmus test
Hi curb,
it's marc (born with it) not mark.
marc
> try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> use the quotation marks!
>
> mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
>
>
>
>
> http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
> At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Wow, internet polling... is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
> >one and lost...
> >
> >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie...
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
e
> >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
i
> >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > >
> > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > >
> > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > >
> > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > >
> > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > >
> > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT --
> > >
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > the SBLT:
> > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > again in a couple of years.
> > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > >
> > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > >
> > > your friend,
> > > curt
> > >
> > > _
> > > _
> > > _
> > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > -> 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
> > >
> > >
>
>
it's marc (born with it) not mark.
marc
> try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> use the quotation marks!
>
> mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
>
>
>
>
> http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
> At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Wow, internet polling... is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
> >one and lost...
> >
> >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie...
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
e
> >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
i
> >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > >
> > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > >
> > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > >
> > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > >
> > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > >
> > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT --
> > >
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > the SBLT:
> > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > again in a couple of years.
> > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > >
> > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > >
> > > your friend,
> > > curt
> > >
> > > _
> > > _
> > > _
> > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > -> 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: the scott baio litmus test
Yeah,
I'm gonna have to sort out that evil twin of mine, been pestering me for
years...
marc
> my apologies.
>
> the 513 figure is still accurate, though. you're evil twin "mark
> garrett" actually yields 2,360.
>
>
>
>
> At 2:33 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Hi curb,
> >
> >it's marc (born with it) not mark.
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> > > use the quotation marks!
> > >
> > > mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> > > "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> > > =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > >
> > > At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> > > >Wow, internet polling... is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out
who
> > > >one and lost...
> > > >
> > > >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie...
> > >
> >
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
> >e
> > > >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
> > >
> >
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
> >i
> > > >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >marc
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > > > >
> > > > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary
art),
> > > > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know
I'm
> > > > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise.
I'm
> > > > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists
whose
> > > > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their
art
> > > > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > > > >
> > > > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in
it
> > > > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are
making
> > > > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for
the
> > > > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most
contemporary
> > > > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty
famous
> > > > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30
years
> > > > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Cf:
> > > > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most
contemporary
> > > > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday,
and
> > > > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio,
how
> > > > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT --
> > > > >
> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > the SBLT:
> > > > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation
marks).
> > > > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > > > again in a couple of years.
> > > > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like
"jennifer
> > > > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary
artist.
> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > > > >
> > > > > your friend,
> > > > > curt
> > > > >
> > > > > _
> > > > > _
> > > > > _
> > > > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > > > -> 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'm gonna have to sort out that evil twin of mine, been pestering me for
years...
marc
> my apologies.
>
> the 513 figure is still accurate, though. you're evil twin "mark
> garrett" actually yields 2,360.
>
>
>
>
> At 2:33 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Hi curb,
> >
> >it's marc (born with it) not mark.
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> > > use the quotation marks!
> > >
> > > mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> > > "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> > > =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > >
> > > At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> > > >Wow, internet polling... is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out
who
> > > >one and lost...
> > > >
> > > >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie...
> > >
> >
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
> >e
> > > >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
> > >
> >
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
> >i
> > > >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >marc
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > > > >
> > > > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary
art),
> > > > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know
I'm
> > > > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise.
I'm
> > > > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists
whose
> > > > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their
art
> > > > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > > > >
> > > > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in
it
> > > > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are
making
> > > > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for
the
> > > > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most
contemporary
> > > > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty
famous
> > > > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30
years
> > > > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Cf:
> > > > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most
contemporary
> > > > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday,
and
> > > > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio,
how
> > > > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT --
> > > > >
> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > the SBLT:
> > > > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation
marks).
> > > > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > > > again in a couple of years.
> > > > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like
"jennifer
> > > > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary
artist.
> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > > > >
> > > > > your friend,
> > > > > curt
> > > > >
> > > > > _
> > > > > _
> > > > > _
> > > > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > > > -> 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: the scott baio litmus test
yeah sure ~ lol
We aim above the curb in order to hit the curb
,ceape
marc
> >thanx for your "champ" advice...
>
> we aim above the mark in order to hit the mark (no pun intended).
>
> peace,
> curt
>
>
We aim above the curb in order to hit the curb
,ceape
marc
> >thanx for your "champ" advice...
>
> we aim above the mark in order to hit the mark (no pun intended).
>
> peace,
> curt
>
>
Re: RE: Re: Charity CD Project
I kind of agree on this bit...below
>I just guess that it was not really so smart and good to have made this
>statement in day jobs before making a campaign for raising money ....
but we all make mistakes
marc
> 1- Before I was thinking like you but since a while severals sign has
> apperared:
> Mark Tribe is a part of net art jury in ars electronica the result is
> several rhizome member are getting a prize and the golden nika is going to
> another rhizome manager alex galloway with carnivore project ....
> ars electronica 2002
>
> 2- day jobs exhibition all artist shows their real work and mark tribe
> describes rhizome as a personnal art project
>
> 3- rhizome is giving grant to artist, who won? again rhizome staff ....
>
> so what would we think ?
>
> I'm not naive, I just have doubt now regarding what's going on ....
>
> That's why I ask this question to have the whole truth cos I cannot accept
> to have this kind of doubt ....and I can say that I'm not alone to think
> like that cos we have already exchange emails in between us (many persons
> who have doubt like me) to make it clear ....
> so ?
> I'm talking not for others but personnaly
>
> I just guess that it was not really so smart and good to have made this
> statement in day jobs before making a campaign for raising money ....
>
> I have no doubt rgarding the worl done, but as a manager people whould
take
> care about what they say and write, I'm exactly talking about politics
....
>
> take care about this ...
>
> on my side I will wait and see
>
> Valery
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Francis Hwang" <francis@rhizome.org>
> To: <list@rhizome.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 9:09 PM
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: RE: Re: Charity CD Project
>
>
> > So Mark decided to call Rhizome a work of art. I don't see what's the
big
> > deal.
> >
> > You can argue over whether or not the idea of "social sculpture" is
valid
> > artistically or not. But it would be a mistake to imply that Mark's
> artistic
> > ambitions are compromising his ability to be an arts administrator.
Mostly
> I
> > know this because here in our tiny Rhiz office, I sit next to him, and I
> > overhear a lot of his phone conversations. And I talk to him every day.
> And,
> > being the sysadmin, I make sure to read all his email. (er, kidding,
> Mark.)
> > Mostly, he spends his time here in the office on boring arts-admin
stuff,
> > the sort of things that people go to art school to _avoid_. Worrying
about
> > grant applications, cash-flow, conversations with board members, how to
> make
> > the site and its related services better to the Rhizome community, etc.,
> > etc. He deals with a lot of paperwork, and he seems to really know his
> > spreadsheets.
> >
> > So please don't think Rhizome is basically Mark Tribe's little vanity
> > project. It's not. We're all working hard here to make it a useful
> resource
> > for its community. I hope we're succeeding. I'm sure you'll all let us
> know
> > if we're not.
> >
> > Francis
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "valery grancher" <vgranger@imaginet.fr>
> > To: "Mark Tribe" <mt@rhizome.org>; <list@rhizome.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 2:19 AM
> > Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: RE: Re: Charity CD Project
> >
> >
> > > I am also surprised by this campaign ! when I can read at new langton
> art
> > > center "day jobs" exhibition this :
> > > "
> > > Mark Tribe
> > > Projects
> > >
> > > Day: Rhizome.org http://www.rhizome.org
> > > Night: Rhizome.org http://www.rhizome.org
> > > Mark Tribe's art work featured in this exhibition can be seen as
> > performance
> > > as much as media art. Rhizome.org is an online community that Mark
> > describes
> > > as "social sculpture" in the tradition of Bueys. Here, product is not
as
> > > important as process, though it would be a disservice to abstract
> > > Rhizome.org to the level of a conceptual art prank when, in fact, it
has
> > had
> > > a very real effect on the social lives of many new media artists and
> > offers
> > > many practical services. This close-knit integration of a conceptual
> > social
> > > work combined, inextricably, with practical real-world services is
> > exemplary
> > > of how new media artists are sometimes able to play and work in the
same
> > > media. Since media is the built environment that we now live in
> full-time
> > > (as opposed to a weekend leisure destination), artists find it
possible
> to
> > > move into the "main house" -- sometimes without anyone noticing them
> sneak
> > > in.
> > >
> > > -- Richard Rinehart"
> > >
> > > on day jobs exhibitions statement !
> > >
> > > what's up ?
> > > Rhizome campaign : is it a campaign for a non profit organization? or
> for
> > > mark Tribe artpiece ?
> > > Could you mind to make it clear ?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Valery Grancher
> > >
> > >
> > > + be me
> > > -> 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
> > >
> >
> > + the best is the enemy of the good
> > -> 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
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> + the best is the enemy of the good
> -> 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 just guess that it was not really so smart and good to have made this
>statement in day jobs before making a campaign for raising money ....
but we all make mistakes
marc
> 1- Before I was thinking like you but since a while severals sign has
> apperared:
> Mark Tribe is a part of net art jury in ars electronica the result is
> several rhizome member are getting a prize and the golden nika is going to
> another rhizome manager alex galloway with carnivore project ....
> ars electronica 2002
>
> 2- day jobs exhibition all artist shows their real work and mark tribe
> describes rhizome as a personnal art project
>
> 3- rhizome is giving grant to artist, who won? again rhizome staff ....
>
> so what would we think ?
>
> I'm not naive, I just have doubt now regarding what's going on ....
>
> That's why I ask this question to have the whole truth cos I cannot accept
> to have this kind of doubt ....and I can say that I'm not alone to think
> like that cos we have already exchange emails in between us (many persons
> who have doubt like me) to make it clear ....
> so ?
> I'm talking not for others but personnaly
>
> I just guess that it was not really so smart and good to have made this
> statement in day jobs before making a campaign for raising money ....
>
> I have no doubt rgarding the worl done, but as a manager people whould
take
> care about what they say and write, I'm exactly talking about politics
....
>
> take care about this ...
>
> on my side I will wait and see
>
> Valery
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Francis Hwang" <francis@rhizome.org>
> To: <list@rhizome.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 9:09 PM
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: RE: Re: Charity CD Project
>
>
> > So Mark decided to call Rhizome a work of art. I don't see what's the
big
> > deal.
> >
> > You can argue over whether or not the idea of "social sculpture" is
valid
> > artistically or not. But it would be a mistake to imply that Mark's
> artistic
> > ambitions are compromising his ability to be an arts administrator.
Mostly
> I
> > know this because here in our tiny Rhiz office, I sit next to him, and I
> > overhear a lot of his phone conversations. And I talk to him every day.
> And,
> > being the sysadmin, I make sure to read all his email. (er, kidding,
> Mark.)
> > Mostly, he spends his time here in the office on boring arts-admin
stuff,
> > the sort of things that people go to art school to _avoid_. Worrying
about
> > grant applications, cash-flow, conversations with board members, how to
> make
> > the site and its related services better to the Rhizome community, etc.,
> > etc. He deals with a lot of paperwork, and he seems to really know his
> > spreadsheets.
> >
> > So please don't think Rhizome is basically Mark Tribe's little vanity
> > project. It's not. We're all working hard here to make it a useful
> resource
> > for its community. I hope we're succeeding. I'm sure you'll all let us
> know
> > if we're not.
> >
> > Francis
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "valery grancher" <vgranger@imaginet.fr>
> > To: "Mark Tribe" <mt@rhizome.org>; <list@rhizome.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 2:19 AM
> > Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: RE: Re: Charity CD Project
> >
> >
> > > I am also surprised by this campaign ! when I can read at new langton
> art
> > > center "day jobs" exhibition this :
> > > "
> > > Mark Tribe
> > > Projects
> > >
> > > Day: Rhizome.org http://www.rhizome.org
> > > Night: Rhizome.org http://www.rhizome.org
> > > Mark Tribe's art work featured in this exhibition can be seen as
> > performance
> > > as much as media art. Rhizome.org is an online community that Mark
> > describes
> > > as "social sculpture" in the tradition of Bueys. Here, product is not
as
> > > important as process, though it would be a disservice to abstract
> > > Rhizome.org to the level of a conceptual art prank when, in fact, it
has
> > had
> > > a very real effect on the social lives of many new media artists and
> > offers
> > > many practical services. This close-knit integration of a conceptual
> > social
> > > work combined, inextricably, with practical real-world services is
> > exemplary
> > > of how new media artists are sometimes able to play and work in the
same
> > > media. Since media is the built environment that we now live in
> full-time
> > > (as opposed to a weekend leisure destination), artists find it
possible
> to
> > > move into the "main house" -- sometimes without anyone noticing them
> sneak
> > > in.
> > >
> > > -- Richard Rinehart"
> > >
> > > on day jobs exhibitions statement !
> > >
> > > what's up ?
> > > Rhizome campaign : is it a campaign for a non profit organization? or
> for
> > > mark Tribe artpiece ?
> > > Could you mind to make it clear ?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Valery Grancher
> > >
> > >
> > > + be me
> > > -> 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
> > >
> >
> > + the best is the enemy of the good
> > -> 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
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> + the best is the enemy of the good
> -> 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
>