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: say no to BABYCHEEKS


Yes Natalie,

'Karei' is now relegated back into the 'Block Sender' now - lost all the
respect that 'they' potentially had, they are not as interesting as Neoists,
lack any grace in their communication, lack any depth - therefore I find
them uninteresting. I advise everyone to do the same in regard to their
failing to come up with anything imaginative other than their limited
persona. They are 'literally' A Yawn...

bye for now - marc

http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.

>
> cOMMANDER WE HAVE A SOLO MIND FUCK GAME GOING ON IN THE THRID SECTOR OF
RHIZOME ........... IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THE ANTAGONIST KARIE WE SENT IS
DECONSTRUCTING AND HIS ONE LINERS ARE NOT CONVINCING ENOUGH FOR THE PEOPLE
TO SUBCOMB TO OUR MIND CONTROLL.... SOUNDS LIKE KARIE NEEDS TO BE RE
PROGRAMMED...REALLY COMMANDER HES CRACKING UP SPOUTING ABOUT BABYCHECKS AND
DICTATION HUMMMMM SOUNDS LIKE SMELLS LIKE WE HAVE A FOOL ON OUR HANDS WHAT
SHOULD WE DO??? REPROGRAM WITH THE THE LEARN TO BE NICE PACKAGE FOR ONLY
29.95 COMMANDER I HAVE SEEN IT AND IT WORKS PULL KARIE OUT NOW BEFORE THEY
BECOME IMMUNE AND LAUGH AT OUR MIND CONTROL.....
> "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org> wrote:On Tue, 31 Dec
2002, NATALIE MYERS wrote:
>
> > suggestion is not dictation.....
>
> You weren't suggesting. You were dictating.
> And yes, it is.
>
> > You may want to consider,
>
> We do not "consider".
>
> > Perhaps you have not thought of,
>
> We do not "think".
>
> > It would interesting if you, and thanks please come agian.......
>
> No, natalie, you didn't do any of the above.
> You did what you did.
>
> >.boring boring boring
>
> The only one boring here is you, babycheeks.
> Boredom is a self-initiated knee-jerk, and only you_ are responsible for
> it.
>
> > babycheeks lacks the guts and integrity of the dail-log ha be that as it
> > may really that is great i can see your point and ohhh that is really
> > remarkable i do not care it does not really matter and this ....WE do
>
> Meaningless empty self-inflated drivel.
> Avoid attempting to dictate our behavior Natalie.
> There are no "explanations' and "justifications".
> You may wish to play idiotic mindfuck games with yourself
> but you're solo there.
>
>
>
> depARTURES Vs. arRIVALS
> ____________________________________ _____________
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

DISCUSSION

Re: Karei & Neosim


Hi Wally,

We agree on something on this list - they've become like little fleas, one
just has to spray them and they will curl over and die. Cuz they offer no
real communication other than hatred & no empathy; thus I have no issue of
them disappearing into the void (hole) from whence they came. The world
would not miss them, not a bad gauge or barometer to define how much they
will be missed.

If rhizome are too caught up in the '1st amendment', and prefer us to either
block or battle it on here, so be it. Then after the fight, we can all get
on with our real imaginative communicative intentions, not to be side-swiped
by 'Karei's' imposing spewings all the time. They have caused a lot of
damage to this list, which I am very resentful about; I now chat to various
rhizomers (offlist) via personal email instead (many of them women), because
they are so fed up with 'Karei's' macho-negative crap themselves, it all
feels quite rotten.

Rhizome are obviously not too bothered about this, or too busy to deal with
this problem - so certain people just have to get on with questioning the
flow and the way things are turning, even if it risks one's reputation. For
'self-conscious' reasoning sometimes have to be put aside to defy the lack
or established complicity occuring. I believe that I have managed to cut
through the armour of 'Karei's' persona via the 'Karei & Neoism' post, sent
in an earlier thread on this list. It is important also for Rhizome
especially to come to terms that even though as far as they are concerned,
this list is nothing compared to other aspects of its social respectability;
that trying (or actually being seen) to resolve issues like this might
actually help them (publicly) for the better. I know what they'll say
though, and it will be a default answer - block sender/1st amendment blah,
blah, blah...

I have consciously not paid any money because of Karei to Rhizome - for I
get value from mostly discussing with many people on this list, as well as
others; max Hermann and everyone else. But 'karei' has been the 1st thing
that has made me question the validity of a raw-list; which is pretty much
something coming from me. Yet perhaps because 'Karei' is like a
parasite/leach, they will not pay anyway, so if I can be assured that real
quality debate is happening on here - then I will be forced to leave and
discuss via email instead with those who are no longer interested in being
attacked in such a way. Of course, this will fall on deaf ears, cuz there
things going behind the scenes at rhizome that many of us are not aware of
which will favour 'Karei' over the rest of us.

That's Show biz Folks!

respect to all who give a damn...

http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.

> > Hi Kadbubz...
> > Neosit - Ninja - kittenz of the delusory nihilist sect/
> > In fact - your preseumption of my class - is your own ego slackness.
>
> Flacidmess might be a more appropoetic word than slackness.
>
> > I am
> > actually working class & proud of it, hence able to deal with little
> urchins
> > like your self. Coming from a tough working class background where part
of
> > the social norm was to greet people with a thump on the nose instead of
> > mutual communication; has prepared me for ugliness such as yourselves.
> >
> > You are so hung up on ego-stuff, make love with each other instead, it
> might
> > help you (honest), I make love a lot, a very nourishing experience. It
is
> a
> > soulful experience - go on, explore your mutual flesh, instead of trying
> to
> > hurt all of the time. I bet you can't...
>
> I'm beside you on that.
>
> > > On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, marc.garrett wrote:
> > >
> > > > Now we are establishing that they lack the imagination
> > >
> > > No babycheeks. We are not the wishful derogatory projections in your
> > > brain.
> > >
> > > > to do something more creative,
> > >
> > > You have no awareness of creativity, murderous simpleton idiota.
> > >
> > > > like sod off! We can safely predict
> > >
> > > You cannot "predict" anything babycheeks.
> > > "Predictability" = the programmatic knee-jerk of western-middle
> > > class conditioned apes.
> > >
> > > > that they will be playing the same old boring record
> > >
> > > No babycheeks. Wea re not the wishful projections inside your brain.
> > >
> > > > & we can all sit comfortably watching them continue
> > > > spewing out their contempt;
> > >
> > > We are not spewing out any contempt : you however are.
> > > Avoid projecting your idiotic ego at us.
> > >
> > > > knowing
> > >
> > > No, babycheeks. You have no capacity to know.
> > >
> > > > that they are nothing but immature
> > >
> > > No babycheeks. We are not the wishful projections inside your brain.
> > > The only one immature here is you.
> > >
> > > > contrary-ites
> > >
> > > We are not contrary, dearest.
> > >
> > > > caught in the flux of their own shite.
> > >
> > > The only one caught in the flux of their own shite (and malice,
> > > hatred, jealousy, murderous idiotism, and egotism) is you,
babycheeks.
> > >
> > > The very unlaughable standard blind middle-class ape, who projects
> > > (externalizes) its own idiot state on other + proceeds to feel
"simply
> > > Superior" (condescension knee-jerk).
> > >
> > > The "record" babycheeks is you.
> > > Reflected accurately + precisely, the bloated symphony of
> > > mediocre egotist marc.garrett (and hence your pissiness + attacks).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > + 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
> >
>
>
> + 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
>

DISCUSSION

Re: say no to BABYCHEEKS


Yawn....

> On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, marc.garrett wrote:
>
> > 'Karei' is now relegated back into the 'Block Sender' now
>
> Again? You're going to ignore us because we won't play
> along with your attempted infantilistic mirrorism
> attempt at self-centered narcissism attempted to be
> passed on as love?
>
> By the way, we do "suggest" that you avoid making slanderous
> and libelous statements such as us being a "sect" without
> any such information.
>
> And appeal to the masses in a very "charming charismatic leader"
> "graceful" and "soulful" manner? maybe you coould even tell
> them how eros (sexuality) is "soulful love" (philia) proceeding
> to peddle your delusions on matters of which you have no understanding?
> Nevermind that you're not even capable of EROS but rather a subject
> to reproductive mechanisms and culturally / genetically programmed
> "desires' which you confuse and confuse with sexuality, least of
> all "heart(pathos)". Nothing wrong with eros, by the way, but it's
> simply not "philia".
>
> Nor are your delusions "imagination".
> As a matter of fact you have no contact either with your sexuality
> or imagination (one needs to be in balance to access those, and
> function a bit above infantile obsessions with faux-emotional
> posturing and pseudo-thinking.
>
> We sympathize : walking a path of one's own where there is
> no "approval" or "disapproval" from another + one is self-responsible
> for one's actions (and totally alone in such) is difficult.
>
> And it is forgivable that you are ignorant.
> What is not forgivable is wilfull refusal to look at yourself,
> and repeated attempts to damage others instead of dealing
> with yourself.
>
> There is no such thing as "soulful sex," because the soul does not
> have any sex organs. Nor are the reproductive functions
> and physical expressions of the body "soulful". Sex is just
> sex. And when it's done properly, there is nothing wrong with it.
> Certainly it CAN BE a facet of "soulful love" and do avoid attempting
> to project some aversion on our behalf towards the body,
> because we can discern between the actual functions of the "soul"
> and sexuality. Pardon us, if we don't tell any humans we have
> sex with that we are their "soul/other" or Jesus, and if we enjoy
> sex for what it is.
>
> Apropos the above the "confusion" of such matter is indeed and in fact a
> cause of lots of suffering world-wide. Yet the source of suffering is
> the delusion_ and it doesn't matter if it comes from "religion" (
> as physically implemented by humans), "philosophy", "science", or from
> "marc garrett".
>
> And no, we do not care about your middle-class programmatic knee-jerks
> on the matter, marc garrett.
>
> Sexuality is important. Idiotism about it isn't.
> Sentimentality and infantile emotional-knee jerks about it are not
> either. Nor does it havea nything to do with "creativity" and "art"
>
> > - lost all the respect that
>
> You are not capable of respect. Imagination. Creativity.
> "Soul". These are not manifestations which exist in order
> to be used to condescend towards others. They are not knee-jerks
> of your ego. Nor are you capable of understanding them.
>
> > 'they' potentially had,
>
> No, you attempted flatulating mirrorism as a passive-aggressive
> "fe-attack" after all the rest of it failed.
> Natirralich, you're going to run away again, as if anyone
> was writing to you, or even interested in communicating
> to you. again, you're attempting to knee-jerk a "dependency"
> "need" which isn't here. If you want to go away, go away.
>
> What is ugly in the human race is this idiotic drive to
> knee-jerk others as if they need to step away from their
> essence-individuality in order to "pursue" and "beg"
> and self-debase themselves at the doors of some ignorant
> narcissistic delusional princessa or ELSE they will be
> harrassed by said princessa.
>
> Come back when you are capable of LOVE marc.
>
> > they are not as interesting as Neoists,
>
> Meaningless drivel. We are not "comparable" to Neoists.
> Nor do you understand Neoism. Nor are you capable of perceiving
> or judging us (or anyone).
>
> All you are interested in is your ego, and you have no
> interest in anything else, and you would "subserviate"
> anything and everything to it, if you had it your way.
> And this is not inaccurate nor anything to do with
> some wishfil "obsession" on our behalf. We write this
> because it is applicable to you.
>
> > lack any grace in their communication,
>
> No dearest. We are not the wishful projections inside your brain.
> Nor do you have any understanding of grace or communication.
> Nor are you capable of communication. What you are whining about
> is that you will not be treated as what you are not, and that we will
> not be muppets to your ego. Our most sincere apologies for the
> doscomfort, princessa.
>
>
> > lack any depth -
>
> You have no capability to perceive depth, no matter how much you pose
> as if you do. You are ignorant, blind, deaf, and illiterate.
>
> > therefore I find them uninteresting.
>
> The princessa "I" has declared.
>
> > I advise everyone to do the same
>
> Certainly. The bloated dictatorial ape 'advises" all to act as one
> and do as it does. After all, it needs re-affirmation "luv" and
> "mirroring" because if there is none such, it won't stand on its
> own two feet for two seconds flat.
>
>
> > in regard to their failing to come up with anything imaginative
>
> We are not 'failing" anything dearest princessa.
> Keep your delusional wishful projections to yourself.
>
> > other than their limited persona.
>
> You are talking about yourself, dearest. We have no "limited personas".
> There is no such thing as UNLIMITED PERSONAS. Nor do we have any
> personas ;) Nor are you capable of perceiving any personas.
>
>
> > They are 'literally' A Yawn...
>
> No dearest. We are not your wishful projections.
> No matter how much you froth at the mouth.
> Boredom + ennui are characteristic of those disconnected
> from reality + blind.
>
> > bye for now - marc
>
> Ciao, princessa. careful that the door does not slam
> your ass on the way out.
>
> > We Can Make Our Own World.
>
> Scribbled the dictatorial ape before it learned to percieve,
> exist, appreciate, and be of serrvice to the one created in absolute
> perfection.
>
> Its poor bleeding "soul".
>
>

DISCUSSION

Re: say no to BABYCHEEKS


Crap - again...extra large Yawn....

>Nor are your delusions "imagination".
As a matter of fact you have no contact either with your sexuality
or imagination (one needs to be in balance to access those, and
function a bit above infantile obsessions with faux-emotional
posturing and pseudo-thinking.

> On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, marc.garrett wrote:
>
> > 'Karei' is now relegated back into the 'Block Sender' now
>
> Again? You're going to ignore us because we won't play
> along with your attempted infantilistic mirrorism
> attempt at self-centered narcissism attempted to be
> passed on as love?
>
> By the way, we do "suggest" that you avoid making slanderous
> and libelous statements such as us being a "sect" without
> any such information.
>
> And appeal to the masses in a very "charming charismatic leader"
> "graceful" and "soulful" manner? maybe you coould even tell
> them how eros (sexuality) is "soulful love" (philia) proceeding
> to peddle your delusions on matters of which you have no understanding?
> Nevermind that you're not even capable of EROS but rather a subject
> to reproductive mechanisms and culturally / genetically programmed
> "desires' which you confuse and confuse with sexuality, least of
> all "heart(pathos)". Nothing wrong with eros, by the way, but it's
> simply not "philia".
>
> Nor are your delusions "imagination".
> As a matter of fact you have no contact either with your sexuality
> or imagination (one needs to be in balance to access those, and
> function a bit above infantile obsessions with faux-emotional
> posturing and pseudo-thinking.
>
> We sympathize : walking a path of one's own where there is
> no "approval" or "disapproval" from another + one is self-responsible
> for one's actions (and totally alone in such) is difficult.
>
> And it is forgivable that you are ignorant.
> What is not forgivable is wilfull refusal to look at yourself,
> and repeated attempts to damage others instead of dealing
> with yourself.
>
> There is no such thing as "soulful sex," because the soul does not
> have any sex organs. Nor are the reproductive functions
> and physical expressions of the body "soulful". Sex is just
> sex. And when it's done properly, there is nothing wrong with it.
> Certainly it CAN BE a facet of "soulful love" and do avoid attempting
> to project some aversion on our behalf towards the body,
> because we can discern between the actual functions of the "soul"
> and sexuality. Pardon us, if we don't tell any humans we have
> sex with that we are their "soul/other" or Jesus, and if we enjoy
> sex for what it is.
>
> Apropos the above the "confusion" of such matter is indeed and in fact a
> cause of lots of suffering world-wide. Yet the source of suffering is
> the delusion_ and it doesn't matter if it comes from "religion" (
> as physically implemented by humans), "philosophy", "science", or from
> "marc garrett".
>
> And no, we do not care about your middle-class programmatic knee-jerks
> on the matter, marc garrett.
>
> Sexuality is important. Idiotism about it isn't.
> Sentimentality and infantile emotional-knee jerks about it are not
> either. Nor does it havea nything to do with "creativity" and "art"
>
> > - lost all the respect that
>
> You are not capable of respect. Imagination. Creativity.
> "Soul". These are not manifestations which exist in order
> to be used to condescend towards others. They are not knee-jerks
> of your ego. Nor are you capable of understanding them.
>
> > 'they' potentially had,
>
> No, you attempted flatulating mirrorism as a passive-aggressive
> "fe-attack" after all the rest of it failed.
> Natirralich, you're going to run away again, as if anyone
> was writing to you, or even interested in communicating
> to you. again, you're attempting to knee-jerk a "dependency"
> "need" which isn't here. If you want to go away, go away.
>
> What is ugly in the human race is this idiotic drive to
> knee-jerk others as if they need to step away from their
> essence-individuality in order to "pursue" and "beg"
> and self-debase themselves at the doors of some ignorant
> narcissistic delusional princessa or ELSE they will be
> harrassed by said princessa.
>
> Come back when you are capable of LOVE marc.
>
> > they are not as interesting as Neoists,
>
> Meaningless drivel. We are not "comparable" to Neoists.
> Nor do you understand Neoism. Nor are you capable of perceiving
> or judging us (or anyone).
>
> All you are interested in is your ego, and you have no
> interest in anything else, and you would "subserviate"
> anything and everything to it, if you had it your way.
> And this is not inaccurate nor anything to do with
> some wishfil "obsession" on our behalf. We write this
> because it is applicable to you.
>
> > lack any grace in their communication,
>
> No dearest. We are not the wishful projections inside your brain.
> Nor do you have any understanding of grace or communication.
> Nor are you capable of communication. What you are whining about
> is that you will not be treated as what you are not, and that we will
> not be muppets to your ego. Our most sincere apologies for the
> doscomfort, princessa.
>
>
> > lack any depth -
>
> You have no capability to perceive depth, no matter how much you pose
> as if you do. You are ignorant, blind, deaf, and illiterate.
>
> > therefore I find them uninteresting.
>
> The princessa "I" has declared.
>
> > I advise everyone to do the same
>
> Certainly. The bloated dictatorial ape 'advises" all to act as one
> and do as it does. After all, it needs re-affirmation "luv" and
> "mirroring" because if there is none such, it won't stand on its
> own two feet for two seconds flat.
>
>
> > in regard to their failing to come up with anything imaginative
>
> We are not 'failing" anything dearest princessa.
> Keep your delusional wishful projections to yourself.
>
> > other than their limited persona.
>
> You are talking about yourself, dearest. We have no "limited personas".
> There is no such thing as UNLIMITED PERSONAS. Nor do we have any
> personas ;) Nor are you capable of perceiving any personas.
>
>
> > They are 'literally' A Yawn...
>
> No dearest. We are not your wishful projections.
> No matter how much you froth at the mouth.
> Boredom + ennui are characteristic of those disconnected
> from reality + blind.
>
> > bye for now - marc
>
> Ciao, princessa. careful that the door does not slam
> your ass on the way out.
>
> > We Can Make Our Own World.
>
> Scribbled the dictatorial ape before it learned to percieve,
> exist, appreciate, and be of serrvice to the one created in absolute
> perfection.
>
> Its poor bleeding "soul".
>
>

DISCUSSION

Re: say no to BABYCHEEKS


I am thinking of submitting you to the Yawn of the millennium club, right
next the dome in the UK, another failure.

marc

>
> > Crap - again...extra large Yawn....

>