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:
Hi Joseph,
This seems like a nationalistic accounting job, killing culture for cash.
marc
> The Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh announced that it would
> eliminate the entire Film and Video Department as a budget cut. (for
> additional
information....http://www.post-gazette.com/ae/20030109judson3.asp
> & http://www.post-gazette.com/ae/20030108carnegie1.asp )
>
> joseph & donna
> www.electrichands.com
> joseph franklyn mcelroy
> corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
>
> go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> call me 646 279 2309
>
> SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> + 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
>
>
This seems like a nationalistic accounting job, killing culture for cash.
marc
> The Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh announced that it would
> eliminate the entire Film and Video Department as a budget cut. (for
> additional
information....http://www.post-gazette.com/ae/20030109judson3.asp
> & http://www.post-gazette.com/ae/20030108carnegie1.asp )
>
> joseph & donna
> www.electrichands.com
> joseph franklyn mcelroy
> corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
>
> go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> call me 646 279 2309
>
> SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> + 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
>
>
Dividing the spoils of a war not yet fought
Dividing the spoils of a war not yet fought
Okay, let's try to get our heads around the Iraq situation. Admittedly th=
e world doesn't want this war, but there are a small group of people, hardl=
y larger than a Latin American junta, deeply entrenched atop our government=
, who desperately do. They are undoubtedly frustrated to find a world so un=
expectedly out of their control -- an ill-timed strike in Venezuela that th=
ey would, under other circumstances, be supporting for everything they were=
worth is driving the price of oil uncomfortably high; the Turks are draggi=
ng their feet on an American invasion force in Turkey; the North Koreans ar=
e withdrawing from the nonproliferation treaty and threatening to resume mi=
ssile testing; Ariel Sharon is suddenly embroiled in a bribery scandal in I=
srael with a surprisingly up-for-grabs election now to take place only week=
s before an Iraq war might begin. It's enough to make a tough guy cry.
But the most obvious "on the ground" reality is that the massive American=
mobilization in the Gulf area only gains momentum by the week. The fact is=
, as was true with those World War I armies, past a certain point you can't=
mobilize on this scale and turn back. That undoubtedly is part of the plan=
in Washington. Let the world do its damnedest, let the inspectors search, =
let the UN yak, let the hoi polloi demonstrate, and in the meantime just cr=
eate the on-the-ground momentum for war, or as military analyst William Ark=
in put it in today's Los Angeles Times Sunday opinion section, "As tens of =
thousands of ground troops and their vast support infrastructure arrive in =
Kuwait, any options other than war fade further and further. This is the mi=
litary corollary to the 'Field of Dreams': If they come, you will use them.=
"
Arkin adds in "An Old-fashioned Fight," a piece about how Donald Rumsfeld=
"capitulated" to traditional military planners, that the war being planned=
is now anything but futuristic.
"Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has approved a war plan. that owe=
s more to D-day and World War II than to the 21st century vision of lightni=
ng-fast, flexible warfare that has become his hallmark.. Last month. [he] s=
urrendered to the traditionalists, secretly approving a blueprint for war. =
that has the American force relying heavily on tanks, artillery and heavy m=
echanized infantry. The plan. does assign critical roles to air power, Spec=
ial Forces and covert operators. But they would operate in subordination to=
the kind of ground assault the Army has trained. itself to conduct in Euro=
pe since the beginning of the Cold War."
To read more of Arkin click here
Just as important, the same group of high officials, planners, and their =
acolytes are deep into making dreams reality when it comes to a postwar Mid=
dle East. They are, in a fashion that might be recognized by anyone who rec=
alls how the British and French divvied up the area after World War I, alre=
ady cutting and dealing the "spoils of war." Both the articles that follow =
deal with that subject in the sort of clear and down to earth way that you =
rarely see on our news pages, and interestingly both cite that phrase, "the=
spoils of war." And -- I know you'll be surprised by this -- the spoils of=
greatest concern to us (not to speak of the French, the Russians, and, as =
columnist Eric Margolis points out in the Toronto Sun, the Turks), are the =
oil resources of Iraq.
As Knut Royce writes in a report for Newsday on our plans for making use =
of Iraq's oil (referred to by a "senior official" in a recent New York Time=
s account of postwar planning as "Iraq's patrimony"), "There are people in =
the White House who take the position that it's all the spoils of war." Pat=
rimony, smatrimony, it's the oil, stupid. Tom
Click here to read more of this dispatch.
Okay, let's try to get our heads around the Iraq situation. Admittedly th=
e world doesn't want this war, but there are a small group of people, hardl=
y larger than a Latin American junta, deeply entrenched atop our government=
, who desperately do. They are undoubtedly frustrated to find a world so un=
expectedly out of their control -- an ill-timed strike in Venezuela that th=
ey would, under other circumstances, be supporting for everything they were=
worth is driving the price of oil uncomfortably high; the Turks are draggi=
ng their feet on an American invasion force in Turkey; the North Koreans ar=
e withdrawing from the nonproliferation treaty and threatening to resume mi=
ssile testing; Ariel Sharon is suddenly embroiled in a bribery scandal in I=
srael with a surprisingly up-for-grabs election now to take place only week=
s before an Iraq war might begin. It's enough to make a tough guy cry.
But the most obvious "on the ground" reality is that the massive American=
mobilization in the Gulf area only gains momentum by the week. The fact is=
, as was true with those World War I armies, past a certain point you can't=
mobilize on this scale and turn back. That undoubtedly is part of the plan=
in Washington. Let the world do its damnedest, let the inspectors search, =
let the UN yak, let the hoi polloi demonstrate, and in the meantime just cr=
eate the on-the-ground momentum for war, or as military analyst William Ark=
in put it in today's Los Angeles Times Sunday opinion section, "As tens of =
thousands of ground troops and their vast support infrastructure arrive in =
Kuwait, any options other than war fade further and further. This is the mi=
litary corollary to the 'Field of Dreams': If they come, you will use them.=
"
Arkin adds in "An Old-fashioned Fight," a piece about how Donald Rumsfeld=
"capitulated" to traditional military planners, that the war being planned=
is now anything but futuristic.
"Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has approved a war plan. that owe=
s more to D-day and World War II than to the 21st century vision of lightni=
ng-fast, flexible warfare that has become his hallmark.. Last month. [he] s=
urrendered to the traditionalists, secretly approving a blueprint for war. =
that has the American force relying heavily on tanks, artillery and heavy m=
echanized infantry. The plan. does assign critical roles to air power, Spec=
ial Forces and covert operators. But they would operate in subordination to=
the kind of ground assault the Army has trained. itself to conduct in Euro=
pe since the beginning of the Cold War."
To read more of Arkin click here
Just as important, the same group of high officials, planners, and their =
acolytes are deep into making dreams reality when it comes to a postwar Mid=
dle East. They are, in a fashion that might be recognized by anyone who rec=
alls how the British and French divvied up the area after World War I, alre=
ady cutting and dealing the "spoils of war." Both the articles that follow =
deal with that subject in the sort of clear and down to earth way that you =
rarely see on our news pages, and interestingly both cite that phrase, "the=
spoils of war." And -- I know you'll be surprised by this -- the spoils of=
greatest concern to us (not to speak of the French, the Russians, and, as =
columnist Eric Margolis points out in the Toronto Sun, the Turks), are the =
oil resources of Iraq.
As Knut Royce writes in a report for Newsday on our plans for making use =
of Iraq's oil (referred to by a "senior official" in a recent New York Time=
s account of postwar planning as "Iraq's patrimony"), "There are people in =
the White House who take the position that it's all the spoils of war." Pat=
rimony, smatrimony, it's the oil, stupid. Tom
Click here to read more of this dispatch.
Re: A Critical Distinction Between Using It and Exploring It
~Your twisting my sobrieties~
Hi Daniel,
I really want to have a lot of fun here - but I feel that, at least for a
while now, there has not been much space for any reasonable or productive
mutual debate. So hopefully, this one of them....
Young: But if unpremeditated (phone line-type or Google type) activity can
be art, in order for it to be recognized as art don't we have to have
someone pointing to it or framing it or doing something to distinguish it
from the mass of things that are going on at the same time?
marc: Yes, we do. We do have someone pointing at it, but not in the same
terms as paintings in a space, or an installation in a space. It is about
realizing, seeing what is artistic, it does not have to be measured by the
same terms. It can be seen as a metaphor, that could be art. Once we get to
that point who knows? It's also about complexity, once we have a language to
understand something, it becomes clearer.
Currently we can only see something like (phone line-type or Google type) as
tools for communication, yet at the same time we are using these tools for
art activity. There will become a time when the tools themselves (if still
relational) start to have meaning. We will create the meaning for it, it is
a human thing. For instance man has creative the universe - not physically,
but we have placed/pinned, our own mythologies and presumptions and dreams
on such a wonder. But as far as humanity is concerned - we invented it. For
we give it meaning all the time. In much the same way we will give (phone
line-type or Google type). We shine a light on it.
Young: So that's like Duchamp taking a manufactured urinal out of its
original context. But if Duchamp had said "The whole urinal business is
art." where would that leave us if we wanted to make a meaningful
distinction between art and other human activity?
marc: Personally, I have been a bit of post-duchamp type of individual for a
while now. One thing I really admire Duchamp for, is not the urinal, but for
giving up art, at least being straight forward like below:-
"I am still a victim of chess. It has all the beauty of art -- and much
more. It cannot be commercialized. Chess is much purer than art in its
social position." Marcel Duchamp
Now this is kool - for he knew that art was not the be all and end all. He
knew that there was something else worth living for out there. Meaning other
things related to him that had the poetic experience or at least was more
valuable than art. Of course many people would agree with this, but it had
to be said.
> So in a sense, we are now experiencing generative works that do not adhere
> to human needs or desire in respect of formal/culturalized 'language'
based
> communication; yet offering new ways of experiencing the haze, as a
> networked activity, and one does not have to know who did it.
Young: There's a contradiction in this sentence. If something is pointing to
a new way of "experiencing the haze" it is addressing "human needs." The
haze must be the eternal human uncertainty about life and reality, now made
hazier by the computer and the internet. But I don't think we should give
the haze itself credit for offering new ways of experiencing itself or being
art any more than nature should get credit for being artistic because it is
being what it cannot help being. Nature and the haze are initial conditions
or givens. Art is one of the ways of coping with initial conditions. There
must be a conscious mind making the "offer" of the new way of experience and
that conscious mind is the artistic mind. Phew! I must rest my conscious
mind at this point.
marc: Yep, I agree again, yes there does need to be -
'a conscious mind making the "offer" of the new way of experience and that
conscious mind is the artistic mind'.
But not in the same way as I feel you are inferring. What I kind of
envisage, is a more amalgamated non-singular decision source. Meaning that
it will not necessarily be art-critics who decide what art is good, and not
the artists themselves to some degree. But, people who wish to explore
creativity (whatever it is) as a way of life, as part of their lives, not a
life=style but a decision of imagination.
The process of information as just functional motion is, yes, a dead thing,
an entropy thing. Yet, if you play with it, give it life by filling it up
with the right ingredients, you have art. You realize it, bring it life.
'Active Imagination Should Be Used For Breaking Free Of The Literalism Of
Our Daily Lives'. James Hillman.
> I see much of the generative art movement as still very young and I feel
>that there is much to learn from it, for all who are concerned and not
>concerned or merely interested. Personally, I find it exhilarating because
>it does not desire recognition in the same way as most artists do.
Young: Here I belong to the majority. I definitely want recognition - not
for money or fame - but to know that my message is getting through.
Communication is what exhilarates me most. It is impossible for me to like
the idea of falling in the forest without anyone hearing (even if the
falling is fun.) If I thought that self-expression was the be-all and
end-all of art I guess I would be satisfied with just working in my dark
cave. But I believe the role of the artist, at least the highest role, is to
bring light for others, to enhance the experience of living etc. etc.
marc: We all want respect for what we do, but on who's terms? Your own of
course. But I bet you've things like, oh you should not put this in because
people might find it offensive.?
If you have not - well I have, many a time. It was only a couple of weeks
ago that I was told by someone who recently was generous enough to feature
one of 'Ruth catlow's' web-piece on their site, saying that it was not
welcome because of the sexual content
http://www.furtherfield.org/rcatlow/domestic_idols/index.htm.
This was all about funding. There are people who do not understand about
freedom of content & declaration of imagination as one of the most important
things that we have left in life. And they will gladly strike something off
the list, just because they found it a bit uncomfortable. All the more
reason it should stay there (we all thought). These dudes stood their ground
against the decision, and in the end the funders backed down, which does not
always happen. So one in the eye of censorship.
Young:I guess I would be satisfied with just working in my dark cave. But I
believe the role of the artist, at least the highest role, is to bring light
for others, to enhance the experience of living etc. etc.
marc:I agree, an honorable thing. But don't you think that it is a bit of an
outmoded concept that we have something really special to offer others? What
makes us so special? Who says that we have something to offer the world that
is worth while that has not been said already. (I'm sure that Eryk said this
to me once, but it is a reasonable question).
Who's asking you to work in a dark cave? I'm not. I'm asking you to turn
that bloody light on in that cave. Look around you and see that art is not
just a remit of culturalized terms, It is bigger and better than that. Like
we are as humans, although having a grunt like Bush ruling America must be
hard to swallow. Our poodle in the UK seems more keen to hide away from the
public at the moment, to comb his hair (Blair). No rhyme pun intended. It is
part of our brain, our neurons, our genes.
Young: Nevertheless, I believe that critical distinctions can be made that
are based on logic and also appeal to our deepest natures (the buddhist,
daoist, Godelian, etc.)- and that somehow developing these standards helps
the world. We can't prove them in a mathematical sense but Hey! If beautiful
artists like us are going to withdraw from the reflection of reality and
from the making of critical distinctions then won't the world go to hell
even faster than it is presently? I'm exhausted. Keep up the good work.
marc:
From vacances, Victor Hugo wired his publisher about the success of Les
Miserables, "?" His publisher replied "!" The important part is what was
explicitly discarded, the "exformation." A message has depth if it contains
a large quantity of exformation.
The least interesting aspect of good conversation is what is actually said.
What is more interesting is all the deliberations and emotions that take
place simultaneously during conversation in the heads and bodies of the
conversers. Tor Norretranders.
We are all so hung up on saying things in the right way, in the right terms.
When really, there is an awful lot that is not said and used, put aside that
we tend to ignore because of mannerist reasons. A good example is 'Jackson
Pollock'. He was not painting he was performing. He was inscribing his scale
and relational experience onto the canvas. Maybe what we all look at, is
only a very small part of what the art is really about. May be a picture
does not tell a thousand stories literally, but it is a link to a person
that placed the stuff on the canvas, but there is much more behind that
person which informed her/him about it.
Logic - huh! 'The fact is that there is too little information in the
so-called Information Age may be responsible for the malaise of modern
society, that nagging feeling that there must be more to life. There is -
but we have to get outside and live life with all our sense to experience it
more fully'. Tor Norretranders.
Sorry quoting this guy, but he seems pretty important in relation to the
discussion. I suppose what I am saying it's not what is in the frame that is
important, it what's outside. And that cannot always be captured by single
methods alone it has to be part everything else to some degree, it ain't
easy to package, but it is a great place to start exploring...
marc
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
Hi Daniel,
I really want to have a lot of fun here - but I feel that, at least for a
while now, there has not been much space for any reasonable or productive
mutual debate. So hopefully, this one of them....
Young: But if unpremeditated (phone line-type or Google type) activity can
be art, in order for it to be recognized as art don't we have to have
someone pointing to it or framing it or doing something to distinguish it
from the mass of things that are going on at the same time?
marc: Yes, we do. We do have someone pointing at it, but not in the same
terms as paintings in a space, or an installation in a space. It is about
realizing, seeing what is artistic, it does not have to be measured by the
same terms. It can be seen as a metaphor, that could be art. Once we get to
that point who knows? It's also about complexity, once we have a language to
understand something, it becomes clearer.
Currently we can only see something like (phone line-type or Google type) as
tools for communication, yet at the same time we are using these tools for
art activity. There will become a time when the tools themselves (if still
relational) start to have meaning. We will create the meaning for it, it is
a human thing. For instance man has creative the universe - not physically,
but we have placed/pinned, our own mythologies and presumptions and dreams
on such a wonder. But as far as humanity is concerned - we invented it. For
we give it meaning all the time. In much the same way we will give (phone
line-type or Google type). We shine a light on it.
Young: So that's like Duchamp taking a manufactured urinal out of its
original context. But if Duchamp had said "The whole urinal business is
art." where would that leave us if we wanted to make a meaningful
distinction between art and other human activity?
marc: Personally, I have been a bit of post-duchamp type of individual for a
while now. One thing I really admire Duchamp for, is not the urinal, but for
giving up art, at least being straight forward like below:-
"I am still a victim of chess. It has all the beauty of art -- and much
more. It cannot be commercialized. Chess is much purer than art in its
social position." Marcel Duchamp
Now this is kool - for he knew that art was not the be all and end all. He
knew that there was something else worth living for out there. Meaning other
things related to him that had the poetic experience or at least was more
valuable than art. Of course many people would agree with this, but it had
to be said.
> So in a sense, we are now experiencing generative works that do not adhere
> to human needs or desire in respect of formal/culturalized 'language'
based
> communication; yet offering new ways of experiencing the haze, as a
> networked activity, and one does not have to know who did it.
Young: There's a contradiction in this sentence. If something is pointing to
a new way of "experiencing the haze" it is addressing "human needs." The
haze must be the eternal human uncertainty about life and reality, now made
hazier by the computer and the internet. But I don't think we should give
the haze itself credit for offering new ways of experiencing itself or being
art any more than nature should get credit for being artistic because it is
being what it cannot help being. Nature and the haze are initial conditions
or givens. Art is one of the ways of coping with initial conditions. There
must be a conscious mind making the "offer" of the new way of experience and
that conscious mind is the artistic mind. Phew! I must rest my conscious
mind at this point.
marc: Yep, I agree again, yes there does need to be -
'a conscious mind making the "offer" of the new way of experience and that
conscious mind is the artistic mind'.
But not in the same way as I feel you are inferring. What I kind of
envisage, is a more amalgamated non-singular decision source. Meaning that
it will not necessarily be art-critics who decide what art is good, and not
the artists themselves to some degree. But, people who wish to explore
creativity (whatever it is) as a way of life, as part of their lives, not a
life=style but a decision of imagination.
The process of information as just functional motion is, yes, a dead thing,
an entropy thing. Yet, if you play with it, give it life by filling it up
with the right ingredients, you have art. You realize it, bring it life.
'Active Imagination Should Be Used For Breaking Free Of The Literalism Of
Our Daily Lives'. James Hillman.
> I see much of the generative art movement as still very young and I feel
>that there is much to learn from it, for all who are concerned and not
>concerned or merely interested. Personally, I find it exhilarating because
>it does not desire recognition in the same way as most artists do.
Young: Here I belong to the majority. I definitely want recognition - not
for money or fame - but to know that my message is getting through.
Communication is what exhilarates me most. It is impossible for me to like
the idea of falling in the forest without anyone hearing (even if the
falling is fun.) If I thought that self-expression was the be-all and
end-all of art I guess I would be satisfied with just working in my dark
cave. But I believe the role of the artist, at least the highest role, is to
bring light for others, to enhance the experience of living etc. etc.
marc: We all want respect for what we do, but on who's terms? Your own of
course. But I bet you've things like, oh you should not put this in because
people might find it offensive.?
If you have not - well I have, many a time. It was only a couple of weeks
ago that I was told by someone who recently was generous enough to feature
one of 'Ruth catlow's' web-piece on their site, saying that it was not
welcome because of the sexual content
http://www.furtherfield.org/rcatlow/domestic_idols/index.htm.
This was all about funding. There are people who do not understand about
freedom of content & declaration of imagination as one of the most important
things that we have left in life. And they will gladly strike something off
the list, just because they found it a bit uncomfortable. All the more
reason it should stay there (we all thought). These dudes stood their ground
against the decision, and in the end the funders backed down, which does not
always happen. So one in the eye of censorship.
Young:I guess I would be satisfied with just working in my dark cave. But I
believe the role of the artist, at least the highest role, is to bring light
for others, to enhance the experience of living etc. etc.
marc:I agree, an honorable thing. But don't you think that it is a bit of an
outmoded concept that we have something really special to offer others? What
makes us so special? Who says that we have something to offer the world that
is worth while that has not been said already. (I'm sure that Eryk said this
to me once, but it is a reasonable question).
Who's asking you to work in a dark cave? I'm not. I'm asking you to turn
that bloody light on in that cave. Look around you and see that art is not
just a remit of culturalized terms, It is bigger and better than that. Like
we are as humans, although having a grunt like Bush ruling America must be
hard to swallow. Our poodle in the UK seems more keen to hide away from the
public at the moment, to comb his hair (Blair). No rhyme pun intended. It is
part of our brain, our neurons, our genes.
Young: Nevertheless, I believe that critical distinctions can be made that
are based on logic and also appeal to our deepest natures (the buddhist,
daoist, Godelian, etc.)- and that somehow developing these standards helps
the world. We can't prove them in a mathematical sense but Hey! If beautiful
artists like us are going to withdraw from the reflection of reality and
from the making of critical distinctions then won't the world go to hell
even faster than it is presently? I'm exhausted. Keep up the good work.
marc:
From vacances, Victor Hugo wired his publisher about the success of Les
Miserables, "?" His publisher replied "!" The important part is what was
explicitly discarded, the "exformation." A message has depth if it contains
a large quantity of exformation.
The least interesting aspect of good conversation is what is actually said.
What is more interesting is all the deliberations and emotions that take
place simultaneously during conversation in the heads and bodies of the
conversers. Tor Norretranders.
We are all so hung up on saying things in the right way, in the right terms.
When really, there is an awful lot that is not said and used, put aside that
we tend to ignore because of mannerist reasons. A good example is 'Jackson
Pollock'. He was not painting he was performing. He was inscribing his scale
and relational experience onto the canvas. Maybe what we all look at, is
only a very small part of what the art is really about. May be a picture
does not tell a thousand stories literally, but it is a link to a person
that placed the stuff on the canvas, but there is much more behind that
person which informed her/him about it.
Logic - huh! 'The fact is that there is too little information in the
so-called Information Age may be responsible for the malaise of modern
society, that nagging feeling that there must be more to life. There is -
but we have to get outside and live life with all our sense to experience it
more fully'. Tor Norretranders.
Sorry quoting this guy, but he seems pretty important in relation to the
discussion. I suppose what I am saying it's not what is in the frame that is
important, it what's outside. And that cannot always be captured by single
methods alone it has to be part everything else to some degree, it ain't
easy to package, but it is a great place to start exploring...
marc
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
Re: Some random thoughts on the state of the art...
Some random thoughts on the state of the art...
Why you think you are going to be attacked by everyone
is beyond me. But if you are after discussion, here it
is. I favor chatting over the senseless 'txt' violence &
respect you as an individual genuinely interested in
debate...
>1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image and
video manipulation over text and vector graphics
within net art. Although some have used image as a
main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind) a
form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more access
to broadband, better software, or the change in
political climate.
It seems to me that 'true' realism can only be defined via
experience & not via interpretation of aesthetics or notions.
Re-interpretation is issued forth by broadcasting channels
allover the world, which is presumed as information, yet in
reality it is interpretation. So with the aspect of people
who use digital cameras to declare their own ideas, thus
reclaiming a space for their own intentions - I am all for
it.
Whether the medium is visual/networked or text, is not
really the issue. I feel that it is much more to do with
consciousness and intention; which can move beyond the
limitation of medium specifications. I prefer the idea of
the individual as medium, not the tool. Therefore, the
message is not what one chooses to use, but also what one
is trying to say.
People(us)have all been mediated to some degree, with lies
in the art world, as well as in the media-press. For the
first time people, not just artists are in control of
how representation is seen and heard (potentially). That's
why America's government are keen to close down the American
people's options on how they use the Internet. People are now
reclaiming the media (just like Jello Biafro suggested). This
can only be a good thing, for it makes people aware of how
manipulation happens using the various processes that have
been learned by professionals in the media. They are learning
new skills and with this finding out other things at the same
time, that the official media are not telling them.
Blogs have been springing up everywhere on the net. I feel it
has much more to do with people becoming aware of how to declare
their humanity (in whatever context)on the Internet.
>2. Along or against this trend, new works are being
made using what Cory Archangel may have coined "Dirt
Style Design" or Low-Fi net art. These works look back
to the "Heroic Period" of Net.art as well as the pop
home pages of the net. Think Hampster Dance (circa
1997) meets one38.org. Reasons? Who knows? Maybe it's
the same reasons as in thought 1.
I tend to think that when one moves backwards, one is
psychologically afraid of something (I could be wrong).
The 'heroic period' is a mythology invented by those who
were lucky enough to be accepted by institutions at the
time. A harking back to a certain time, but in reality it
was elitist. And open only a to few. The real 'heroic
period' is now, because it is a time when the Internet &
its many users/artists can collaborate to do something
that is potentially exciting (at last).
As in design, it does not mean anything without a context.
The reason why certain people are choosing to stick to a
'genre' is obviously a decision - & that is their right as
a creative individual. But changes in concepts/reasons/
function of a web site it seems, does tend to reflect certain
philosophies, especially in Internet art. It says who that
individual or group is. To me, what is more important, is how
that group is changing things, emotionally, tactically,
creatively as a function on the net, as well as in the everyday
world.
>3. When looking at net art as well as art in general
of late, I've been trying to use the American movie
rating system. Not as a quality judgment but as
another way to look at content. "G" and "PG" seem to
be the ratings of the time. I am looking for an
interesting PG-13 or up. Other people have pointed out
to me that using movie ratings to look at visual art
is like comparing apples to oranges but it has been a
good exercise for me.
Although at the same time I can understand the motive
for such an action, as stated above.I personally, do not
like rating anything that I see and usually try to judge by
its own reasoning's first, although culturalized aspects do
regularly invade my judgment, more than I would like it to.
I am a great believer in 'content', in whatever context.
Like yourself, I can see that Net Art is changing. It is
a many headed horse, traveling in directions that (hopefully)
have no finality. I feel that I am exploring, discovering
new ways of reading, looking, experiencing and whether it is
code, image, text is of no importance - what is important
is that the creator's intentions are real. This is where
interpretation comes in again.
What I have noticed is that the idea of relational experience
via Net Art is a common factor that seems to be offering new
horizons of inter- connectedness. This means that
non-specialization is taking effect, the democratization of
creativity via the use of accessible technology. This, is not
a bad thing, and is celebrated too little, and can be dissed
in disguise, using obscure language that stays in the realm
of institutional remits. So, I say again - it is now that the
real challenge is taking place, the real 'heroic period' is
here now, not then...
with respect - marc garrett
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
Why you think you are going to be attacked by everyone
is beyond me. But if you are after discussion, here it
is. I favor chatting over the senseless 'txt' violence &
respect you as an individual genuinely interested in
debate...
>1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image and
video manipulation over text and vector graphics
within net art. Although some have used image as a
main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind) a
form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more access
to broadband, better software, or the change in
political climate.
It seems to me that 'true' realism can only be defined via
experience & not via interpretation of aesthetics or notions.
Re-interpretation is issued forth by broadcasting channels
allover the world, which is presumed as information, yet in
reality it is interpretation. So with the aspect of people
who use digital cameras to declare their own ideas, thus
reclaiming a space for their own intentions - I am all for
it.
Whether the medium is visual/networked or text, is not
really the issue. I feel that it is much more to do with
consciousness and intention; which can move beyond the
limitation of medium specifications. I prefer the idea of
the individual as medium, not the tool. Therefore, the
message is not what one chooses to use, but also what one
is trying to say.
People(us)have all been mediated to some degree, with lies
in the art world, as well as in the media-press. For the
first time people, not just artists are in control of
how representation is seen and heard (potentially). That's
why America's government are keen to close down the American
people's options on how they use the Internet. People are now
reclaiming the media (just like Jello Biafro suggested). This
can only be a good thing, for it makes people aware of how
manipulation happens using the various processes that have
been learned by professionals in the media. They are learning
new skills and with this finding out other things at the same
time, that the official media are not telling them.
Blogs have been springing up everywhere on the net. I feel it
has much more to do with people becoming aware of how to declare
their humanity (in whatever context)on the Internet.
>2. Along or against this trend, new works are being
made using what Cory Archangel may have coined "Dirt
Style Design" or Low-Fi net art. These works look back
to the "Heroic Period" of Net.art as well as the pop
home pages of the net. Think Hampster Dance (circa
1997) meets one38.org. Reasons? Who knows? Maybe it's
the same reasons as in thought 1.
I tend to think that when one moves backwards, one is
psychologically afraid of something (I could be wrong).
The 'heroic period' is a mythology invented by those who
were lucky enough to be accepted by institutions at the
time. A harking back to a certain time, but in reality it
was elitist. And open only a to few. The real 'heroic
period' is now, because it is a time when the Internet &
its many users/artists can collaborate to do something
that is potentially exciting (at last).
As in design, it does not mean anything without a context.
The reason why certain people are choosing to stick to a
'genre' is obviously a decision - & that is their right as
a creative individual. But changes in concepts/reasons/
function of a web site it seems, does tend to reflect certain
philosophies, especially in Internet art. It says who that
individual or group is. To me, what is more important, is how
that group is changing things, emotionally, tactically,
creatively as a function on the net, as well as in the everyday
world.
>3. When looking at net art as well as art in general
of late, I've been trying to use the American movie
rating system. Not as a quality judgment but as
another way to look at content. "G" and "PG" seem to
be the ratings of the time. I am looking for an
interesting PG-13 or up. Other people have pointed out
to me that using movie ratings to look at visual art
is like comparing apples to oranges but it has been a
good exercise for me.
Although at the same time I can understand the motive
for such an action, as stated above.I personally, do not
like rating anything that I see and usually try to judge by
its own reasoning's first, although culturalized aspects do
regularly invade my judgment, more than I would like it to.
I am a great believer in 'content', in whatever context.
Like yourself, I can see that Net Art is changing. It is
a many headed horse, traveling in directions that (hopefully)
have no finality. I feel that I am exploring, discovering
new ways of reading, looking, experiencing and whether it is
code, image, text is of no importance - what is important
is that the creator's intentions are real. This is where
interpretation comes in again.
What I have noticed is that the idea of relational experience
via Net Art is a common factor that seems to be offering new
horizons of inter- connectedness. This means that
non-specialization is taking effect, the democratization of
creativity via the use of accessible technology. This, is not
a bad thing, and is celebrated too little, and can be dissed
in disguise, using obscure language that stays in the realm
of institutional remits. So, I say again - it is now that the
real challenge is taking place, the real 'heroic period' is
here now, not then...
with respect - marc garrett
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
Mechanic tries to Fix up his Art-Life!
Sleazy Art Meetings (6)
Mechanic tries to Fix up his Art-Life!
I work for myself as a mechanic in my own garage and my main passion is art,
especially Internet and performance art. I'm a pretty radical artist I
suppose; also have a web site showing 'Real-time' web cams as I mend various
vehicles. I get over seven hundred hits a day and the toll is rising. Art
Action is my life; it is Performance in the Context of Play and Ritual.
I am a very serious artist/mechanic but I possess an urgent need to find
another artist, preferably an adventurous female to share new ideas with.
Until now, I have only explored one concept and that is fixing cars and
showing them online. It's time to branch out to find a decent cyber fem who
is keen on sharing a Dadaist take on life. Hell, even the washing up would
be fun with her as we 'discuss how things mean, rather than what things mean
'.
Recently I've been surfing around on the Internet and the other day I found
this site called 'Live behavior System'. It was really cool and I tried the
free membership. I played around in the chat rooms and then I found this
incredible woman. She was a married artist looking for someone to talk about
'Live action role-play'. I had her send me a picture of herself and I almost
fell off my chair. She was gorgeous, incredibly hot.
She said that she was very interested in pursuing real art behavior with me
but felt self-conscious. I said that she was only experiencing a possessive
adjective emotion, which is natural. She said 'ok, what about her
subconscious narrative matrix?' I must admit I was speechless for a few
seconds and I could only think of the film 'The Matrix', with all that
leatherwear. No decent cars though.
I chatted with her for over an hour and at the end of our talk she told me
she wasn't going to do it. I sighed and logged off. The next day I checked
the system again and she was online. We chatted and she told me that live
action role-play and me was all that she could think about. We talked some
more and finally I left the final decision up to her. I suggested that we
should both meet each other and try out some art behavior or live action
role-play together without web cams, just the two of us.
Either she would show up at my place or she wouldn't. Simple as that. I gave
her my address and told her to come by on the weekend. The weekend came and
went, and she never showed up. But on Wednesday a woman came into my garage
and asked me if I could fix her art-life so it would run more reliably. She
had on a blue dress that she filled out perfectly.
I experienced an almost sculptural sensation, a manifestation of visceral
materiality in my pants. She didn't say anything else, she just moved closer
to me, dropped to her knees and pulled out my ready-made. Then she slowly
explored my personal narrative before giving me the best live Art-Behavior
performance that I have ever had in my life. It was amazing; it was like
when I saw Picasso's Guernica, whilst looking through a Kaleidoscope
telescope for the first time. It was thought provoking, mesmerizing and all
consuming.
It was such an overwhelming deep, ultimate action-type happening, for a
moment I felt like I couldn't take it anymore. A mutual function of live
action role-play, shared by two people. It was so real that it felt unreal.
She climbed up on my metaphorical prodigy and slowly, ever so slowly,
submerged it deep down into her situationist grasp. Wow, what a feeling. We
tried several unrehearsed, laterally, intuitive positions before I had to
pull out my personal critique, I was about to explode.
Incredible. After she cleaned herself up she told me that she thought she
had made a mistake and hurried out of my garage. Suddenly I got loads of
phone calls from excited friends and viewers who regularly frequented my web
site, it turns out that I accidentally left the web cam on. Many of the
phone calls were requests for me to repeat the performance. And then it hit
me, I did not turn the web cam on, she did. Dammit! I was set up by a
competitive art-activist. Pretending to be into live action role-play and
she made a 'Spectacle' out of me. I never saw her again, which is too bad
because she was an incredible artist.
http://www.furtherfield.org/mgarrett/mgw/docs/playful_art_text.htm
Mechanic tries to Fix up his Art-Life!
I work for myself as a mechanic in my own garage and my main passion is art,
especially Internet and performance art. I'm a pretty radical artist I
suppose; also have a web site showing 'Real-time' web cams as I mend various
vehicles. I get over seven hundred hits a day and the toll is rising. Art
Action is my life; it is Performance in the Context of Play and Ritual.
I am a very serious artist/mechanic but I possess an urgent need to find
another artist, preferably an adventurous female to share new ideas with.
Until now, I have only explored one concept and that is fixing cars and
showing them online. It's time to branch out to find a decent cyber fem who
is keen on sharing a Dadaist take on life. Hell, even the washing up would
be fun with her as we 'discuss how things mean, rather than what things mean
'.
Recently I've been surfing around on the Internet and the other day I found
this site called 'Live behavior System'. It was really cool and I tried the
free membership. I played around in the chat rooms and then I found this
incredible woman. She was a married artist looking for someone to talk about
'Live action role-play'. I had her send me a picture of herself and I almost
fell off my chair. She was gorgeous, incredibly hot.
She said that she was very interested in pursuing real art behavior with me
but felt self-conscious. I said that she was only experiencing a possessive
adjective emotion, which is natural. She said 'ok, what about her
subconscious narrative matrix?' I must admit I was speechless for a few
seconds and I could only think of the film 'The Matrix', with all that
leatherwear. No decent cars though.
I chatted with her for over an hour and at the end of our talk she told me
she wasn't going to do it. I sighed and logged off. The next day I checked
the system again and she was online. We chatted and she told me that live
action role-play and me was all that she could think about. We talked some
more and finally I left the final decision up to her. I suggested that we
should both meet each other and try out some art behavior or live action
role-play together without web cams, just the two of us.
Either she would show up at my place or she wouldn't. Simple as that. I gave
her my address and told her to come by on the weekend. The weekend came and
went, and she never showed up. But on Wednesday a woman came into my garage
and asked me if I could fix her art-life so it would run more reliably. She
had on a blue dress that she filled out perfectly.
I experienced an almost sculptural sensation, a manifestation of visceral
materiality in my pants. She didn't say anything else, she just moved closer
to me, dropped to her knees and pulled out my ready-made. Then she slowly
explored my personal narrative before giving me the best live Art-Behavior
performance that I have ever had in my life. It was amazing; it was like
when I saw Picasso's Guernica, whilst looking through a Kaleidoscope
telescope for the first time. It was thought provoking, mesmerizing and all
consuming.
It was such an overwhelming deep, ultimate action-type happening, for a
moment I felt like I couldn't take it anymore. A mutual function of live
action role-play, shared by two people. It was so real that it felt unreal.
She climbed up on my metaphorical prodigy and slowly, ever so slowly,
submerged it deep down into her situationist grasp. Wow, what a feeling. We
tried several unrehearsed, laterally, intuitive positions before I had to
pull out my personal critique, I was about to explode.
Incredible. After she cleaned herself up she told me that she thought she
had made a mistake and hurried out of my garage. Suddenly I got loads of
phone calls from excited friends and viewers who regularly frequented my web
site, it turns out that I accidentally left the web cam on. Many of the
phone calls were requests for me to repeat the performance. And then it hit
me, I did not turn the web cam on, she did. Dammit! I was set up by a
competitive art-activist. Pretending to be into live action role-play and
she made a 'Spectacle' out of me. I never saw her again, which is too bad
because she was an incredible artist.
http://www.furtherfield.org/mgarrett/mgw/docs/playful_art_text.htm