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: more mccloud, last one promise
Hi t.whid,
> It's not a serious book (it's analogous to a pop psych book) and to
> quote it when making args about art doesn't serve you well curt. I
> think you have much better ideas and args than McCloud.
Why can't Curt use references from elsewhere if he wants to? I see this as a
very positive thing to do. It takes the power away from the usual critics,
and references that are so 'rank pulling' intellectually. It breaks down
barriers, and opens up other ways for people to understand art things.
Soundz kool to me, or is it a keep in the family situation going on here?
marc
> At 12:42 -0500 2/19/03, curt cloninger wrote:
> >t.,
> >
> >you're missing McCloud's argument and the point of the book.
> >"understanding comics" isn't an art history chronicle. it's a
> >series of ruminations on the language of a particular medium. he's
> >not suggesting that 20th century comic artists were directly
> >influenced by egyptian art. he's suggesting that there's something
> >intrinsic to the human condition that makes us want to tell stories
> >sequentially with pictures, and he's analyzing the ways we have done
> >so throughout history in order to arrive at some fundamental
> >conclusions about images, icons, words, and communication itself.
>
>
> +++
> yo,
>
> It's been a long time since I've read it but I'll concede that he
> doesn't attempt to draw direct connections btw contemporary comix and
> egyptian art.
>
> If memory serves correctly he calls Egyptian art comics however
> (along with cave paintings). If he does do this it is a good
> illustration of his intellectual paucity. There is no defensible
> reason to tack on contemporary names to historical movements or
> thinking. I'v made that point before on this list so I won't go
> through it again. (Rembrandt != expressionist)
>
> There's nothing illuminating in describing people using images to
> tell stories throughout history. A fairly obvious observation imo. To
> tack on the sequential thing because it happens to be his own medium
> is simply self-serving.
>
> It's not a serious book (it's analogous to a pop psych book) and to
> quote it when making args about art doesn't serve you well curt. I
> think you have much better ideas and args than McCloud.
>
> take care,
>
>
> >
> >He brings up the Egyptians to point out that this form of iconic
> >storytelling is not so tangential to human culture as we might
> >suppose. He later uses these Egyptian narratives to exemplify a
> >time when images and words were not so segregated and specialized as
> >they were at the end of the 19th century.
> >
> >Likewise, with the 6 creative phases, he's not talking about
> >historical art movements, he's talking about the intrinsic human
> >creative process. Maybe there's no such thing as an intrinsic human
> >creative process, and maybe art means nothing outside of its given
> >socio-historical contexts -- but those assertions were still open to
> >some debate last time I checked.
> >
> >peace,
> >curt
> >
> >
> >++++
> >t. wrote:
> >
> >yo curt,
> >
> >it's irrelevant in that those who pioneered newspaper comics in
> >america in the early part of the 20th weren't taking any cues from
> >Egyptian art; they weren't thinking about Egyptian art. they were
> >being directly influenced by political cartoons from 1800s in both
> >America and Europe (Nash, Daumier, etc) (btw Marcel Duchamp's bro was
> >a cartoonist for newspapers, it was considered very uncool so he
> >changed his name to Jacques Villon ).
> >
> >to say simply that it's a sequential pictorial narrative therefor
> >draw some relation is absurd. film (which fits the def as well) is
> >also directly related to Egyptian art? Early comics creators weren't
> >directly influenced by any art historical form of sequential art.
> >the only connection is a general art historical connection but then
> >you
> >can say everyone from Titian to Matt Barney have connections to Egyptian
art.
> >
> >it's just a rather obvious play to attempt to give contemporary
> >comics some sort of art historical or cultural cache that they don't
> >need. they live and breathe on their own. so perhaps it isn't an
> >absurd idea, simply an irrelevant observation.
> >
> >+ 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
>
> --
> <twhid>
> http://www.mteww.com
> </twhid>
> + 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
>
> It's not a serious book (it's analogous to a pop psych book) and to
> quote it when making args about art doesn't serve you well curt. I
> think you have much better ideas and args than McCloud.
Why can't Curt use references from elsewhere if he wants to? I see this as a
very positive thing to do. It takes the power away from the usual critics,
and references that are so 'rank pulling' intellectually. It breaks down
barriers, and opens up other ways for people to understand art things.
Soundz kool to me, or is it a keep in the family situation going on here?
marc
> At 12:42 -0500 2/19/03, curt cloninger wrote:
> >t.,
> >
> >you're missing McCloud's argument and the point of the book.
> >"understanding comics" isn't an art history chronicle. it's a
> >series of ruminations on the language of a particular medium. he's
> >not suggesting that 20th century comic artists were directly
> >influenced by egyptian art. he's suggesting that there's something
> >intrinsic to the human condition that makes us want to tell stories
> >sequentially with pictures, and he's analyzing the ways we have done
> >so throughout history in order to arrive at some fundamental
> >conclusions about images, icons, words, and communication itself.
>
>
> +++
> yo,
>
> It's been a long time since I've read it but I'll concede that he
> doesn't attempt to draw direct connections btw contemporary comix and
> egyptian art.
>
> If memory serves correctly he calls Egyptian art comics however
> (along with cave paintings). If he does do this it is a good
> illustration of his intellectual paucity. There is no defensible
> reason to tack on contemporary names to historical movements or
> thinking. I'v made that point before on this list so I won't go
> through it again. (Rembrandt != expressionist)
>
> There's nothing illuminating in describing people using images to
> tell stories throughout history. A fairly obvious observation imo. To
> tack on the sequential thing because it happens to be his own medium
> is simply self-serving.
>
> It's not a serious book (it's analogous to a pop psych book) and to
> quote it when making args about art doesn't serve you well curt. I
> think you have much better ideas and args than McCloud.
>
> take care,
>
>
> >
> >He brings up the Egyptians to point out that this form of iconic
> >storytelling is not so tangential to human culture as we might
> >suppose. He later uses these Egyptian narratives to exemplify a
> >time when images and words were not so segregated and specialized as
> >they were at the end of the 19th century.
> >
> >Likewise, with the 6 creative phases, he's not talking about
> >historical art movements, he's talking about the intrinsic human
> >creative process. Maybe there's no such thing as an intrinsic human
> >creative process, and maybe art means nothing outside of its given
> >socio-historical contexts -- but those assertions were still open to
> >some debate last time I checked.
> >
> >peace,
> >curt
> >
> >
> >++++
> >t. wrote:
> >
> >yo curt,
> >
> >it's irrelevant in that those who pioneered newspaper comics in
> >america in the early part of the 20th weren't taking any cues from
> >Egyptian art; they weren't thinking about Egyptian art. they were
> >being directly influenced by political cartoons from 1800s in both
> >America and Europe (Nash, Daumier, etc) (btw Marcel Duchamp's bro was
> >a cartoonist for newspapers, it was considered very uncool so he
> >changed his name to Jacques Villon ).
> >
> >to say simply that it's a sequential pictorial narrative therefor
> >draw some relation is absurd. film (which fits the def as well) is
> >also directly related to Egyptian art? Early comics creators weren't
> >directly influenced by any art historical form of sequential art.
> >the only connection is a general art historical connection but then
> >you
> >can say everyone from Titian to Matt Barney have connections to Egyptian
art.
> >
> >it's just a rather obvious play to attempt to give contemporary
> >comics some sort of art historical or cultural cache that they don't
> >need. they live and breathe on their own. so perhaps it isn't an
> >absurd idea, simply an irrelevant observation.
> >
> >+ 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
>
> --
> <twhid>
> http://www.mteww.com
> </twhid>
> + 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
>
Deconstruct the Narrative = Protocolian positioning.
Deconstruct the Narrative = Protocolian positioning.
'Some thoughts regarding Cory Archangel's
Data Diaries & established culturalization'.
In the western world, technologies are now so much a part of the everyday,
the use of it has become habitual. You turn the computer on, it loads up,
you click a couple of tabs and then you are away, reading, sending emails or
creating an artwork via given applications. Cory seems to be moving towards
transcending such presumed habits, very much like those electronic geeks
'Kraftwerk', diverting the program. Rebuilding and reworking perceived
notions of what programs and hardware is used for. Coming up with alternate
shifts that do not necessarily infuse collective or world issues but it is
very much part of a digital genre that deconstructs the medium itself.
Cory's (what might seem flippant) use of data, as virtual substance, filler;
reevaluating the computer with a conduit sensibility. Whilst actively
diverting programs and the hardware 'uses', and re-inventing via method and
conceptual poetics. You get the impression of a kind of innocence at play,
this is of course a self-conscious decision, and all part of the small
scheme of things. When I say small scheme, I mean that work itself does
not wish to enter a dialogue with the user or viewer. What you see is what
you get. Therefore the communication is functional, not emotional. To expect
emotion from this work is like expecting figurative painting or emotional
content or narrative from a 'sixty's' 'frank Stella' painting. You just
ain't
gonna get any, and that's fair enough.
'Data Diaries' is primarily a formal piece, sitting (surprisingly) well with
modernist principles of abstraction, is Cory Archangel a contemporary
American 'Computer Abstractionist'? This work is Art as Art, not reflecting
global or emotional issues, politics about our lives in any way, in fact it
declares quite clearly an anti narrative. The work relies heavily on
'exformation', 'exformation is everything we do not actually say but have in
our heads when or before we say anything at all. Information is the
measurable, demonstrable utterance we actually come out with'. [Tor
Norretranders, The User Illusion (1998)]
So what arrives is function rather than narrative, thus you witness the raw
object as it is, no obvious space for intuitive interpretation in respect of
relational or lateral dialogue. This means that the work is for hanging on
your wall, it is a picture, not a message. It can only be a message in the
context of what is attached to it, via labeling, as Art given context. And
this is how its meaning is determined. So therefore we end up dealing with
constructed references around it, to support its essence. If it did not have
the support of an art institutional background to relate to it, where would
it go, who would look at it?
To answer this question one has to look at examples that others have
willingly referred; giving it art-clout. This means that much of the
discourse that surrounds it is via a culturalized art and language mind-set,
which may not necessarily contribute to its (supposed) punk essence. The
work itself may not warrant such interest, when compared to artists such as
Picasso, or even Heath Bunting. Ah but that has also been taken care of, due
to what we all now know as the 'Heroic Period'. So here comes along the
issue of who gets known by whom and why? And it could be construed that
Cory is at the tail end of the political and 'divisionist' term 'Heroic
Period'. Not by his own making but by others who wish to place him in an art
context that the artworld can understand. A product, a brand and an
aesthetic nuance that can be appreciated by an educated audience, but not to
a generation of people who wish for such barriers to be broken down.
What we have learnt here is, that Internet art has to be more
institutionally
friendly, more referenced based to be acknowledged by the establishment. So
you get artists who are still experimenting trying to break the rule of code
which will be a 'no no', unless supported by certain structures. Everything
gets pulled back into the black hole of controlled representation. What
could begin to happen (may be it already has), is that certain people will
be ignored because they have chosen to believe that they could break the
rules in a relational way, not an aesthetic way. So those who thought that
the walls had suddenly crashed down for them; and thought that they were
part of something special; are finding the walls rising back up again. In
fact, they were not ever in the story in the first place.
So if we bypass whether narrative is important or not and cut to the chase
of how things work. Radical becomes product, not as a physical object you
can hold but as a currency, a sale's pitch. You'll get the 'Heroic Period'
gang, being shunted to exhibition to exhibition by the funding elite, over
and over again. Then you'll get the next generation who advocate them as
influential to their own work. Therefore falling into the same culturalized
trappings, running the art arena gauntlet, thus using the same tactics as
many others have done before, and millions are now. 'Pissing' up the wall as
others watch them mark out there 'canonized territory. This activity,
usually male in motion (now a unisex activity), is a very traditional
stance.
So net/web artists will be sculpted to adhere to certain agendas, just like
what was perceived as traditional before the Internet age. Making work that
does not question institutional remits because it would be foolhardy to do
so. Work that is radical in its 'soul' can now only be considered as myth
and delusory. It will be left out, ignored by those who can gain more
mileage out of the invented terminology's and written histories that have
now been tagged, like a stamp of official acceptance that these one's are
ok. 'You can touch these dudes they have been affiliated'.
Perhaps it is wrong for me to use Cory as a virtual hammer to pick holes in
the obvious failings of contemporary net/web art, and isolationist snobbism.
But, there are many questions still not answered, that have to be challenged
and reevaluated genuinely and not by protocol. Cory's art is not 'Punk', it
advocates the style of it, but it certainly does not fill the void that punk
fills for me. if you have to pin an art reference to justify its being, it
certainly ain't Punk.
I personally enjoy Cory's work but I do not like what comes with it, the
background noise is far too loud for me and it gets in the way of the work
itself.
marc garrett
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
'Some thoughts regarding Cory Archangel's
Data Diaries & established culturalization'.
In the western world, technologies are now so much a part of the everyday,
the use of it has become habitual. You turn the computer on, it loads up,
you click a couple of tabs and then you are away, reading, sending emails or
creating an artwork via given applications. Cory seems to be moving towards
transcending such presumed habits, very much like those electronic geeks
'Kraftwerk', diverting the program. Rebuilding and reworking perceived
notions of what programs and hardware is used for. Coming up with alternate
shifts that do not necessarily infuse collective or world issues but it is
very much part of a digital genre that deconstructs the medium itself.
Cory's (what might seem flippant) use of data, as virtual substance, filler;
reevaluating the computer with a conduit sensibility. Whilst actively
diverting programs and the hardware 'uses', and re-inventing via method and
conceptual poetics. You get the impression of a kind of innocence at play,
this is of course a self-conscious decision, and all part of the small
scheme of things. When I say small scheme, I mean that work itself does
not wish to enter a dialogue with the user or viewer. What you see is what
you get. Therefore the communication is functional, not emotional. To expect
emotion from this work is like expecting figurative painting or emotional
content or narrative from a 'sixty's' 'frank Stella' painting. You just
ain't
gonna get any, and that's fair enough.
'Data Diaries' is primarily a formal piece, sitting (surprisingly) well with
modernist principles of abstraction, is Cory Archangel a contemporary
American 'Computer Abstractionist'? This work is Art as Art, not reflecting
global or emotional issues, politics about our lives in any way, in fact it
declares quite clearly an anti narrative. The work relies heavily on
'exformation', 'exformation is everything we do not actually say but have in
our heads when or before we say anything at all. Information is the
measurable, demonstrable utterance we actually come out with'. [Tor
Norretranders, The User Illusion (1998)]
So what arrives is function rather than narrative, thus you witness the raw
object as it is, no obvious space for intuitive interpretation in respect of
relational or lateral dialogue. This means that the work is for hanging on
your wall, it is a picture, not a message. It can only be a message in the
context of what is attached to it, via labeling, as Art given context. And
this is how its meaning is determined. So therefore we end up dealing with
constructed references around it, to support its essence. If it did not have
the support of an art institutional background to relate to it, where would
it go, who would look at it?
To answer this question one has to look at examples that others have
willingly referred; giving it art-clout. This means that much of the
discourse that surrounds it is via a culturalized art and language mind-set,
which may not necessarily contribute to its (supposed) punk essence. The
work itself may not warrant such interest, when compared to artists such as
Picasso, or even Heath Bunting. Ah but that has also been taken care of, due
to what we all now know as the 'Heroic Period'. So here comes along the
issue of who gets known by whom and why? And it could be construed that
Cory is at the tail end of the political and 'divisionist' term 'Heroic
Period'. Not by his own making but by others who wish to place him in an art
context that the artworld can understand. A product, a brand and an
aesthetic nuance that can be appreciated by an educated audience, but not to
a generation of people who wish for such barriers to be broken down.
What we have learnt here is, that Internet art has to be more
institutionally
friendly, more referenced based to be acknowledged by the establishment. So
you get artists who are still experimenting trying to break the rule of code
which will be a 'no no', unless supported by certain structures. Everything
gets pulled back into the black hole of controlled representation. What
could begin to happen (may be it already has), is that certain people will
be ignored because they have chosen to believe that they could break the
rules in a relational way, not an aesthetic way. So those who thought that
the walls had suddenly crashed down for them; and thought that they were
part of something special; are finding the walls rising back up again. In
fact, they were not ever in the story in the first place.
So if we bypass whether narrative is important or not and cut to the chase
of how things work. Radical becomes product, not as a physical object you
can hold but as a currency, a sale's pitch. You'll get the 'Heroic Period'
gang, being shunted to exhibition to exhibition by the funding elite, over
and over again. Then you'll get the next generation who advocate them as
influential to their own work. Therefore falling into the same culturalized
trappings, running the art arena gauntlet, thus using the same tactics as
many others have done before, and millions are now. 'Pissing' up the wall as
others watch them mark out there 'canonized territory. This activity,
usually male in motion (now a unisex activity), is a very traditional
stance.
So net/web artists will be sculpted to adhere to certain agendas, just like
what was perceived as traditional before the Internet age. Making work that
does not question institutional remits because it would be foolhardy to do
so. Work that is radical in its 'soul' can now only be considered as myth
and delusory. It will be left out, ignored by those who can gain more
mileage out of the invented terminology's and written histories that have
now been tagged, like a stamp of official acceptance that these one's are
ok. 'You can touch these dudes they have been affiliated'.
Perhaps it is wrong for me to use Cory as a virtual hammer to pick holes in
the obvious failings of contemporary net/web art, and isolationist snobbism.
But, there are many questions still not answered, that have to be challenged
and reevaluated genuinely and not by protocol. Cory's art is not 'Punk', it
advocates the style of it, but it certainly does not fill the void that punk
fills for me. if you have to pin an art reference to justify its being, it
certainly ain't Punk.
I personally enjoy Cory's work but I do not like what comes with it, the
background noise is far too loud for me and it gets in the way of the work
itself.
marc garrett
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
Deconstruct the Narrative = Protocolian positioning.
Deconstruct the Narrative = Protocolian positioning.
'Some thoughts regarding Cory Archangel's
Data Diaries & established culturalization'.
In the western world, technologies are now so much a part of the everyday,=
the use of it has become habitual. You turn the computer on, it loads up,=
you click a couple of tabs and then you are away, reading, sending emails o=
r
creating an artwork via given applications. Cory seems to be moving towards=
transcending such presumed habits, very much like those electronic geeks
'Kraftwerk', diverting the program. Rebuilding and reworking perceived
notions of what programs and hardware is used for. Coming up with alternate=
shifts that do not necessarily infuse collective or world issues but it is=
very much part of a digital genre that deconstructs the medium itself.
Cory's (what might seem flippant) use of data, as virtual substance, filler=
;
reevaluating the computer with a conduit sensibility. Whilst actively
diverting programs and the hardware 'uses', and re-inventing via method and=
conceptual poetics. You get the impression of a kind of innocence at play,=
this is of course a self-conscious decision, and all part of the small
scheme of things. When I say small scheme, I mean that work itself does
not wish to enter a dialogue with the user or viewer. What you see is what=
you get. Therefore the communication is functional, not emotional. To expec=
t
emotion from this work is like expecting figurative painting or emotional=
content or narrative from a 'sixty's' 'frank Stella' painting. You just ain=
't
gonna get any, and that's fair enough.
'Data Diaries' is primarily a formal piece, sitting (surprisingly) well wit=
h
modernist principles of abstraction, is Cory Archangel a contemporary
American 'Computer Abstractionist'? This work is Art as Art, not reflecting=
global or emotional issues, politics about our lives in any way, in fact it=
declares quite clearly an anti narrative. The work relies heavily on
'exformation', 'exformation is everything we do not actually say but have i=
n
our heads when or before we say anything at all. Information is the
measurable, demonstrable utterance we actually come out with'. [Tor
Norretranders, The User Illusion (1998)]
So what arrives is function rather than narrative, thus you witness the raw=
object as it is, no obvious space for intuitive interpretation in respect o=
f
relational or lateral dialogue. This means that the work is for hanging on=
your wall, it is a picture, not a message. It can only be a message in the=
context of what is attached to it, via labeling, as Art given context. And=
this is how its meaning is determined. So therefore we end up dealing with=
constructed references around it, to support its essence. If it did not hav=
e
the support of an art institutional background to relate to it, where would=
it go, who would look at it?
To answer this question one has to look at examples that others have
willingly referred; giving it art-clout. This means that much of the
discourse that surrounds it is via a culturalized art and language mind-set=
,
which may not necessarily contribute to its (supposed) punk essence. The
work itself may not warrant such interest, when compared to artists such as=
Picasso, or even Heath Bunting. Ah but that has also been taken care of, du=
e
to what we all now know as the 'Heroic Period'. So here comes along the
issue of who gets known by whom and why? And it could be construed that
Cory is at the tail end of the political and 'divisionist' term 'Heroic
Period'. Not by his own making but by others who wish to place him in an ar=
t
context that the artworld can understand. A product, a brand and an
aesthetic nuance that can be appreciated by an educated audience, but not t=
o
a generation of people who wish for such barriers to be broken down.
What we have learnt here is, that Internet art has to be more institutional=
ly
friendly, more referenced based to be acknowledged by the establishment. So=
you get artists who are still experimenting trying to break the rule of cod=
e
which will be a 'no no', unless supported by certain structures. Everything=
gets pulled back into the black hole of controlled representation. What
could begin to happen (may be it already has), is that certain people will=
be ignored because they have chosen to believe that they could break the
rules in a relational way, not an aesthetic way. So those who thought that=
the walls had suddenly crashed down for them; and thought that they were
part of something special; are finding the walls rising back up again. In=
fact, they were not ever in the story in the first place.
So if we bypass whether narrative is important or not and cut to the chase=
of how things work. Radical becomes product, not as a physical object you=
can hold but as a currency, a sale's pitch. You'll get the 'Heroic Period'=
gang, being shunted to exhibition to exhibition by the funding elite, over=
and over again. Then you'll get the next generation who advocate them as
influential to their own work. Therefore falling into the same culturalized=
trappings, running the art arena gauntlet, thus using the same tactics as=
many others have done before, and millions are now. 'Pissing' up the wall a=
s
others watch them mark out there 'canonized territory. This activity,
usually male in motion (now a unisex activity), is a very traditional
stance.
So net/web artists will be sculpted to adhere to certain agendas, just like=
what was perceived as traditional before the Internet age. Making work that=
does not question institutional remits because it would be foolhardy to do=
so. Work that is radical in its 'soul' can now only be considered as myth=
and delusory. It will be left out, ignored by those who can gain more
mileage out of the invented terminology's and written histories that have=
now been tagged, like a stamp of official acceptance that these one's are=
ok. 'You can touch these dudes they have been affiliated'.
Perhaps it is wrong for me to use Cory as a virtual hammer to pick holes in=
the obvious failings of contemporary net/web art, and isolationist snobbism=
.
But, there are many questions still not answered, that have to be challenge=
d
and reevaluated genuinely and not by protocol. Cory's art is not 'Punk', it=
advocates the style of it, but it certainly does not fill the void that pun=
k
fills for me. if you have to pin an art reference to justify its being, it=
certainly ain't Punk.
I personally enjoy Cory's work but I do not like what comes with it, the
background noise is far too loud for me and it gets in the way of the work=
itself.
marc garrett
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
'Some thoughts regarding Cory Archangel's
Data Diaries & established culturalization'.
In the western world, technologies are now so much a part of the everyday,=
the use of it has become habitual. You turn the computer on, it loads up,=
you click a couple of tabs and then you are away, reading, sending emails o=
r
creating an artwork via given applications. Cory seems to be moving towards=
transcending such presumed habits, very much like those electronic geeks
'Kraftwerk', diverting the program. Rebuilding and reworking perceived
notions of what programs and hardware is used for. Coming up with alternate=
shifts that do not necessarily infuse collective or world issues but it is=
very much part of a digital genre that deconstructs the medium itself.
Cory's (what might seem flippant) use of data, as virtual substance, filler=
;
reevaluating the computer with a conduit sensibility. Whilst actively
diverting programs and the hardware 'uses', and re-inventing via method and=
conceptual poetics. You get the impression of a kind of innocence at play,=
this is of course a self-conscious decision, and all part of the small
scheme of things. When I say small scheme, I mean that work itself does
not wish to enter a dialogue with the user or viewer. What you see is what=
you get. Therefore the communication is functional, not emotional. To expec=
t
emotion from this work is like expecting figurative painting or emotional=
content or narrative from a 'sixty's' 'frank Stella' painting. You just ain=
't
gonna get any, and that's fair enough.
'Data Diaries' is primarily a formal piece, sitting (surprisingly) well wit=
h
modernist principles of abstraction, is Cory Archangel a contemporary
American 'Computer Abstractionist'? This work is Art as Art, not reflecting=
global or emotional issues, politics about our lives in any way, in fact it=
declares quite clearly an anti narrative. The work relies heavily on
'exformation', 'exformation is everything we do not actually say but have i=
n
our heads when or before we say anything at all. Information is the
measurable, demonstrable utterance we actually come out with'. [Tor
Norretranders, The User Illusion (1998)]
So what arrives is function rather than narrative, thus you witness the raw=
object as it is, no obvious space for intuitive interpretation in respect o=
f
relational or lateral dialogue. This means that the work is for hanging on=
your wall, it is a picture, not a message. It can only be a message in the=
context of what is attached to it, via labeling, as Art given context. And=
this is how its meaning is determined. So therefore we end up dealing with=
constructed references around it, to support its essence. If it did not hav=
e
the support of an art institutional background to relate to it, where would=
it go, who would look at it?
To answer this question one has to look at examples that others have
willingly referred; giving it art-clout. This means that much of the
discourse that surrounds it is via a culturalized art and language mind-set=
,
which may not necessarily contribute to its (supposed) punk essence. The
work itself may not warrant such interest, when compared to artists such as=
Picasso, or even Heath Bunting. Ah but that has also been taken care of, du=
e
to what we all now know as the 'Heroic Period'. So here comes along the
issue of who gets known by whom and why? And it could be construed that
Cory is at the tail end of the political and 'divisionist' term 'Heroic
Period'. Not by his own making but by others who wish to place him in an ar=
t
context that the artworld can understand. A product, a brand and an
aesthetic nuance that can be appreciated by an educated audience, but not t=
o
a generation of people who wish for such barriers to be broken down.
What we have learnt here is, that Internet art has to be more institutional=
ly
friendly, more referenced based to be acknowledged by the establishment. So=
you get artists who are still experimenting trying to break the rule of cod=
e
which will be a 'no no', unless supported by certain structures. Everything=
gets pulled back into the black hole of controlled representation. What
could begin to happen (may be it already has), is that certain people will=
be ignored because they have chosen to believe that they could break the
rules in a relational way, not an aesthetic way. So those who thought that=
the walls had suddenly crashed down for them; and thought that they were
part of something special; are finding the walls rising back up again. In=
fact, they were not ever in the story in the first place.
So if we bypass whether narrative is important or not and cut to the chase=
of how things work. Radical becomes product, not as a physical object you=
can hold but as a currency, a sale's pitch. You'll get the 'Heroic Period'=
gang, being shunted to exhibition to exhibition by the funding elite, over=
and over again. Then you'll get the next generation who advocate them as
influential to their own work. Therefore falling into the same culturalized=
trappings, running the art arena gauntlet, thus using the same tactics as=
many others have done before, and millions are now. 'Pissing' up the wall a=
s
others watch them mark out there 'canonized territory. This activity,
usually male in motion (now a unisex activity), is a very traditional
stance.
So net/web artists will be sculpted to adhere to certain agendas, just like=
what was perceived as traditional before the Internet age. Making work that=
does not question institutional remits because it would be foolhardy to do=
so. Work that is radical in its 'soul' can now only be considered as myth=
and delusory. It will be left out, ignored by those who can gain more
mileage out of the invented terminology's and written histories that have=
now been tagged, like a stamp of official acceptance that these one's are=
ok. 'You can touch these dudes they have been affiliated'.
Perhaps it is wrong for me to use Cory as a virtual hammer to pick holes in=
the obvious failings of contemporary net/web art, and isolationist snobbism=
.
But, there are many questions still not answered, that have to be challenge=
d
and reevaluated genuinely and not by protocol. Cory's art is not 'Punk', it=
advocates the style of it, but it certainly does not fill the void that pun=
k
fills for me. if you have to pin an art reference to justify its being, it=
certainly ain't Punk.
I personally enjoy Cory's work but I do not like what comes with it, the
background noise is far too loud for me and it gets in the way of the work=
itself.
marc garrett
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.
Re: snowy bklyn
Hi t.whid,
Just wanted to say that I loved the images linked below for the list. We had
one day of snow in London & it caused immense havoc, as usual. Trains not
working, motorway jams where people were stuck for over 12 hours in the
freezing cold. Our systems here cannot deal environmental change it seems...
marc
> hey everyone,
>
> here are some snow pics for those that aren't here to enjoy it.
>
> btw, people are taking back the streets again as it's much easier to
> walk in a plowed street than an unshoveled sidewalk (the corners are
> esp bad).
>
> take care.
>
> pics:
>
> http://www.mteww.com/snowday/upgrand.jpg
> http://www.mteww.com/snowday/koolman.jpg
> http://www.mteww.com/snowday/downgrand.jpg
> --
> <t.whid>
> www.mteww.com
> </t.whid>
>
> + 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
>
>
Just wanted to say that I loved the images linked below for the list. We had
one day of snow in London & it caused immense havoc, as usual. Trains not
working, motorway jams where people were stuck for over 12 hours in the
freezing cold. Our systems here cannot deal environmental change it seems...
marc
> hey everyone,
>
> here are some snow pics for those that aren't here to enjoy it.
>
> btw, people are taking back the streets again as it's much easier to
> walk in a plowed street than an unshoveled sidewalk (the corners are
> esp bad).
>
> take care.
>
> pics:
>
> http://www.mteww.com/snowday/upgrand.jpg
> http://www.mteww.com/snowday/koolman.jpg
> http://www.mteww.com/snowday/downgrand.jpg
> --
> <t.whid>
> www.mteww.com
> </t.whid>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>
Re: Paris Connection in relation to early net.art
This one i thought was excellent...
marc
http://www.flyingpuppet.com/shock/oneday.htm
> Hi jim,
> You raised some really interesting points and I do particularly agree your
thoughts on
> with the alex galloway article. A kind of nostalgia does seem to permeate
this kind of text
> (although I have to say that I am not particularly fond of introductions
at all) but this
> could very well be to do with the NY scene that I have no real handle on.
>
> I do think the paris connection is incredibly interesting and stimulating,
but I admit I
> haven't spent enough time on all the artists as I rarely get past nicolas
claus, as his work
> just intrigues and delights me on so many levels (funnily enough I passed
the url of dark
> matter on to takeo the other day as something he could look at as an
example of how
> video is being used in experimental and absorbing ways)
>
> I am obviously biased towards turbulence.org as they gave me my own little
soapbox
> through the artist studio which was a buzz (I'd had them bookmarked since
discovering
> net.art) but yes, they are bringing many different approaches together and
vitally, doing
> this without dictating a style or form of 'what is net.art' but just what
feels like a real
> interest and pleasure in all the works...
> cheers,
> j.
>
>
>
> > thanks, jess, for the link to takeo at
http://www.takeo.org/nspace/ns00.htm , which you maintain
> > is highly related to and more notable than the arcangel work. i would
agree with what you say
> > about takeo vs arcangel.
> >
> > i recall a post from a while ago by curt cloninger in which he pointed
out that early computer
> > art was more or less necessarily almost solely conceptual, given the
technological constraints
> > upon it in terms of visuals, sound, and bandwidth. and he posed the
question as to whether this
> > needed to continue as the predominant modus of net.art, given that
though there are still
> > constraints on tech and bandwidth, both have advanced to a state where
such an aesthetic is not
> > necessarily required.
> >
> > also, i would point out that the rectilinear, often purposefully
'pixelated' style we associate
> > with the arcangel piece is very new york - eastern european early
net.artish in its
> > associations. to me, it's less interesting as something to look as
contemplate as a reiteration
> > of the style of early net.art. to me, the discussion about it and the
galloway essay read like
> > ads for 'classic' net.art. want a piece to be championed by the early
net.artists? do it in
> > their style. pay tribute. meet good guys.
> >
> > the 'paris connection' project at http://turbulence.org/curators/Paris
is an attempt to discuss
> > work that does not reiterate this style but, instead, has proceeded into
a shift in net art that
> > i find appealing and relates to yours and curt's observations. it is not
new york. it is paris.
> > the work is often wonderfully conceptual and philosophical, even
minimal, as in the work of
> > Antoine Schmitt and servovalve, but it is also capable of what is to me
a more fecund
> > exploration of video--in the work of clauss and birge, for
instance--than the arcangel work. and
> > the explorations of audio, for instance, in the work of servovalve,
lamarque, and birge combine
> > tech with the sensual and experiential.
> >
> > something beautiful is unfolding in paris. though there are, among the
six parisians, some top
> > art-programmers, birge, for instance, is not a programmer but is known
for his work in
> > multimedia audio in france, is the king of multimedia audio there, and
is a full collaborator
> > with the others. we see in this loosely-knit group a strong modus of
collaboration between
> > programmers, audio guys, people involved in dance--and a range of other
media and arts. we see a
> > tremendous synthesis of arts, media, and programming in their
collaborative work together.
> > toward an art for the net that is as good as any art on the planet. and
an art in which there is
> > no axe through the middle of the brain between experience and concept.
it is rich in both.
> >
> > paris connection is an attempt in english, french, spanish, and
portuguese to tell the world
> > about their work, related work, and these larger contexts in which
net.art is proceeding beyond
> > the solely conceptual cerebrations of early net.art. there is a strong
tradition in french
> > culture toward synthesis of arts and media. here is a quote from
guillaume apollinaire from
> > 1917:
> >
> > "These artifices can still go much further and achieve the synthesis of
the arts, of music,
> > painting, and literature ... One should not be astonished if, with only
the means they have now
> > at their disposal, they set themselves to preparing this new art (vaster
than the plain art of
> > words) in which, like conductors of an orchestra of unbelievable scope
they will have at their
> > disposal the entire world, its noises and its appearances, the thought
and language of man,
> > song, dance, all the arts and all the artifices, still more mirages than
Morgane could summon up
> > on the hill of Gibel, with which to compose the visible and unfolded
book of the future.... "
> > "L'Esprit Nouveau et les Poetes" Apollinaire, 1917
> >
> > interesting and encouraging that both the arcangel and paris connection
are published on
> > turbulence. turbulence at turb. that's what we like to see. turbulence
and synthesis. many
> > thanks to helen thorington and jo for publishing and encouraging both.
> >
> > ja
> >
> o
> /^ rssgallery.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
>
>
marc
http://www.flyingpuppet.com/shock/oneday.htm
> Hi jim,
> You raised some really interesting points and I do particularly agree your
thoughts on
> with the alex galloway article. A kind of nostalgia does seem to permeate
this kind of text
> (although I have to say that I am not particularly fond of introductions
at all) but this
> could very well be to do with the NY scene that I have no real handle on.
>
> I do think the paris connection is incredibly interesting and stimulating,
but I admit I
> haven't spent enough time on all the artists as I rarely get past nicolas
claus, as his work
> just intrigues and delights me on so many levels (funnily enough I passed
the url of dark
> matter on to takeo the other day as something he could look at as an
example of how
> video is being used in experimental and absorbing ways)
>
> I am obviously biased towards turbulence.org as they gave me my own little
soapbox
> through the artist studio which was a buzz (I'd had them bookmarked since
discovering
> net.art) but yes, they are bringing many different approaches together and
vitally, doing
> this without dictating a style or form of 'what is net.art' but just what
feels like a real
> interest and pleasure in all the works...
> cheers,
> j.
>
>
>
> > thanks, jess, for the link to takeo at
http://www.takeo.org/nspace/ns00.htm , which you maintain
> > is highly related to and more notable than the arcangel work. i would
agree with what you say
> > about takeo vs arcangel.
> >
> > i recall a post from a while ago by curt cloninger in which he pointed
out that early computer
> > art was more or less necessarily almost solely conceptual, given the
technological constraints
> > upon it in terms of visuals, sound, and bandwidth. and he posed the
question as to whether this
> > needed to continue as the predominant modus of net.art, given that
though there are still
> > constraints on tech and bandwidth, both have advanced to a state where
such an aesthetic is not
> > necessarily required.
> >
> > also, i would point out that the rectilinear, often purposefully
'pixelated' style we associate
> > with the arcangel piece is very new york - eastern european early
net.artish in its
> > associations. to me, it's less interesting as something to look as
contemplate as a reiteration
> > of the style of early net.art. to me, the discussion about it and the
galloway essay read like
> > ads for 'classic' net.art. want a piece to be championed by the early
net.artists? do it in
> > their style. pay tribute. meet good guys.
> >
> > the 'paris connection' project at http://turbulence.org/curators/Paris
is an attempt to discuss
> > work that does not reiterate this style but, instead, has proceeded into
a shift in net art that
> > i find appealing and relates to yours and curt's observations. it is not
new york. it is paris.
> > the work is often wonderfully conceptual and philosophical, even
minimal, as in the work of
> > Antoine Schmitt and servovalve, but it is also capable of what is to me
a more fecund
> > exploration of video--in the work of clauss and birge, for
instance--than the arcangel work. and
> > the explorations of audio, for instance, in the work of servovalve,
lamarque, and birge combine
> > tech with the sensual and experiential.
> >
> > something beautiful is unfolding in paris. though there are, among the
six parisians, some top
> > art-programmers, birge, for instance, is not a programmer but is known
for his work in
> > multimedia audio in france, is the king of multimedia audio there, and
is a full collaborator
> > with the others. we see in this loosely-knit group a strong modus of
collaboration between
> > programmers, audio guys, people involved in dance--and a range of other
media and arts. we see a
> > tremendous synthesis of arts, media, and programming in their
collaborative work together.
> > toward an art for the net that is as good as any art on the planet. and
an art in which there is
> > no axe through the middle of the brain between experience and concept.
it is rich in both.
> >
> > paris connection is an attempt in english, french, spanish, and
portuguese to tell the world
> > about their work, related work, and these larger contexts in which
net.art is proceeding beyond
> > the solely conceptual cerebrations of early net.art. there is a strong
tradition in french
> > culture toward synthesis of arts and media. here is a quote from
guillaume apollinaire from
> > 1917:
> >
> > "These artifices can still go much further and achieve the synthesis of
the arts, of music,
> > painting, and literature ... One should not be astonished if, with only
the means they have now
> > at their disposal, they set themselves to preparing this new art (vaster
than the plain art of
> > words) in which, like conductors of an orchestra of unbelievable scope
they will have at their
> > disposal the entire world, its noises and its appearances, the thought
and language of man,
> > song, dance, all the arts and all the artifices, still more mirages than
Morgane could summon up
> > on the hill of Gibel, with which to compose the visible and unfolded
book of the future.... "
> > "L'Esprit Nouveau et les Poetes" Apollinaire, 1917
> >
> > interesting and encouraging that both the arcangel and paris connection
are published on
> > turbulence. turbulence at turb. that's what we like to see. turbulence
and synthesis. many
> > thanks to helen thorington and jo for publishing and encouraging both.
> >
> > ja
> >
> o
> /^ rssgallery.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
>
>