Olson has served as Editor & Curator at Rhizome, the inaugural curator at Zero1, and Associate Director at SF Camerawork. She's contributed to many major journals & books and this year Cocom Press published Arte Postinternet, a Spanish translation of her texts on Postinternet Art, a movement she framed in 2006. In 2015 LINK Editions will publish a retrospective anthology of over a decade of her writings on contemporary art which have helped establish a vocabulary for the criticism of new media. Meanwhile, she has also curated programs at the Guggenheim, New Museum, SFMOMA, White Columns, Artists Space, and Bitforms Gallery. She has served on Advisory Boards for Ars Electronica, Transmediale, ISEA, the International Academy of Digital Arts & Sciences, Creative Capital, the Getty Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Kennedy Center, and the Tribeca Film Festival.
Olson studied Fine Art at Goldsmiths, History of Consciousness at UC Santa Cruz, and Rhetoric & Film Studies at UC Berkeley. She has recently been a visiting artist at Yale, SAIC, Oberlin, and VCU; a Visiting Critic at Brown; and Visiting Faculty at Bard College's Milton Avery Graduate School of the Arts and Ox-Bow. She previously taught at NYU's Tisch School of the Arts' new media graduate program (ITP) and was Assistant Professor of New Media at SUNY-Purchase's School of Film & Media Studies. She was recently an Artist-in-Residence at Eyebeam & is currently Visiting Critic at RISD.
abstractmachine.v87D6
Douglas Edric Stanley's abstractmachine.v87D6 installation at the Transvergence exhibition of ZeroOne looks pretty cool. It includes 'cubed', a Rubik's Cube-driven interface that generates breakcore(!).
See also this interview with Douglas Edric Stanley on wmmna -ADM
Originally posted by adm from del.icio.us/tag/eyebeam-reblog, ReBlogged by admeyers on Aug 9, 2006 at 12:23 PM
visualcomplexity.com | Turing
<img src="http://a.parsons.edu/~lima/visualcomplexity/images/205_big02.jpg" /><p>Turing is an interactive visualization of Alan Turing's famous computational machine. It is the first in a series of projects which aim to make the process of programming more intuitive. A Turing machine is essentially a miniature model of a computer with a memory tape, and a memory-reading head. Upon reading the current letter on the tape, the head may write a new letter onto the tape, and then move left or right on the tape. The logic in the machine is embodied in the transitions between the states. Each transition has associated with it an input symbol, an output symbol, and a selection between left and right. If the letter on the tape matches the input symbol, the output symbol is written to the tape, and it then moves left or right. It has been proven in fact that any thing which could be computed, could be done on a Turing machine.</p>
<p class="rb_attribution">
<span class="rb_source">
<a href="http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/index.cfm?domain=Computer%20Systems">Originally</a>
from <a class="rb_source_link" href="http://del.icio.us/tag/art">del.icio.us/tag/art</a></span>
by <span class="rb_author">d.f.h</span>
<span class="rb_reblogged">
reBlogged
by <span class="rb_reblogger">artificialeyes.tv</span>
on <span class="rb_modified">Aug 9, 2006, 12:16PM</span>
</span>
</p>
Apparition II in Hong Kong
The LCSD programme, Apparition II, by Klaus Obermaier and the Ars Electronica Futurelab will be shown in the Kwai Tsing Theatre from 16-17 Sep, 06 at 8:00 p.m. From the official programme note:
The camera based motion tracking system developed for APPARITION uses complex computer vision algorithms to extract the performers moving outline or shape from the background to provide constantly updating information for a body projection as well as qualitative calculations of certain motion dynamics, ...
It sounds interesting. Here are the links to the movies from the official website http://www.excile.at/.
Remember the Golan Levin & Zach Lieberman's Messa di Voce in the Art of Experimental Interaction Design book from IdN.
Image from http://tmema.org/
Image from http://www.idnproshop.com/
It is also showing now at the Tokyo's NTT ICC in the Kids Program. Keith has just visited the exhibition when he was in Tokyo a while ago.
And also the Medial Stage and Costume Design project from the German ART+COM.
Image from http://www.artcom.de/
Wetware Hackers Day 2
First up at the second day of the workshop on biotech and art was artist and Buffalo-based researcher Paul Vanouse. Paul explained the different ways of "fingerprinting" one's DNA. In his view, the results of the two methods which are basically about either splicing apart of amplifying the genetic sequence contained in every cell, tell as much about the method that's being used as they tell about the actual genome. Thus the notion of the "individual" fingerprint and how racism and a possible genetic racism might relate in the future is also the subject of his own works. Using the same imaging technique, we got to actually splice up virus DNA and put it into a gel in which the separated parts will travel at different speeds, allowing to be identified under UV light. In his more recent work "Latent Figure Protocol" he uses the actual genetic sequences to actually draw on the gel, re-creating for example a Copyright-logo.
Natalie Jeremijenko did the second and final part and gave a brief overview of her ideas on what a laboratory is and how it could be re-imagined. The victorian notion of zoos for example, the impossibility of interaction between people and the animals in their closed-off and labelled enclosures. In her view, communication should rather be fostered, especially between urban dwellers and the animals that followed man to the cities. The projects she recently developed dealed with that, especially the pigeon (it's the animal of the moment here!) and fish-related projects at the recent Whitney biennial in New York City. Taking up her notion of "cross-species cuisine" (food that's good for man and animal), we actually made food that would be tasty for people and fish and even be healthy since the Chitosan we put in it ...
A Virtual Sojourn
Tamiko Thiel's 'The Travels of Mariko Horo' is truly a multimedia project. The whole thing revolves around a travel narrative centered on a character appropriately named Mariko the Wanderer. Mysteriously hailing from a period somewhere in the mammoth range of the 12th to the 22nd centuries, Mariko's journey involves moving West from Japan, in search of a Buddhist paradise. Her successful quest is marked by the additional discovery of a dark purgatorial space. All of the character's memories--both visual and textual--are rendered in 'The Travels of Mariko.' Users become the lead character, seeing the world through her eyes as a joystick steers them through this fictional space. The actual project is doing a bit of touring, premiering at this week's ISEA festival, in San Jose, before moving on to Munich, in the form of a dance. Mariko's journals have been published, in print, and the choreographed and VR versions of her story are enhanced by complexly beautiful imagery and rich meditations on the merger of Eastern and Western music, with a score that combines sampled and computer-generated sound. You can download an interactive VRML / X3D demo and start your own to sojourn to paradise, today. - Irene Wu
Rhizome Today: A critic, with opinions about postinternet art
My own effort in talking about Postinternet, at least in those early instances, as on the panel, was to (a) expand Rhizome's mission--I was then Editor & Curator--to cover and support a wider variety of practices; and (b) just to describe my own work and how a project like my Monitor Tracings (totally "offline" drawings) could be contextualized as internet art, or art 'after' the internet (i.e. In the style of & made after I log-off.) I think Michael puts it *perfectly* when he says, "we should understand all our gestures, 'online' and 'offline,' as actions in a network that is mediated and administered by computers." Perhaps this is obvious, but I'd say this applies to all of waking life, not just art production+reception.
I've personally moved from discussing Postinternet Art as "art after the internet" toward discussing Postinternet as "the symptoms of network culture." I am less interested in discussing PI Art specifically/exclusively, now that people have brow-beaten and/or branded the term into something far different than what I originally meant, and much more interested in discussing the social affects around the production of postinternet conditions and their manifestations. And, meanwhile, I have said (particularly in the Ullens catalogue & also in an interview in the Art and the Internet book put out by Black Dog) that, to me, Postinternet is just a 'placeholder' term around which to convene in having conversations around the latter symptoms. (I've started working on spelling these out more explicitly in recent & forthcoming writing-- including the keynote lecture I just gave at Pratt's UPLOAD conference, entitled "Postinternet is Dead. Long Live Postinternet.")
Likes/Dislikes around the word, aside, I hope this very long-running conversation around art and the internet can continue to incorporate careful consideration of the affects of network culture, as networks themselves evolve.
Breaking the Ice
Like most of the folks above, I too am a "forever member," from the days of the Rhizome Communications ascii RAW listserv and, later, fancy Dreamweaver/Flash "Splash Pages," to the present. Reena Jana and I were the first two paid writers (poached from Wired!), when Alex Galloway was running "content," which at that time meant programming and editorial--though Rhizome was declaratively non-editorial, so they just commissioned book & exhibition reviews, and some interviews from us that were fed into the RAW stream and included in the Digest as Features. Oy vey, I can still remember the cross-eyed weekly ritual of trying to untangle parallel conversations to reassemble them into a coherent thread for the Digest, when I was editing it--and the race to get it out by noon one day each week!!
I've seen Rhizome go through so many changes, and I've been a part of the back channel conversations on years of them, including huge ones that we decided not to go through with. I have to say that it's always hard to serve a membership-based organization, which is what Rhizome has always thought of itself as. But I can say that every change in content or form has been discussed critically, at length, and typically not without a degree of passion.
I am also biting my tongue because I *really* do not want to put words in any staff member's mouth (past or present), but I can say that I believe everyone who's ever worked there has taken their position as a labor of love, with users/reader/members/community (everyone has their favorite self-identification; semantics trolls please don't hate today!) in mind, and everyone has collaborated with the staff to bring a unique take on how best to serve you in the current creative and technological climate. For instance, I remember that my big objective coming in the door was wanting to change the mission statement to reflect not only net art and not only highly technological art, but also art that "reflects" on technology in a meaningful way. In fact, I think contemplating this change was very much a part of my conceptualizing Postinternet.
There is so much to say here, but I think I'd best sign off. This is not my soap box, and in some way, it feels weird to comment so much. I used to be a Superusing Megaposter, but as soon as I became Editor & Curator, I stepped back to focus on trying to facilitate and amplify other voices, which I do believe every Rhizome Editor has done in their own way.
I'll end with this, then. I'd be surprised if every reader, writer, or editor loved everything that ever appeared (structurally or content-wise) in their newspaper of choice. I'd be surprised if every curator or museumgoer loved every artwork shown (or every exhibition design decision) in their favorite museum. But it's the day we stop reading, stop going to look at art that disappoints me. It's the day Rhizome stops experimenting that scares me. And I wish them well on this new experiment.
Conference Report: NET.ART (SECOND EPOCH)
Thank you for these points of clarification. I actually tried to convey (and forgive me if I failed) that your presentation was unique in identifying multiple generations of networked artists, and I particularly liked the way you talked about artists working before the internet in ways that anticipated network culture.
You also made that great point (via Hal Foster) about the ways in which critics' work is influenced by what is/ was happening at the moment they entered the art world. I admire how you helped pioneer new media criticism and yet have continued to stay on the pulse of new work. This is what I had in mind when recalling your point about your relationship to a previous generation of net-dot-artists, versus the artists of the era Inclusiva was calling the "second epoch." I just really liked the way you fleshed out more than two epochs and I wanted to highlight your catalyzing role in the net-dot-art scene, in particular.
In my own presentation, my intent absolutely was not to dismiss any previous artists, movements, practices, etc. It was simply to flesh-out one niche of new media art practice. In fact, I really liked the pointed questions that the audience asked afterwards, because it helped us have a really meaningful discussion about the problematic relationship of pro surfer work to art historical discourse, and my calls to action revolved around getting those artists to participate in learning about their own pre-histories and writing historiographies that situate their own trajectories on their own terms.
So I don't think we're in disagreement. But I appreciate your call to fine-tune my articulation of these scenarios.
Go Ahead, Touch Her
Go Ahead, Touch Her
I'm sorry that you found my article objectionable. I didn't intend to make the implications you suggest, but I believe your response cuts to the most interesting aspect of Laric's piece, which is the effect of remixing.
For those who care to review the lyrics to this song, they are here:
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/mariahcarey/touchmybody.html
They include the refrain:
Touch my body
Put me on the floor
Wrestle me around
Play with me some more
Touch my body
Throw me on the bed
So, in fact, I do think that Carey's lyrics (and video) invite sexual fantasy, but my article doesn't say that she is asking to be violated, it says that she's asking to be remixed. Of course, the slippage between the two that you identify is what's so interesting.
In an interview with Laric, he told me that he noticed that the video takes-on an increased sexual tone when all but Carey is masked out. He was interested in how this first-person invitation to "touch my body" could be construed as an invitation to remix the visage of her body (and/or the voice emitted from it), particularly given (a) the implicit link to digital culture embodied by both the lyrics and video, and (b) the fact that the remix is now such an important part of the media ecology of pop culture.
In the last 25+ years of pop music, lining-up celebrity remixes and making singles remix-ready has been an important part of the production cycle, often preceding the release of the original recording. Almost all historical accounts of Madonna's rise to fame cite her relationship with DJs and openness to remixing as a key factor in her success. So while you may see the remix as a violent act, clearly those participating in this industry see it as an imperative.
Discussions of why a remix is or isn't violent are interesting, as they get to questions of the status of the digital reproduction. Are we remixing a person or "just" her image, and what's the difference when thinking about how a person's identity--particularly a famous person's identity--hinges upon their image? Carey's image was already manipulated before it came to us. In the interview with Laric, he pointed to a segment in the original video in which the shape of a cup becomes distorted as a result of distorting the footage to make the singer standing behind the cup appear slimmer. So this is already not her. If you listen closely, I believe there is also a question as to whether all of the voiced parts of the song are her, so the audio issue adds another layer to the phenomenological question of the brute force of the remix.
These issues of the import of the remix, the relationship to broader pop culture (rather than an insular art world), collective authorship, and the nature of Carey's invitation are what I hoped to address in this article.