ARTBASE (1)
BIO
Michael Szpakowski is an artist, composer, writer and educator.
CV:
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/szpakowski_cv.pdf
Video work:
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/vlog/ScenesOfProvincialLife.cgi
Stills:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako
12 Remixes:
http://www.michaelszpakowski.org/mickiewicz/
CV:
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/szpakowski_cv.pdf
Video work:
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/vlog/ScenesOfProvincialLife.cgi
Stills:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako
12 Remixes:
http://www.michaelszpakowski.org/mickiewicz/
new work - 'jeremiad'
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/jeremiad/jeremiadIntro.html
best
michael
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
best
michael
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
Re: software art vs. programmed art
Hi Jim
< My point? Just like poetry, unless written by those
who don't care about the
art (in which case it's usually dross), is usually
very keenly about poetry,
so too will what can appear to be "programmed art"
have its deep and abiding
concern with software.>
Is this not simply another way of saying there is
always a formal dimension to a work of art and that
naturally anyone 'in the trade' will have a
preoccupation with, and maybe undertake a more
immediate scrutiny of, both form and mechanics.
So that for those actively involved in making art a
work appears more to be "about" formal qualities than
it does even for the informed viewer who is not also a
practitioner.
This has been true since the birth of any sort of
human artistic endeavour and will remain true.
Does it hold any general lessons for what we should be
making?
I remain to be convinced.
The key question over a specific example of
"programmed art" or any other sort of art is "is it
any good", and whilst part of the answer to that is
"is it well constructed" and "is it formally
satisfying?" actually there are a whole series of
other dimensions that are as/more important.
I was looking at some late Degas in the UK national
gallery the other day & I was struck by the withdrawal
from finish - bits of the canvas left bare, no glaze.
Similarly reading a biography of the poet John
Berryman, it describes his struggle to 'disrupt' the
regular pattern of versification he initially
established in the 'Dream Songs'.
I can't help feeling that in both these cases the
artists were reaching beyond both form and technique
to something else, or perhaps more accurately, as I'm
not trying to suggest anything mystical at work,
subsuming both form and technique *within* the
affective qualities of their art.
I absolutely think that it's not possible to rule out
in advance that any medium is capable of being used to
create worthwhile art, but what I reject even more is
the notion that any medium somehow yields a 'special
case'- I wonder if it wouldn't be more fruitful to
examine concrete examples of successful or
unsuccessful practice in some detail rather than
discussing generalised taxonomical considerations.
When Mark River recently posted semi tongue in cheek
'can we just call it art now?' or words to that effect
I felt he was spot on.
best
michael
--- Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.com> wrote:
>
> > Wittgenstein seems to have struck again : isn't it
> all a matter of
> > agreeing on the words.
> > There is no doubt that there is a large group of
> artistic productions
> > out there that use "programs" as their main
> material. A subset of
> > these have "software" as their main subject.
> > Wouldn't everybody be pleased by naming the first
> group "programmed
> > art" and the second "software art"? This is the
> position that I have
> > taken recently in my talks. I use this terminology
> because "program"
> > is a more generic word, and "software" tends to
> mean "commercial
> > software product", which gives it a "cultural"
> orientation.
> >
> > Then, whether the "software art" category of
> transmediale should
> > accept "programmed art" in general is a decision
> of the transmediale
> > people and jury (this is what we had done when I
> was member of the
> > jury in 2002).
>
> It's often the case with other types of works of art
> that an indirect
> subject of the work is the art (of poetry or writing
> or programming or
> whatever). Indirect but often quite strongly, moving
> in parallel and other
> directions with the more prominent subjects.
>
> It can be argued that this makes for more
> interesting art than when the
> subject is overtly focussed on the art and its
> material. Who cares about
> even the juicy topics one can discuss concerning
> software but, mainly,
> programmers and the cognoscenti? I'm one myself, but
> for art to be rich with
> experience, best to bring it home through many
> dimensions of experience.
>
> Poets live the development of poetics. It's on their
> mind continually. It's
> how they live and make sense of their lives, in
> relation to the art. Art
> life art life art life life.
>
> Even if it's not, an experienced poet can read a
> poem and imagine how the
> poem is about poetry/poetics. Because poetics is
> always in relation to life.
> The poem is always in relation to some poetics. I
> tend to favor poems that
> speak interestingly to poetry. Indirectly, directly,
> whatever.
>
> My point? Just like poetry, unless written by those
> who don't care about the
> art (in which case it's usually dross), is usually
> very keenly about poetry,
> so too will what can appear to be "programmed art"
> have its deep and abiding
> concern with software.
>
> ja
> http://vispo.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
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
< My point? Just like poetry, unless written by those
who don't care about the
art (in which case it's usually dross), is usually
very keenly about poetry,
so too will what can appear to be "programmed art"
have its deep and abiding
concern with software.>
Is this not simply another way of saying there is
always a formal dimension to a work of art and that
naturally anyone 'in the trade' will have a
preoccupation with, and maybe undertake a more
immediate scrutiny of, both form and mechanics.
So that for those actively involved in making art a
work appears more to be "about" formal qualities than
it does even for the informed viewer who is not also a
practitioner.
This has been true since the birth of any sort of
human artistic endeavour and will remain true.
Does it hold any general lessons for what we should be
making?
I remain to be convinced.
The key question over a specific example of
"programmed art" or any other sort of art is "is it
any good", and whilst part of the answer to that is
"is it well constructed" and "is it formally
satisfying?" actually there are a whole series of
other dimensions that are as/more important.
I was looking at some late Degas in the UK national
gallery the other day & I was struck by the withdrawal
from finish - bits of the canvas left bare, no glaze.
Similarly reading a biography of the poet John
Berryman, it describes his struggle to 'disrupt' the
regular pattern of versification he initially
established in the 'Dream Songs'.
I can't help feeling that in both these cases the
artists were reaching beyond both form and technique
to something else, or perhaps more accurately, as I'm
not trying to suggest anything mystical at work,
subsuming both form and technique *within* the
affective qualities of their art.
I absolutely think that it's not possible to rule out
in advance that any medium is capable of being used to
create worthwhile art, but what I reject even more is
the notion that any medium somehow yields a 'special
case'- I wonder if it wouldn't be more fruitful to
examine concrete examples of successful or
unsuccessful practice in some detail rather than
discussing generalised taxonomical considerations.
When Mark River recently posted semi tongue in cheek
'can we just call it art now?' or words to that effect
I felt he was spot on.
best
michael
--- Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.com> wrote:
>
> > Wittgenstein seems to have struck again : isn't it
> all a matter of
> > agreeing on the words.
> > There is no doubt that there is a large group of
> artistic productions
> > out there that use "programs" as their main
> material. A subset of
> > these have "software" as their main subject.
> > Wouldn't everybody be pleased by naming the first
> group "programmed
> > art" and the second "software art"? This is the
> position that I have
> > taken recently in my talks. I use this terminology
> because "program"
> > is a more generic word, and "software" tends to
> mean "commercial
> > software product", which gives it a "cultural"
> orientation.
> >
> > Then, whether the "software art" category of
> transmediale should
> > accept "programmed art" in general is a decision
> of the transmediale
> > people and jury (this is what we had done when I
> was member of the
> > jury in 2002).
>
> It's often the case with other types of works of art
> that an indirect
> subject of the work is the art (of poetry or writing
> or programming or
> whatever). Indirect but often quite strongly, moving
> in parallel and other
> directions with the more prominent subjects.
>
> It can be argued that this makes for more
> interesting art than when the
> subject is overtly focussed on the art and its
> material. Who cares about
> even the juicy topics one can discuss concerning
> software but, mainly,
> programmers and the cognoscenti? I'm one myself, but
> for art to be rich with
> experience, best to bring it home through many
> dimensions of experience.
>
> Poets live the development of poetics. It's on their
> mind continually. It's
> how they live and make sense of their lives, in
> relation to the art. Art
> life art life art life life.
>
> Even if it's not, an experienced poet can read a
> poem and imagine how the
> poem is about poetry/poetics. Because poetics is
> always in relation to life.
> The poem is always in relation to some poetics. I
> tend to favor poems that
> speak interestingly to poetry. Indirectly, directly,
> whatever.
>
> My point? Just like poetry, unless written by those
> who don't care about the
> art (in which case it's usually dross), is usually
> very keenly about poetry,
> so too will what can appear to be "programmed art"
> have its deep and abiding
> concern with software.
>
> ja
> http://vispo.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
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
yet more QuickTime shorts
Two more QuickTime movies
( 0006 & 0007 of volume one of ten thousand in a
series of 50 billion)
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies/
'the_firebird' has sound.
'jump' doesn't.
best
michael
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
( 0006 & 0007 of volume one of ten thousand in a
series of 50 billion)
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies/
'the_firebird' has sound.
'jump' doesn't.
best
michael
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
Re: software art vs. programmed art
Liza
Curious that Wittgenstein was mentioned earlier on as
on rereading your post I think my rather stern
rejoinder might have hinged on a Wittgensteinian
reading/misreading of it.
Did you *mean* that the expression will come to *mean*
( in the sense of *signify that*) there is
'determinacy in the outcome', in which case its a
debate about terminology or did you *mean* that the
adoption of the term will *actually lead* to such
content.
I read it as the second and although I absolutely
stand in general by what I (rather pompously) said, I
think it might have been a rather over the top
reaction to what you *meant*.
Sorry.
michael
--- Liza Sabater <liza@culturekitchen.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, Oct 4, 2003, at 15:40 America/New_York,
> Dan Katz wrote:
>
> > Programmed art is agreeable to me.
>
>
> No. It will certainly come to mean there is
> determinacy in the outcome.
>
> / l i z a
> =============================
> http://culturekitchen.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
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
Curious that Wittgenstein was mentioned earlier on as
on rereading your post I think my rather stern
rejoinder might have hinged on a Wittgensteinian
reading/misreading of it.
Did you *mean* that the expression will come to *mean*
( in the sense of *signify that*) there is
'determinacy in the outcome', in which case its a
debate about terminology or did you *mean* that the
adoption of the term will *actually lead* to such
content.
I read it as the second and although I absolutely
stand in general by what I (rather pompously) said, I
think it might have been a rather over the top
reaction to what you *meant*.
Sorry.
michael
--- Liza Sabater <liza@culturekitchen.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, Oct 4, 2003, at 15:40 America/New_York,
> Dan Katz wrote:
>
> > Programmed art is agreeable to me.
>
>
> No. It will certainly come to mean there is
> determinacy in the outcome.
>
> / l i z a
> =============================
> http://culturekitchen.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
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
Re: software art vs. programmed art
Hi
My threepenn'orth:
The interaction between any human being and any work
of art is never, can never, be completely determined (
most importantly because we live in history, but also
because although we are social creatures there is such
a thing as individual psychology) and this is a much
deeper and more fruitful question than anything
digitisation has brought to the table.
There will *never* be 'determinacy in the outcome'.
Questions of technique and categorisation, "software
art", "interactive", "digital", "generative" &c are
minor and wholly subsidiary.
best
michael
--- Liza Sabater <liza@culturekitchen.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, Oct 4, 2003, at 15:40 America/New_York,
> Dan Katz wrote:
>
> > Programmed art is agreeable to me.
>
>
> No. It will certainly come to mean there is
> determinacy in the outcome.
>
> / l i z a
> =============================
> http://culturekitchen.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
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
My threepenn'orth:
The interaction between any human being and any work
of art is never, can never, be completely determined (
most importantly because we live in history, but also
because although we are social creatures there is such
a thing as individual psychology) and this is a much
deeper and more fruitful question than anything
digitisation has brought to the table.
There will *never* be 'determinacy in the outcome'.
Questions of technique and categorisation, "software
art", "interactive", "digital", "generative" &c are
minor and wholly subsidiary.
best
michael
--- Liza Sabater <liza@culturekitchen.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, Oct 4, 2003, at 15:40 America/New_York,
> Dan Katz wrote:
>
> > Programmed art is agreeable to me.
>
>
> No. It will certainly come to mean there is
> determinacy in the outcome.
>
> / l i z a
> =============================
> http://culturekitchen.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
=====
*** QuickTime large QuickTime NUMBER, it is small, office being nearly office OF the office OF the COMMANDS office OF the film or many nearly time the small order where that, that is the office OF the office OF the COMMANDS QuickTime when into the film, is given, it gives the office OF the
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ ***
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com