Michael Szpakowski
Since the beginning
Works in Harlow United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

ARTBASE (1)
Discussions (1004) Opportunities (5) Events (14) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

two new pieces


hi

two new movies

***A word of caution -if you react badly to flicker
avoid 'the watcher'***

http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies/after_ovid.mov

1.3 M

http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/Some_QuickTime_Movies/the_watcher.mov

985K

best
michael

=====
*** You are asked for a jusqu'a car-portrait 'imagining ourselves' contribution.
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/self_portraits/contribute.html
It black and an empty image must be qu'avec null, he n'est become the methods and material digitali/fotografici, (acceptable = ink, matita, coal, varnish; acceptable not = computer the photography &c)
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/self_portraits/index.html ***

DISCUSSION

Re: portrait of the artist as a young editor


yes -I should have been more explicit in following
through -I too much prefer the Brakhage position.
His mistaken attribution of his own position to Cage
is quite interesting though in terms of artistic
psychology.
I can't imagine making work without chance playing a
big role in the process ( in fact any artist who
denies this is almost certainly lying) - but equally I
can't imagine wanting to give in to it.
Cage's mission strikes me as an essentially religious
rather than artistic one ( and I do know they can
coincide, but with Cage the art comes a poor second.)
He seems to have been a thoroughly decent and likable
person but I suspect he probably inadvertantly caused
the creation of more deeply trite and worthless art
than anyone except for Duchamp.

I bought a copy of the "by Brakhage" double DVD a
couple of months or so ago and I allow myself little
shots of it at the end of the day, rather as I did
with Malt Whisky or Grappa in my drinking days. It has
a similar warming and stimulant effect except I wake
up with a clearer head.
best
michael

--- Curt Cloninger <curt@lab404.com> wrote:
> I trust you are correct. I'm less interested in
> Cage here as in the
> idea that Brakhage is attributing to him. In the
> same interview,
> Brakhage relates an incident where Pollock cusses a
> bunch of critics
> who imply that Pollock's work was produced by chance
> operations.
>
> I personally get more out of Brakhage's actual
> output/work than
> either Pollock's or Cage's, which makes me
> interested in his process.
> What he's saying below seems particularly applicable
> to contemporary
> generative art, which is why I posted it. Critics
> and theorists tout
> the idea of the beauty of randomness, but ask lia or
> golan levin or
> josh davis or anyone who is hands-on coding
> generative art, and I
> believe they will side more with brakhange on the
> issue. Josh Davis
> is currently developing software that analyzes the
> semi-random
> iterations that his generative software produces,
> and harvesting the
> iterations most likely to aesthetically appeal to
> him. Portrait of
> the artist as meta-editor.
>
>
>
> At 11:54 AM -0700 6/18/04, Michael Szpakowski wrote:
> >Brakhage was a genius and I revere him.
> >He's totally wrong here on Cage though, Curt -
> there's
> >actually no evidence at all that Cage ever did
> filter
> >his random operations through anything so mundane
> as
> >his hearing and the application of any conscious
> >judgement, except his commitment to the random.
> >Arnold Schoenberg said of him "John Cage is not a
> >composer but an inventor, of genius" & people have
> got
> >so used to quoting that as if implied an
> endorsement
> >by one trailblazer for another that they miss the
> >sting in its tail.
> >I think he was an interesting guy but, a bit like
> >Duchamp, please spare me the epigones, especially
> the
> >third generation ones!
> >best
> >michael
> >
> >
> >--- Curt Cloninger <curt@lab404.com> wrote:
> >> Frankly, I don't see any chance operations in
> John
> >> Cage's work
> >> either. He tried many different things as I
> did,
> >> and in that sense,
> >> yes, I have thrown the dice many different ways
> --
> >> hazard of the
> >> dice, right? -- and rejected almost all of them.
> He
> >> dipped
> >> toothbrush in ink and splattered it across page
> and
> >> threw dice and
> >> put notations as to whether those were whole
> notes,
> >> quarter notes,
> >> eighth notes, whatever; played it; and threw
> most of
> >> it away. And
> >> when he found something that he liked, he kept
> it.
> >> "Liked" would be
> >> too small a word. When he found something that
> >> seemed from his soul
> >> that he could respond to it, and be in charge of
> it
> >> therefore, and
> >> sign it, give it out to the world. Why, it
> seems
> >> the same way to me;
> >> that's the way I work.
> >>
> >> - stan brakhage, 1996
> >>
> >> _
> >> +
> >> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> >> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> >> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> >> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> >> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> >> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is
> >> open to non-members
> >> +
> >> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms
> set
> >> out in the
> >> Membership Agreement available online at
> >> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >>
>
>

DISCUSSION

surrealists in a photobooth


http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/features/story/0,11710,1239610,00.html

no images on the site unfortunately -the ones in the
print edition were just great.
michael

DISCUSSION

a thing of some beauty


I know the spam thing is perhaps a bit well worn now
-but this just plopped into my bulk folder together
with the offer of cheap viagra.
I think its a thing of some beauty -puts me in mind of
Ashberry a bit.

"charitable, his magician! have, cyclorama, fool in
order,
descendant, noise rose from, diaphragm, the apartment
doesn't.
tableland, flooded his ears, brigade, ivan right
after,
boar, and the head, damage, the convoy raised."

best
michael

DISCUSSION

Re: portrait of the artist as a young editor


Brakhage was a genius and I revere him.
He's totally wrong here on Cage though, Curt - there's
actually no evidence at all that Cage ever did filter
his random operations through anything so mundane as
his hearing and the application of any conscious
judgement, except his commitment to the random.
Arnold Schoenberg said of him "John Cage is not a
composer but an inventor, of genius" & people have got
so used to quoting that as if implied an endorsement
by one trailblazer for another that they miss the
sting in its tail.
I think he was an interesting guy but, a bit like
Duchamp, please spare me the epigones, especially the
third generation ones!
best
michael

--- Curt Cloninger <curt@lab404.com> wrote:
> Frankly, I don't see any chance operations in John
> Cage's work
> either. He tried many different things as I did,
> and in that sense,
> yes, I have thrown the dice many different ways --
> hazard of the
> dice, right? -- and rejected almost all of them. He
> dipped
> toothbrush in ink and splattered it across page and
> threw dice and
> put notations as to whether those were whole notes,
> quarter notes,
> eighth notes, whatever; played it; and threw most of
> it away. And
> when he found something that he liked, he kept it.
> "Liked" would be
> too small a word. When he found something that
> seemed from his soul
> that he could respond to it, and be in charge of it
> therefore, and
> sign it, give it out to the world. Why, it seems
> the same way to me;
> that's the way I work.
>
> - stan brakhage, 1996
>
> _
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is
> open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
> out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>