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

Re: Quotation (was: why so little discussion?)


I'm always faintly taken aback when I read assertions
like this.
<It seems that 'quotation' lies
at the heart of "postmodern" cultural production...
That is, simulations, appropriations, and
self-referential "deconstruction" have been cited as
both harbingers and cornerstones of artistic "work">
All these characteristics can be found in most periods
of art, in music ( variations on a theme of...),
visual
art ( such and such *after* such and such) and
literature ( pretty much the whole of Shakespeare).
Its perhaps a question of degree, of the ( sometimes
deeply desperate) self consciousness of deployment
which marked the something new in post modernism.
What interests me is the feeling ( and I referred to
this specifically in an earlier post in this thread on
MTAAs wonderful 'five small videos' ) that this self
consciousness is disappearing, that we're perhaps
returning to an earlier kind of practice where
quotation (and the cloud of concepts related to it) is
merely one scarcely remarked weapon in the artist's
arsenal, to be wielded relatively unselfconsciously.
I mean I've not done a *scientific survey* or anything
- but it's a feeling that we're moving into a period
of *consolidation* of artistic language, of an
*application* of lots of the formal shenanigans of the
last half century of so to something that is concerned
more with a profound combination of the intellectual
and the affective & which is also aware of its place
in an ongoing tradition ( and this does not of course
imply massive surface complexity -what 'five small
videos' has in common with a Schubert Lied is the
appearance of *necessity* -"yes that's the only way it
could be!" - and hence simplicity, but a simplicity
which isn't exhausted the first or the second time
round but continues to reveal new layers, new meanings
on repeated engagement)
The recent work of MTAA is inceasingly beginning to
feel to me like an exemplar of this tendency ( another
significant one being for me the work of Alan Sondheim
which if people don't know they absolutely *should*
http://www.asondheim.org/ ).
The thrust (and also the appeal) of the two video
pieces seems to me not primarily formal, conceptual
or didactic in some way, but affective, rich and open
ended; aware of its place in tradition and paying due
homage to it but not simply smart commentary on it.
I can't help speculating too that this quality is not
unrelated to a revival of oppositional political ideas
at the base of society - the experience that artists
had of being part of the millions who marched against
the war and the general revival of a discourse that
not only does not accept the market but situates
itself in opposition to it ( look at the sales of
Moore's books, the massive numbers attending the
various social forums around the world, the millions
truly 'lions led by donkeys', who came into polical
activity around the Kerry campaign).
best
michael

--- Marisa Olson <artstarrecords@yahoo.com> wrote:

> A general question... It seems that 'quotation' lies
> at the heart of "postmodern" cultural production...
> That is, simulations, appropriations, and
> self-referential "deconstruction" have been cited as
> both harbingers and cornerstones of artistic "work"
> in
> the post-modern era--by Jameson, Baudrillard, and so
> many others...
>
> It's one thing to see how Warhol might appropriate
> an
> older image in a "newer" painting, but what of "net
> art"'s appropriation of earlier works, images,
> conversations, etc..? Does the medium make any
> difference? What of the difference between the veil
> of
> code and its appearance? What difference does the
> ability to forge a "real" link (vs a semi-anonymous
> reference) to an earlier work make? From
> historiographic perspective, where does the old end
> and the new (interpretation) begin?
>
> Sorry for all the quotations. It can, at times, be
> hard to keep a straight face using all these general
> terms. Plus, we are talking about """"quotation""""
> right?
>
> Marisa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
> +
> -> 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
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com

DISCUSSION

Re: why so little discussion?


Hi Jim, all
I'm replying to your original post although I read the
others.
I don't know what the answer is; I certainly enjoy it
when a topic catches fire -in general that doesn't
seem to happen with discussions of specific pieces,
which is a shame because this requires a more subtle
approach than some of the polarised *in-general*
positions often argued here.
So I'm going to post some stuff about a recent piece
in the hope someone will respond.
I meant to post awhile back to say how much I'd liked
the MTAA "Five Small Videos About Interruption and
Disappearing"

http://mteww.com.twhid.com/five_small_videos/

Like them very much I do; but they also intrigue me.
The blurb says they are inspired by early performance
videos - a genre and a period which I enjoy a lot.
There was a marvellous exhibition at the ICA here
about a year ago of single channel video works - lots
of Acconci, Baldessari and also early Nauman
-wonderful stuff.

One thing that occurs to me about the MTAA response is
firstly how *elegant* it is - & this is a quality of
all their work - elegance and thoroughness, or perhaps
elegance due to thoroughness - one could never accuse
them of a lack of craft.
This is in stark contrast to the sheer edginess and
sense of ( often literal!) danger in much of that
early video work. Doing my sums I can't put this down
to the newness of video as a medium - actually I
suspect that the technologies used by MTAA are newer
relative to them.

There's a temptation to see this piece ( and others
such as the one year performance piece) as a sort of
conceptual post modernist whimsy, beautifully made but
essentially a clever formal exercise.
I think this would be wrong - actually there seems to
me to be a feel of "classicism" about this work - the
elegance seems not a symptom or a bolt on but a very
much integral part of the work.
I see this happening quite a lot -its as if in the
shadow of high modernism it wasn't quite respectable
to use the methods and the language of the past
without being *ironic* or having a high concept.
Now all those barriers have long been broken we can
simply move on to using a good move no matter when or
where we saw it.
SO specifically here it's as if the artists of the
seventies having blazed a trail, created edgy stuff in
a kind of white heat, MTAA are examining the language
and the practice with the benefit of a couple of
decades of hindsight and appropriating *what fits*,
*what works* into their own practice.
And the resultant work for me isn't simply clever or
knowing but actually quite touching - I'm quite moved
by these two characters in the videos ( and there are
longer backward shadows cast here - Laurel and Hardy,
Abbott and Costello, the *comic film duo* , spring to
mind).
Certainly the piece feels to me to have many
resonances that go beyond the intellectual, the
clever, the knowing and enter the world of the
affective.
I'd be interested to know what you or others think.
best
michael

--- Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.com> wrote:

> why is it that there is so little discussion of
> net.art posted to rhizome? a
> lot of the posts announce work that isn't viewable,
> ie, announcements of
> installation projects and whatnot, but there are
> posts concerning net.work
> that is viewable online, and it is rarely discussed.
>
> ja
> http://vispo.com
>
>
> +
> -> 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
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com


DISCUSSION

Re: Aching slash


this is beautiful Lewis.
michael
--- Lewis LaCook <llacook@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> Lying in your ashes, shedding:
> a lyre in shallows, and awash
> with trenches that succor
> only these frozen teats; I'm
>
> glad of your company tonight,
> aching, and happy I can
> slash and burn my route through
> each and every rancid dream
> of your cleft brow. I've never been
> gladder than when the saddest eyes
> I've ever seen were lonely, and
>
> one luscious second they were
> on me. Pills and cannabis
> bleach like woolen suns,
> spitting out awful fullness, fucking
> in tune with nothing at all save
> the commonality of my absence.
> It's a law here that heats the windows
> into the little hearts I'm all
> outside of. This is good shit, like
>
> silk licking your lungs, like a skinny
> hispanic girl who walks in one
> night when you're alone, the one
>
> with the eyes pulling something
> else along. She's more than
> standing there. I do this for
> the good of my legs, which ache
> one day, and wish.
>
>
>
> =====
>
>
>
***************************************************************************
>
> Lewis LaCook -->http://www.lewislacook.com/
>
> http://www.corporatepa.com/
>
> XanaxPop:Mobile Poem Blog->
> http://www.lewislacook.com/xanaxpop/
>
> Collective Writing Projects--> The Wiki-->
> http://www.lewislacook.com/wiki/ Appendix M
> ->http://www.lewislacook.com/AppendixM/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> www.yahoo.com
>
>
> +
> -> 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
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com

DISCUSSION

A Giant of a Man


Lukasz Szpakowski

15th February 1913 Miesatycze, Poland