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: im_mobile


Nice to have you back Jess!
I really like this piece- I love the care with which
the images have been mixed so that sometimes we are
seeing an almost abstract examination of certain
shapes, colours or textures, then at others we see
near realistic motion sequences struggle to emerge and
then kind of fold back into the screen ( I don't mean
the panning stuff but the..is it footballers or some
sort of sporting event?) .One question though - does
it need the music? I think it holds up without...( and
personally I find the music, unlike the work itself,
somewhat banal)
warmest wishes
michael

--- Jess Loseby <jess@rssgallery.com> wrote:

> hello. I don't seem to know any of you these days.
>
> trying to get reconnected around ongoing ill health.
> im_mobile is a flash video mix as
> part of the "without permission" series to try and
> get back to work.
> 1000 mobile phone vid and stills.
> may make you feel a little off-colour
> (I'm still kind of into force-fed cathasis:)
>
> DO NOT view if sensitive to strobe or have light
> sensitive epilepsy!!!!!
>
> http://www.rssgallery.com/im_mobile.html
>
> [firefox users please follow link there]
>
>
> jess.
>
>
>
>
> +
> -> 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
>

DISCUSSION


DISCUSSION

Censorship of artwork at St Francis College Brooklyn - please read & act


HI all
Please read the mail below, from an artist called
Tracy Phillips, who has had an artwork removed from a
show at St Francis College by the authorities there.
I've posted an image of the piece at:
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/She_became_obsessed.jpg
*Please* send protest e mails to Frank Macchiarola,
President of the college:

fmacchia@ stfranciscollege.edu

and copy to Tracy at

Tracy Phillips <tep1961@yahoo.com>

Please also forward/blog this as appropriate.

I've pasted my own letter of protest at the bottom of
this mail.

> Hello Michael,
> Robert Roth gave me your name and suggested I
> contact
> you. He thought you might have some ideas that
> could
> be of help.
> On Sept. 9th, I removed my painting from a show at
> St.
> Francis College. The college had determined that it
> was offensive and wanted it moved to a less visible
> spot in the show. I have not been told why the
> piece
> was considered a problem (I have attached a copy of
> the image for you). I feel as though the piece is
> being marginalized and my voice as an artist is
> being
> squelched.
> The reception for the show was on the 9th. However
> the show was actually hung for view on the 1st of
> September. I found out on the 9th, that the piece
> had
> been taken down by the college. It Hadn't Been Up
> All
> Week! The curator (the show was put together by an
> independent curator) made a rather feeble attempt to
> get the college to reconsider. They agreed to allow
> her to hang the piece in it's original space for the
> opening only. The curator wants to maintain her
> relationship with the college and won't rock the
> boat.
> As a result I've been left to try to organize some
> sort of response on my own. This is new to me and
> I'm
> not even sure how to begin. I am furious at the
> college for their narrow mindedness and attack on my
> right to express myself as an artist, the curator,
> and
> my fellow artists in the show for their apathy. So
> far a couple of artists have threatened to pull
> their
> work if mine is not reinstated, but no one has done
> so
> yet. The curator has asked that people contact the
> college president and demand that the piece be
> returned. I sent out an email tonight to everyone I
> know with the info. The college President is Frank
> J.
> Macchiarola, 718-522-2300
> The painting is titled "She became obsessed with
> thoughts of forbidden fruit". It is in Oil.
> copyright
> 2005
> I would appreciate any suggestions or help you have
> to
> give.
> Thanks,
> Tracy Phillips

Dear Mr Macchiarola
I'm an artist and educator from the UK and I'm writing
to you to protest at the decision to remove the
artwork by Tracy Phillips from the Dining In/Dining
Out show at the college.
This contravenes all accepted norms, not only of the
presentation of artwork but also of academic freedom.
If the work was in any sense controversial one might
at least *understand*, if not agree with, your actions
-however what seems to be the case is that you took
exception to a truthful depiction of old age. ( and,
it should be said, rather a marvellous painting)
I took a look at your web site and I took particular
note of this passage from your president's message:
"The other quality that makes St. Francis stand out is
its commitment to promoting the development of the
whole person, including those important values found
in Catholic Education: freedom, tolerance, respect for
each other. "
Unfortunately in this case the three qualities you
claim to value seem to be in short supply -perhaps you
made an error either in wording your message or in
your actions with regard to the exhibition because
surely no-one in your position of caring for
developing minds could be *consciously* capable of
such a level of hypocrisy.
I would be interested to read your response as I'm
sure would many of my colleagues worldwide.
yours
Michael Szpakowski

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: two things (not an exhaustive list) about which I was wrong on this list


Hi Curt
< I'm not trying to put you on the spot or anything,>

well I pretty much invited it..

<what you thought about the works before...2. what you
think about them now...3. (most interestingly) what
changed in your understanding that caused you to
appreciate them>
I *was* pretty splenetic about Data Diaries - a few
things came together on that but the gist of my
position was that it was a one liner - essentially
fairly disposable conceptualism with some almost
optional visuals and sounds ( and way too many of
them, in that I felt then that they were there just to
*illustrate the point*) that came with the "idea".
Furthermore Alex Galloway in his intro piece made a
big point, indeed a virtue, ( and of course it was
entirely unfair of me to take this out on the work
itself) of that fact that it stemmed from a clever but
essentially very quick hack.
I would want to say that I find the one liner culture
in general a depressing thing & that I see lots of
work that gives me no reason to feel any more
charitable to it than I did then. The artistic one
liner currently comes, as you know, almost inevitably
with some sort of explicatory statement, usually by
the artist her/himself although in this case the
honours were done by Alex Galloway. In general, its
something I'm pretty uncomfortable with since the
pairing of one liner and usually theory laden
explanation is often at kindest banale.
Nevertheless I was wrong about Data Diaries.
The main reason is that I was blind then to the fact
that the work is simply enormously beautiful - I've
spent a lot of the past two years thinking about film
and video both theoretically and practically and I
think that this has perhaps improved my *looking* - I
do see the piece in a completely different way now
-I've also recognised ( and said elsewhere) that I've
come to understand that artists whom I don't greatly
care for have made it possible for me to use -rather
conservatised -forms of their innovations within my
own work and this has made me less ready to rush to
judgement.
Secondly I feel less dogmatic than I did about the
artist statement, again partly through personal
experience; whilst I hope never ever to be caught
quoting Baudrillard in speaking about my work I
realised practically that when people ask me questions
about it I'm not averse to answering, either
artistically and technically, so it seem both
hypocritical and perverse to rail *on principle*
against those who provide such answers in advance (
when they write crap, as is so often the case, because
someone has told them that what artists do is to write
inpenetrable artists statements, they are of course
entirely fair game). I also have thought a great deal
about how art fits into society more generally,and
the more I think about it the more it seems to me that
the life of any artwork exists way beyond the
boundaries of the work itself, indeed way beyond the
artworld - it's part of an huge ongoing conversation
between human beings, some of whom are members of the
"artworld" many of whom are not -this is what a
"tradition" is, or rather this is what a tradition is
part of. "Everything is connected" as good old
Vladimir Ilyich so rightly said.
So I now accept the factual content of Galloway's
introduction as a helpful and enlightening contexting
of the piece.
Lastly, I think I was rather stuck up about craft -
I'm not recanting here, it's something I'll continue
to fly the flag for *but*
(a) Data Diaries *is* *very* clever -and a bit like
jazz improvisation, which we've discussed before, the
act of creating a particular, apparently effortless (
not quite effortless, I'm trying to say something like
apparently-unstriven-for) piece has to be put into
the context of all the preparatory work on pieces or
solos that necessarily prepared the artist for *this
one*
(b) which of us has not made work that contains whole
strings of accidents? I think my former , rather
prudish, account of how an artist worked, couched in
terms of an initial vision realised through a highly
controlled craft process simply doesn't match up to
the evidence of my own making experience ( and what my
increasingly educated eye reads in the work of
others.)
which is maybe 50-80% planning and craft, 20-50%
accident.
Another factor that helped along my change of mind was
my growing appreciation of the work of MTAA, to which
I was originally quite hostile, but which gradually
really got under my skin for a number of reasons -
wit, a way of generating real substance from quite
flimsy conceptualist premises and last but not least
the fact that craft-wise their work is always *so*
irreproachably made.
I think my essential postition and tastes have not
substantially altered from those I've argued and
displayed here on a number of occasions - what I think
has changed is that I'm looking and thinking better -
I've understood that work I intially dismissed has
merits that with a little bit of wriggle room are
pretty much within my consciously articulated tastes
-of course enjoying them viscerally is the key test,
the thing that always come first.
This brings me on to Emin. Didn't like her at all -now
a lot of what she does, I do like -especially the
drawings & the embroidery pieces & it's a visceral,
not an intellectual change - the drawings were the way
in.For the last year or so I've been struggling with
drawing, which I find *really* difficult but also
fascinating and absorbing - I saw some of Emin's a few
months back and they *moved* me.
'Bed' seems to me pretty dull, derivative and lazy &
but I now think this is the exception and that I was
wrong about her in general.
The reason that I posted the original "recantation"
was that I enjoy enormously the stimulation of being
involved with discussions here about work - I don't
think *my* change of heart is of any great
significance to anyone but I did want to say in all
honesty that I think I did make two serious errors of
judgement - I don't feel guilty or anything but I
wanted to offer testimony of a mind changing through
doing, looking, thought and discussion.
warmest wishes
michael

--- curt cloninger <curt@lab404.com> wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> I'm not trying to put you on the spot or anything,
> but it would be interesting to hear you expound a
> bit more on:
> 1. what you thought about the works before
> 2. what you think about them now
> 3. (most interestingly) what changed in your
> understanding that caused you to appreciate them.
>
> Personally, I like data diaries on several different
> levels, not the least of which is
> abstract/aesthetic.
>
> Tracy Emin's work still seems awkward. So much of
> its alleged impact is derived from Emin's alleegedly
> self-aware situationing of the work vis-a-vis the
> context of the artworld stage she's been given,
> which in turn undermines any endearing outsider
> impact the work might otherwise have had. I love
> the rhetorical deftness of this dis (by Richard
> Dorment): "What interests me about Emin is not her
> relentless self-absorption, limitless self-pity or
> compulsion to confess the sad details of her past
> life, but that all of this adds up to so little of
> real interest." Ouch.
>
> Are you up to defending "My Bed," or is it her
> entire oeuvre that need be considered?
>
> peace,
> curt
>
>
>
> Michael Szpakowski wrote:
>
> > For anyone who cares:
> > I was wrong about Tracey Emin - it's a body of
> work of
> > real substance & I'm now especially taken by her
> > drawing.
> > I was also dead wrong about Cory Arcangel's Data
> > Diaries -I've been looking at these again prompted
> by
> > a post on Doron's DV Blog & I think they're great
> ( I
> > love the sound in particular, but its all good)
> >
> > In both cases it was a combination of personal
> > experience ( so, getting stuck into drawing & also
> > doing hard practical thinking about lots of
> different
> > approaches to video) but also mulling ( over some
> > time) over stuff discussed , points made, here on
> RAW
> > that made me (a) appreciate the value of stuff I
> > hadn't really got before & (b) come to slightly
> more
> > nuanced positions on some of the philosophical
> issues.
> > best
> > michael
> >
> +
> -> 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
>