yo,

short report with 5 collectable JPEGs

http://www.mteww.com/cgi/mtaa-rr.pl/twhid/open_swap.html

++

also! special bonus:

M.River's swap action documentation:
http://www.tinjail.com/beer/
--
<t.whid>
www.mteww.com
</t.whid>

Hi Brett,

You've convinced me. The distinctions you draw btw Jodi and other
purely visual artists of the net makes the point compellingly that
Jodi has a conceptual basis to their work.

But that doesn't make them conceptualists (as I think you would
agree). The point being that they would never create a system for
system's sake. If their systems don't result in interesting visuals I
don't think the public sees them. This is opposed to artists like..
well, like MTAA in some work, where the system is paramount--damn the
visuals if they don't result.

take care,

At 11:06 -0700 4/23/03, Brett Stalbaum wrote:
>First, my congratulations to jodi, eyebeam, and the curators. There is not
>very much that I wish to disagree with t.whid on here. But I think it is a
>(small to medium) mistake to underplay the conceptualism in jodi's work,
>because artists raising the question 'what is a browser?' is not too far
>from raising questions about what art is. Maybe that is not the tightest
>argument, but in any case, I think it is clear that they helped project the
>definition of art in a direction that includes the performance of code in a
>browser. This notion was not a broad assumption in the institutional art
>world during middle 1990's as it is today. Thus I argue that 'conceptualism'
>is an appropriate term, even if not a strong one.
>
>In 1998 (the date indicates something about why I focus on 'the browser'
>over jodi's game work...), I wrote the following in switch, the journal at
>cadre/sjsu, where jodi was in residency in 1994, btw.
>(http://switch.sjsu.edu/web/v4n2/brett/index.html)
>
>"jodi, for its part, is perhaps the best known accomplishment of the
>international net.art movement. In their site, Heemskerk and Paesmans have
>collaborated on a formal exploration of the visual implications and
>possibilities of web browsing software. Unlike e13, jodi is not merely an
>image and design delivery system, even if it does primarily focus on the
>visual aspects of net as media. The visuals presented by jodi don't only
>make reference to computer code and the visual detritus of computer
>systems, but employs such code in an experimental fashion in its
>implementation of a highly complex HTML hyperspace. So instead of a
>presentational graphic design style of beautiful images delivered by the
>net, we find that the surface of the browser has been reconsidered as
>having its own reflexive qualities as a medium, and it is the implications
>of these features of the browser that are explored in jodi. jodi treats
>the browser as an agent or systematic process, and let the browser "have
>it's say" as the conceptual foundation for their work. This includes the
>use of bad code, or the implementation of code in a manner in which was
>not intended by the engineers who designed the browsers or the language
>specifications. jodi is in no way a merely superficial art proposition
>which only concerns the visual play it ultimately presents, but is in fact
>a significant proposition about the codes which lie under the surface and
>mediate how we see and navigate."
>
>
>On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, t.whid wrote:

>>
>> I feel the projections showed Jodi's (or at least Dirk's) primary
>> motivations more than any of their other works.
>>
>> IMO Jodi is primarily interested in aesthetics. Jodi are primarily
>> visual. They are very formal and not interested in conceptualism
>> really. Their MO is recycling or misusing technology to create what
>> is a fairly conservative (read modern) aesthetic whose focus is
>> visual. The 'desktop improvisation' projections showed this very
>> clearly.
>>
>> Also, if one gets beyond the visual/aural assault of the projections
>> one starts to see a very human activity. It shows a whole new side of
>> Jodi, it makes them human. Watch the cursor, you can see the thought
>> patterns of the person behind it, searching, improvising, making
>> decisions. It's fun to watch someone who obviously loves to tinker
>> take the o-so-common computer desktop and make it do surprising
>> things. The simple fact that he surprised me with what he could do
>> with the Mac Classic Desktop (an environment i'm very intimate with)
>> I found very interesting.
>>
>> Jodi has never been about interaction. I don't think Jodi has ever
>> wanted to be scary either. They're kind of like a big monster who
>> wants to play but squishs their playmate because they don't know
>> their own strength.

--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>

xposting to rhiz, bah

+++
hi Keith,

I feel the projections showed Jodi's (or at least Dirk's) primary
motivations more than any of their other works.

IMO Jodi is primarily interested in aesthetics. Jodi are primarily
visual. They are very formal and not interested in conceptualism
really. Their MO is recycling or misusing technology to create what
is a fairly conservative (read modern) aesthetic whose focus is
visual. The 'desktop improvisation' projections showed this very
clearly.

Also, if one gets beyond the visual/aural assault of the projections
one starts to see a very human activity. It shows a whole new side of
Jodi, it makes them human. Watch the cursor, you can see the thought
patterns of the person behind it, searching, improvising, making
decisions. It's fun to watch someone who obviously loves to tinker
take the o-so-common computer desktop and make it do surprising
things. The simple fact that he surprised me with what he could do
with the Mac Classic Desktop (an environment i'm very intimate with)
I found very interesting.

Jodi has never been about interaction. I don't think Jodi has ever
wanted to be scary either. They're kind of like a big monster who
wants to play but squishs their playmate because they don't know
their own strength.

>Sorry for the lack of clarity:
>
>I meant the jodi projections. Not exactly interactive. Why reprise
>as a dvd something you did in a more way several years before? What
>had previously been a kinda scarey pseudo-assault on your desktop
>was reduced to a kind of formalist doodling. Not so interesting,
>except it was big and loud and in a trendy space.
>
>Keith Sanborn
>
>>about the urls or the jodi projections?
>>
>>the url comment was a joke.
>>
>>the comment regarding jodi's work is not a joke.
>>
>>>You must be joking.
>>>
>>>
>>>>do urls in general just keep getting longer and longer?)
>>>>
>>>>I was really impressed with the large Jodi projections, liked
>>>>those quite a bit.

--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>

hey everybody,

some coverage of the Mouchette happening and Jodi's INSTALL.EXE:

http://www.mteww.com/cgi/mtaa-rr.pl/twhid/photos/jodi_mouchette.html

check out the photos too, leave comments if you feel like it.
--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>

This is a great idea. I've been wondering about these questions as
well. sometimes the audience feels very small from my POV.

one problem in your implementation of the survey, a lot of browser's
let one block unwanted pop-ups these days (i use apple's safari) so
you are perhaps losing some of your intended survey subjects.

good luck.

Hi there,

I'm a french student folowing a master in Cultural Projects
Management at the university of Paris 1. My current work deals with
the question of Netart's public. My researches' aim is to answer to
four questions:

a. Who are the visitors of art stuff on the web?

b. How do the public understand these master pieces? How various are
their interpretations?

c. How an internet's users manage to reach a master piece on the web?

d. What does the link used by the user to reach the piece of art in
his own interpretation?

I realized a short survey to make visitors answer these questions.
Christophe Bruno already agree to help me, then when someone reach
the website <http://www.iterature.com/adwords/>Google Adwords
Happening, the survey appear as a pop-up beyond the webpage.
For my researches, I also need artists interested in my work to their
visitors answer these questions. It also could help you to get a
better knowledge of your audience.
Thank you very much for your help in advance.
Best regards

Jean Thevenin

P.S : sorry for bad english !

--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>