Artists M. River and T. Whid formed MTAA in 1996 and soon after began to explore the internet, video, software and sculpture as mediums for their conceptually-based art. The duo’s exhibition history includes group shows and screenings at The New Museum of Contemporary Art, Postmasters Gallery and Artists Space, all in New York City, and at The Getty Research Institute in Los Angeles. In "New Media Art" (Taschen, 2006), authors Mark Tribe and Reena Jana describe MTAA’s "One Year Performance Video (aka samHsiehUpdate)" as “a deftly transparent demonstration of new media’s ability to manipulate our perceptions of time.” The collaboration has earned grants and awards from Creative Capital, Rhizome.org, Eyebeam, New Radio & Performing Arts, Inc. and The Whitney Museum of American Art.
TRACEPLACESPACE
New audio by Cary Peppermint, check it out…
+++
TRACEPLACESPACE
seven audio works .mp3 - Cary Peppermint 2007
The audio works of TRACEPLACESPACE were formed loosely in response to ever-accelerating technological developments, passing time, urgent ecological issues, and remarkable events of our globally connected system in process long before but brought to the forefront since the latter part of the year 2001. The works of TRACEPLACESPACE are components of a digital, multi-media, network-infused performance of the same title.
I like to perform this work in small community venues, outdoor gatherings, art-spaces, and galleries where everyone is welcome and can sit on the floor, talk to one another, and drink green tea. However I will perform TRACEPLACESPACE approximately anywhere.
Filming Outside the Cinema
I have to admit that I'd not given much thought to film outside the cinema, web film or live video, or anything like that, but I've spent lots of time here hanging out with Peter Horvath and I'm impressed.
Peter makes very beautiful films for the web, and you can check them all out online. Today he showed us The Presence of Absence, which was comissioned for the Whitney Museum's Artport in 2003, and then Tenderly Yours from 2005, which "resituates the personal, casual and ambiguous approach of French new wave cinema in a net art narrative that explores love, loss and memory. The story is recited by a striking and illustrious persona, who moves through the city with her lover. Her willful independence is intoxicating, though her sense of self is ambiguous..." Gorgeous.
Cut Piece - Yoko Ono
Cut Piece (2006, 36.5MB, 9 min)
“Ono had first done the performance in 1964, in Japan,
and again at Carnegie Hall, in New York, in 1965.
Ono sat motionless on the stage after inviting the audience
to come up and cut away her clothing, covering her breasts
at the moment of unbosoming.”
from Bedazzled .
Conglomco Media Network announces http://meta-cc.net live
Conglomco Media Network is pleased to announce the official beta release of the META[CC] video engine at http://meta-cc.net.
META[CC] seeks to create an open forum for real time discussion, commentary, and cross-refrencing of electronic news and televised media. By combining strategies employed in web-based discussion forums, blogs , tele-text subtitling, on-demand video streaming, and search engines, the open captioning format employed by META[CC] will allow users to gain multiple perspectives and resources engaging current events. The system is adaptable for use with any cable or broadcast television network.
We hope that you will take a moment from your viewing time to add the RSS feed of a blog you find noteworthy. As more information sources are supplied to META[CC], the more intelligent the system becomes. As such, the META[CC] search engine is apolitical and influenced only by the news and information sources supplied by its viewers/users. We apologize, but at this time podcasts and vlogs are not supported.
Many thanks for your interest and participation,
The META[CC] team
http://meta-cc.net
Open Call for Sound Works : WILD INFORMATION NETWORK
Cary Peppermint:
WILD INFORMATION NETWORK
The Department of Ecology, Art, and Technology
Open Call for Sound Works In Mp3 Format - Deadline April 1, 2006
http://www.restlessculture.net/deepwoods
If we encountered a pod-cast, or a streaming radio server in the woods, in the “natural
Re: pogogallery forum
>The pogogallery forum is up and running and we're interested in
>getting some of you guys involved.
>
>http://www.pogogallery.com
>
>our most recent post is by Rainer Usselmann who asks:
>
<snip>
i would ask respectfully:
Why don't you address practical concerns regarding your web site?
Built for MSIE? Unsound!
but i like Mozilla browser.
++
use standards. http://www.webstandards.org
(btw i've been bugging rhizome to do the same)
--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>
Re: CODeDOC -- launched today at artport
a bit stuffed with cotton, but i felt compelled to type this
micro-review anyway, please be kind if it makes no sense)
i enjoyed this exhibition very much.
fascinating to check out the code before one experiences the work;
the curatorial strategy is very successful imo.
don't know how interested the general public would be in looking over
the Java and other languages and seeing how the code creates the
work. it's definitely a show by net/software artists for net/software
artists. i enjoyed the works that made the code similar to
traditional art, like John Klima and Maceij Wisniewski. the other
artists code looks like code for anything, it could be code for a
word processor (that is, if one can't read the stuff and have an idea
of what it'll do). but john and maceij's code looks like something
poetic or art-like, it's not just utilitarian. this adds another
level to these works.
also interesting to see the different artists' take on the
'assignment'. some, like k. mccoy, took it very literally, while
others, like galloway decided to take a more conceptual or
less-literal approach to the idea of a 'point' and the idea of code
itself.
perhaps this is the start of a new trend in software/net artists
open-sourcing their code. in reference: MTAA are working on a
networked sculpture and i felt compelled to make public the
applescripts that help to run it, check 'em out there:
http://www.endnode.net/careAndFeeding_applescript.html
take care
>CODeDOC
>An online exhibition
>at the Whitney Museum's artport
>http://artport.whitney.org
>http://artport.whitney.org/commissions/codedoc/
>
>Participating artists: Sawad Brooks, Mary Flanagan, Alex Galloway, John
>Klima, Golan Levin, Kevin McCoy, Mark Napier, Brad Paley, Scott Snibbe,
>Camille Utterback, Martin Wattenberg, Maciej Wisniewski
>
>CODeDOC takes a reverse look at 'software art' projects by focusing on and
>comparing the 'back end' of the code that drives the artwork's 'front
>end'--the result of the code, be it visuals or a more abstract communication
>process. A dozen artists coded a specific assignment in a language of their
>choice and were asked to exchange the code with each other for comments. The
>results of the programming are made visible only after the code--what
>visitors to this site encounter first is a text document of code from which
>they can launch the front end of the project. CODeDOC is an endeavor to take
>a closer look at the process of this particular artistic practice, and to
>raise questions about the parameters of artistic creation.
>
>
>+ If the reader will keep me company I shall be glad.
>-> 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
--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>
Re: CODeDOC -- launched today at artport
though i don't remember if all were actually open source (k.mccoy
published his code under the gnu gpl), some of them may have had
copyrights or other license info at the top that i didn't notice.
take care
At 13:21 -0400 9/16/02, Mark Tribe wrote:
>At 11:18 AM 9/16/2002 -0400, t.whid wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>perhaps this is the start of a new trend in software/net artists
>>open-sourcing their code. in reference: MTAA are working on a
>>networked sculpture and i felt compelled to make public the
>>applescripts that help to run it, check 'em out there:
>>http://www.endnode.net/careAndFeeding_applescript.html
>
>we've been talking with mark napier and a few others about starting
>an open source code archive for artists. so we'd have code objects
>in addition to art objects and text objects.
>
>maybe this will finally get off the ground soon... ;-)
>
>+ If the reader will keep me company I shall be glad.
>-> 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
--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>
dumbness
apologies for fanning the flames but there seems to be a bit of a
gallery starting so i thought i might add to it.
so far it's blackhawk, askrom, and twhid in the trash gallery. did i
miss anyone?
-bah
--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>
Re: Nungu
proper thing as well. and i feel that i have some views on this
coming from my long-term collaboration with M.River. (going on 6
years)
>hi j,m, &all,
>
>i'd like to add a few remarks.
>
>
>jess wrote:
>> >I find it difficult to agree that the fact the artists have now been
>> >credited for the 'source'
>> >of the project makes things ok. It does look like ideas and work can been
>> >used as the
>> >basis to secure funding for new work in which the original artists will
>> >play no part and
>> >without their permission (or even, views) sought. This seems to me as a
>> >dangerous
>> >precedent to set on collaborative projects.
>
>it is the only precedent to set, bitter or not. a collaborative has to
>be, and indeed is, an entity that exists independently of any individual
>member. the individual members, often in flux, combine to form the
>unified public entity of the collective. any other entity, such as
>rhizome, interacts soley with the collective public entity, and has to
>assume, and expect, that conflicts within the collaborative entity are
>resolved within that entity. its the only way to operate.
[very good point following]
if it becomes
>publically known that a collaborative entity is rife with internal
>problems, fear not, organizations will avoid dealing with that entity.
>which is why it is ESSENTIAL that public collaborative entities resolve
>their conflicts in private. once it spills into the public realm,
>everybody loses.
i agree absolutely with John and Rhizome on this. if i wished to
pursue a commission on my own, outside of MTAA, i may only have MTAA
work to show as examples of previous work as it's all i've done in
the past few years. It would be none of M.River's business which
projects i used as examples. these projects would be credited as part
of MTAA of which i'm a member.
Things get stickier if m.river & i part ways yet i continue to use
the MTAA label for my own work. ethically that would be an appalling
thing for me to do, very sleazy indeed. There may be public arguments
where i assert M.River didn't mind that i use the name and he asserts
otherwise. What would a funding entity do at that point? no one knows
what the *real* agreement was, only M.River and i. They've looked at
the past work, looked at the present proposal and made their
decision. They quietly tell me that perhaps i should behave
differently in the future, perhaps change the authorship of the
present commission to T.Whid instead of MTAA, and put a red flag on
my file for the future.
>
>mark wrote:
>
>>...So the question is not
>> whether Telematic Surveillance deals with ideas that Mrs. Jeevam Jham also
>> deals with, but whether the new project contains copyrightable content from
>> the old project. And it doesn't. Even if it did, it wouldn't be Rhizome's
>> responsibility to resolve an intellectual property dispute between former
>> collaborators.
>
>indeed it is not rhizome's responsibility, it is the responsibility of
>the collaborative entity to properly disperse funds and credits among
>themselves. if Nike hires RGA to produce a website for their new shoe,
>it is not Nike's responsibility to insure that RGA employees get their
>paychecks.
>
>jess wrote:
>> >It is hard to believe that these former
>> >Nungu collaborators will be willing to accept a credit and an invitation
>> >to apply to future
>> >rhizome commissions as (for want a better word) fair.
>
>in all honesty, what else can they expect, or demand? that the nungu
>commission be retracted, the money returned to rhizome? not fair to the
>current members of the collective.
>
>
>jess wrote:
>> >When and where will the line be drawn? My feeling is that to
>>warrant a grant
>> >(particularly with the respected name of rhizome attached) work must be
>> >the artists' own
>> >or if based upon a previous collaboration, all collaborators in that
>> >previous project must
>> >be happy for the work to be expanded/re-presented/continued. If this is
>> >not the case
>> >here, I have to say that I am still deeply unhappy that rhizome continues
>> >to support the
>> >new project.
>
>what you suggest here is far more problematic than the situation we are
>presently faced with. it is simply unreasonable to expect that all
>members of a collective will all agree on the future life of a work they
>created together. imagine a situation where two members of a collective
>are romantically involved, have a falling out, and one party
>subsequently refuses to allow the other to expand upon an existing
>project, to even include it in their resume, just out of spite. is it
>then up to rhizome to moderate their "divorce?" certainly not. lets take
>another example: suppose there is rock band, of four members. they make
>it big, one member decides she's had enough, quits the band. she can now
>say that the band can't continue without her agreeing to their actions?
>hardly. she probably maintains rights to the previously recorded songs,
>but certainly can't have any say in what the band continues to produce,
>even if it is the worst bubblegum kiddie-pop, and even though the band
>is leveraging their success on the initial fame she helped to create.
>
agreed on this point as well. if MTAA breaks up, i would assume that
M.River would keep all our projects on his resume and so would i. if
he wanted to create a version 2 of an MTAA project he wouldn't need
my approval and vice versa.
it's my strong suspicion that rhizome's only recourse would be to
distance themselves from a project that received a commission thru
outright deception. rhizome doesn't have the personnel or the budget
to start a legal proceeding to retrieve commission funds. it's far
from clear from what i've read on this list that nungu was actively
trying to deceive rhizome, seems more like inexperience and poor
judgement.
my $.02.
--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>
