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: RHIZOME_RAW: Rhizome Expands Editorial Scope, Hires Staff Writers
Great news.
I have one very small request: can we remove the background image on
the front page of Rhizome's web site? It makes scrolling really,
really slow in Firefox on the Mac.
woohoo!
On 9/5/07, Marisa Olson <marisa@rhizome.org> wrote:
> Big news! Rhizome has hired two staff writers--William Hanley and
> Caitlin Jones--who will make daily original contributions that will
> expand the scope of our front page news stream. The writers will serve
> as a community amplifier, covering art, events, and ideas happening on
> Rhizome and also across the expanding field of contemporary art that
> engages technology.
>
> Hanley and Jones are respected critics who bring to Rhizome a wealth
> of experience. Both have written for numerous international
> publications on new media and contemporary art. Hanley was formerly an
> editor at ArtInfo.com and Jones held a combined curatorial and
> conservation position at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum before
> becoming Director of Programming at the Bryce Wolkowitz Gallery.
>
> Together with Rhizome Editor & Curator, Marisa Olson, the staff
> writers will be responsible for bringing Rhizome readers large doses
> of daily criticism and coverage of local and international events. In
> addition to their original articles, the writers will become Rhizome's
> resident rebloggers and will share responsibility for writing Rhizome
> News--the organization's thrice-weekly email and web-based
> publication--with the pool of talented freelancers that has always
> ensured a diversity of voices and subject matter on Rhizome's front
> page.
>
> Rhizome's front page news stream will now include a mixture of
> original writing--short posts and longer editorial features--alongside
> reblogged content: blog posts from all over the web and highlights
> from Rhizome Raw, the organization's listserv of eleven years, which
> supports a community of new media practitioners and enthusiasts.
>
> Rhizome's editorial content is part of Rhizome's broader slate of
> programs, including exhibitions, commissions, education, symposia,
> performances, and other events, all of which strive to bring greater
> visibility, context, and discussion to the new media art field.
>
> Please join us in welcoming Hanley and Jones, and please... Post some
> comments to our new blog!
>
>
> + + +
> Marisa Olson
> Editor & Curator
> Rhizome at the
> New Museum of Contemporary Art
> +
> -> 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
>
>
>
interesting....
THE BOOK OF ENEMY: A BLOG-NOVEL
I'm working with a friend of mine Dave Wildman on project that brings
blogging, and videoblogging together with his forthcoming novel, THE BOOK OF
ENEMY.
If I was in Hollywood pitching this to a studio I'd say it's a cross between
LonleyGirl15 and 24. But then again, I haven't read the novel. It's going to
happen in real time during September and you can take part by making some
videos, audio, podcsasts, photos, blog posts, etc. However you'd like to
contribute would be great.
+++
more here:
http://offonatangent.blogspot.com/2007/08/book-of-enemy-blog-novel.html
Re: RHIZOME_RAW: holy shit: MASS MoCA - it ain't art but if it is, we're co-authors
mesh with artists. This is a no-win situation for anyone.
Buchel's actions are going to lead to more restrictive contracts for artists
when dealing with museums.
MASS MoCA's actions, if accepted by the courts, are going to require artists
to deal with institutions from a more hostile stance as museum's could
simply co-opt a work without the artists agreement if they're ridiculous
claims are upheld.
This situation is simply fucked.
On 7/26/07, Marisa Olson <marisa@rhizome.org> wrote:
>
> Hey, guys. I've been kind of following this story. There have been a
> number of articles, but here are some key ones, I think:
>
> Background:
>
> http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2007/03/28/behind_doors_a_=
world_unseen/
>
> Buchel's demands:
> http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/exhibitionist/2007/03/buechel_list_=
of.html
>
>
> Op Ed:
> http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2007/07/01/no_admittance/
>
> And here's a nice piece by Nick Stillman, offering some art historical
> context:
> http://www.nyfa.org/level3.asp?id=602&fid=4&sid=8
>
> I don't know... I've heard both sides of the story. It's intense.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 7/26/07, marc garrett <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org> wrote:
> > How did it get to this?
> >
> > marc
> > > still trying to digest this...
> > >
> > >
> http://www.clancco.com/art_law/mass_moca_counterclaims_arguing_buchel_pro=
ject_is.html
> > >
> > >
> > > The most elucidating part of MASS MoCA's defense is predicated on
> > > affirmative defenses that should arouse suspicion and distrust on the
> > > part of any visual artist toward any cultural institution. Out of the
> > > twenty-nine affirmative defenses, MASS MoCA is claiming that Buchel=
's
> > > counterclaims are barred because "the materials that are the subject
> > > matter of [Buchel's] Counterclaims do not contain sufficient origin=
al
> > > expression on the part of Buchel to be protected under the [U.S.]
> > > Copyright Act."
> > >
> > > Alternatively, MASS MoCA argues that Buchel's counterclaims are bar=
red
> > > because MASS MoCA is "a joint owner of any copyright in the Materials
> > > which are the subject matter of Buchel's counterclaims."
> > >
> > > More alarming is MASS MoCA's argument that they are the lawful owners
> > > of the materials which are the subject matter of this dispute, and
> > > thus allowed to display them publicly.
> > >
> > > But this isn't the end of this wonderful yarn of fiction. MASS MoCA
> > > further argues that Buchel's work is not even art, but simply a
> > > compilation of materials which, if accepted by the Court, would not be
> > > granted protection under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA).
> > > If in fact the Court decides that VARA does apply, MASS MoCA argues
> > > that any modification to the "materials" which may have happened is
> > > allowed by VARA under the "conservation or placement" exception,
> > > and/or that the doctrine of "fair use" would allow MASS MoCA to
> > > display Buchel's project without infringing the Copyright or VARA
> Acts.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > +
> > -> 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
> >
>
> +
> -> 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
>
Re: RHIZOME_RAW: holy shit: MASS MoCA - it ain't art but if it is, we're co-authors
More here:
http://newsgrist.typepad.com/underbelly/2007/07/mass-moca-sad-d.html
On 7/26/07, marc garrett <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org> wrote:
>
> How did it get to this?
>
> marc
> > still trying to digest this...
> >
> >
> http://www.clancco.com/art_law/mass_moca_counterclaims_arguing_buchel_pro=
ject_is.html
> >
> >
> > The most elucidating part of MASS MoCA's defense is predicated on
> > affirmative defenses that should arouse suspicion and distrust on the
> > part of any visual artist toward any cultural institution. Out of the
> > twenty-nine affirmative defenses, MASS MoCA is claiming that Buchel's
> > counterclaims are barred because "the materials that are the subject
> > matter of [Buchel's] Counterclaims do not contain sufficient original
> > expression on the part of Buchel to be protected under the [U.S.]
> > Copyright Act."
> >
> > Alternatively, MASS MoCA argues that Buchel's counterclaims are barred
> > because MASS MoCA is "a joint owner of any copyright in the Materials
> > which are the subject matter of Buchel's counterclaims."
> >
> > More alarming is MASS MoCA's argument that they are the lawful owners
> > of the materials which are the subject matter of this dispute, and
> > thus allowed to display them publicly.
> >
> > But this isn't the end of this wonderful yarn of fiction. MASS MoCA
> > further argues that Buchel's work is not even art, but simply a
> > compilation of materials which, if accepted by the Court, would not be
> > granted protection under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA).
> > If in fact the Court decides that VARA does apply, MASS MoCA argues
> > that any modification to the "materials" which may have happened is
> > allowed by VARA under the "conservation or placement" exception,
> > and/or that the doctrine of "fair use" would allow MASS MoCA to
> > display Buchel's project without infringing the Copyright or VARA Act=
s.
> >
> >
>
> +
> -> 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
>
