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: [thingist] RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Re: NYT art critic reviews Pixar exhibition at MoMA
responding inline:
On 12/17/05, napier <napier@potatoland.org> wrote:
> At 10:16 AM 12/17/2005 -0500, patrick lichty wrote:
> >Mark,
> >Good point. However, we're conflating eras here. Michelangelo's time
> >had totally different paradigms than ours, and the Sistine Paintings are
> >a totally different context and function than Pixar in the MoMA.
> >.......
> >
> >Or is Pixar showing us the Deity of our time (money/Entertainment)? If
> >that's where you're going, then I might agree with you.
>
> These movies (Pixar, Dreamworks, Lucas) tell popular stories that are part
> of our culture and are about our culture. In the broad sense they're not
> that far from the religious stories of the church circa 1400.
The biblical stories weren't just 'popular stories' in 15th century
Europe, they were the defining beliefs for the entire culture -- they
gave the pope his power and authority because people *believed* them.
Or at least pretended too, but the cultural and social effect is the
same.
There is so much different culturally, economically and politically
from today to the renaissance that I find the comparison of the
Sistine chapel or Mich's David (a more apt comparison IMHO) to
contemporary Hollywood to be problematic almost to the point of
worthlessness.
Popular entertainments at the Hollywood level just simply didn't exist
and tho Mich's David was meant to be a populist (nationalist) symbol
that isn't were it's greatness lies. The argument becomes then, is
there a sub-text to Pixar films that could bring them up from
entertainments to a sort of greatness? Mark, I know as a Dad you'd
probably give Pixar your right thumb for the quiet domestic moments
they've probably provided you while the youguns sat rapt in front of
the TV, but do you see anything great in them? Your current work, when
compared to a Pixar movie on a formal or technical level, is absurdly
simple, yet, it's impact on an intellectual and emotional level is,
IMHO, much greater. And that's because you're an artist and they are
merely entertainers.
>
> Power is distributed differently now so it's hard to compare
> directly. Paradigms are different but I don't see the differences as that
> great. The Sistine Chapel was arguably the most advanced rendering of it's
> time, and told a popular story in visual terms that anybody could follow.
> It was placed in a public space. This isn't Pollack. It's much closer to
> Star Wars.
>
> Granted, MoMA is supposed to be about Pollack, not the Sistine Chapel, but
> it wouldn't be the first time in history that these categories have changed.
>
> mark
>
--
<twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
Re: NYT art critic reviews Pixar exhibition at MoMA
> What would Jackson do?
>
> There are so many artists making so many different things that I have
> to wonder if the original comment addresses artists at all.
>
> Based upon an abstract definition of what Murphy is calling Visual Art
> (VA) and Visual Culture (VC), I suspect that if anyone is to blame, it
> is the collectors (consumers) rather than the artists. To say
> otherwise suggests that there are a finite of artists in the world at
> any point in time endowned with super hero art skills - and that these
> super talented few have opted to waste their talent making Visual
> Culture instead of Visual Art.
I'm not really following this arg -- I don't see how it follows that
it's not the artists fault if they choose to spend their talents at
Pixar as opposed to PS1.
I think what Murphy meant was that, in art, one usually assumes that
the artist is trying to create an entire package of form, subject and
content (i know, i know -- hopelessly modernist definition of art).
Whereas, in visual culture, most practitioners are consumed with the
form (or technique). Pixar is a great example. As far as 3D
representations of form go they are extremely far advanced -- way
beyond any individual artists working today. But their subject and
content -- tho entertaining -- doesn't attempt a sophistication or
critical awareness that one would presume to find in art.
Murphy was suggesting that a lot of art out there these days may have
the same issue, but since it purports to be art, it's a problem. Pixar
doesn't have a problem because they don't pretend to make art, they're
just damn good entertainers.
>
> If Jackson Pollack was embarking on a career in the arts today -
> would he opt to manufacture well presented one liners instead of
> making expressive paintings?
>
> Jason Van Anden
> www.smileproject.com
>
>
> On 12/16/05, T.Whid <twhid@twhid.com> wrote:
> > Perhaps I should have said it's relevant for all of us to consider...
> >
> > On 12/16/05, Jason Van Anden <jason@smileproject.com> wrote:
> > > > ...a relevant thing for some in this forum to consider.
> > >
> > > who? example?
> > >
> > > jason
> > >
> > > On 12/16/05, T.Whid <twhid@twhid.com> wrote:
> > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/arts/design/16pixa.html
> > > >
> > > > Murphy posted on Thingist this quote:
> > > >
> > > > "Still, there is much to see in the show, and if a lot of it is more
> > > > visual culture than art, much less great art, the focus is in accord
> > > > with the museum's long tradition of attention to all kinds of visual
> > > > disciplines, especially design."
> > > >
> > > > To which he added this commentary:
> > > >
> > > > "Yeah, most of what passes for Visual Art these days is Visual
> > > > Culture. A totally respectable field of study but it's not art. What
> > > > the two share is Design."
> > > >
> > > > ...a relevant thing for some in this forum to consider.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > <twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
> > > >
> > > > +
> > > > -> 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jason Van Anden
> > > http://www.smileproject.com
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > <twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
> >
> > +
> > -> 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
> >
>
>
> --
> Jason Van Anden
> http://www.smileproject.com
>
--
<twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
Re: NYT art critic reviews Pixar exhibition at MoMA
On 12/16/05, Jason Van Anden <jason@smileproject.com> wrote:
> > ...a relevant thing for some in this forum to consider.
>
> who? example?
>
> jason
>
> On 12/16/05, T.Whid <twhid@twhid.com> wrote:
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/arts/design/16pixa.html
> >
> > Murphy posted on Thingist this quote:
> >
> > "Still, there is much to see in the show, and if a lot of it is more
> > visual culture than art, much less great art, the focus is in accord
> > with the museum's long tradition of attention to all kinds of visual
> > disciplines, especially design."
> >
> > To which he added this commentary:
> >
> > "Yeah, most of what passes for Visual Art these days is Visual
> > Culture. A totally respectable field of study but it's not art. What
> > the two share is Design."
> >
> > ...a relevant thing for some in this forum to consider.
> >
> > --
> > <twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
> >
> > +
> > -> 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
> >
>
>
> --
> Jason Van Anden
> http://www.smileproject.com
>
--
<twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
NYT art critic reviews Pixar exhibition at MoMA
Murphy posted on Thingist this quote:
"Still, there is much to see in the show, and if a lot of it is more
visual culture than art, much less great art, the focus is in accord
with the museum's long tradition of attention to all kinds of visual
disciplines, especially design."
To which he added this commentary:
"Yeah, most of what passes for Visual Art these days is Visual
Culture. A totally respectable field of study but it's not art. What
the two share is Design."
...a relevant thing for some in this forum to consider.
--
<twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
fat and phat NYTime's article on videoblogging
not sure how much Rhizomers are down with the whole
videoblog/vlog/podcast thing, but this article is fawning.
Wish we could get something about net art that is this celebratory.
--
<twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
