Patrick Tresset
Since 2004
Works in London United States of America

PORTFOLIO (1)
Discussions (9) Opportunities (0) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Re: Charlie puts NMA's down...


to avoid any confusion

www.doc.gold.ac.uk/aikon <<< that is not Drawbot url, it' s ours

Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.co

Patrick Tresset <autrechose@btopenworld.com> wrote:
I am not sure if everybody knows that Charlie is involved in a very interesting
and well funded project initiated by Paul Brown called Drawbot.

www.doc.gold.ac.uk/aikon

Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.com> wrote:
> another quote:
> "The web, Charlie says, has the alarming potential of realising
> the idea of
> the artist Joseph Beuys, that everyone is an artist. This could spell the
> end of art as we know it, when everyone becomes a producer and we
> all drown
> in a sea of mediocrity made up of billions of minutely-niched
> microchannels."
>
> i think this is great, so will better write:
>
> "when everyone becomes a producer and we all grow in a great sea of
> experimentations made up of billions of creative microchannels."
>
> why being so alarmed by JB (& others) idea , Charlie ?

Both of these have already happened, haven't they? It's like the wave and particle theories of light. They are at odds with each other but both shed some light on um light.

Not "billions" of channels--and more channels of dreck than creative microchannels--but enough of both that it almost might as well be "billions". Also, one person's creative microchannel is another's dreck.

What art is is continually under revision in a wacky wiki with no file protection and thousands of copies of what once was only a few hundred copies.

I recall McLuhan and Ong emphasizing that in some cultures, there is no concept of art, although there are/were many artifacts that are now interpreted as art. And in some of these cultures, they say 'no, we don't make art; we just try to make everything we make with care and attention."

Art is continually torn apart, rent asunder, dying, dead, dismembered--and continually subject to remembering, transformation, regeneration, transmigration, resurrection. It's like Orpheus on a very bad hair day where there's one limb here, one limb there, death and destruction of he himself all around yet different versions of himself in various stages of life--not even recognizable as being he himself--maybe not even he himself, by now. And now we see even very little use in linking them all to Orpheus, since the process by now involves so many hybrids, many of which quite clearly do not involve Orpheus so much as non-Orphic figures that we think it might not be like this at all.

ja
http://vispo.com

+
-> 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

Re: Charlie puts NMA's down...


to avoid any confusion

www.doc.gold.ac.uk/aikon <<< that is not Drawbot url, it' s ours

Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.co

Patrick Tresset <autrechose@btopenworld.com> wrote:
I am not sure if everybody knows that Charlie is involved in a very interesting
and well funded project initiated by Paul Brown called Drawbot.

www.doc.gold.ac.uk/aikon

Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.com> wrote:
> another quote:
> "The web, Charlie says, has the alarming potential of realising
> the idea of
> the artist Joseph Beuys, that everyone is an artist. This could spell the
> end of art as we know it, when everyone becomes a producer and we
> all drown
> in a sea of mediocrity made up of billions of minutely-niched
> microchannels."
>
> i think this is great, so will better write:
>
> "when everyone becomes a producer and we all grow in a great sea of
> experimentations made up of billions of creative microchannels."
>
> why being so alarmed by JB (& others) idea , Charlie ?

Both of these have already happened, haven't they? It's like the wave and particle theories of light. They are at odds with each other but both shed some light on um light.

Not "billions" of channels--and more channels of dreck than creative microchannels--but enough of both that it almost might as well be "billions". Also, one person's creative microchannel is another's dreck.

What art is is continually under revision in a wacky wiki with no file protection and thousands of copies of what once was only a few hundred copies.

I recall McLuhan and Ong emphasizing that in some cultures, there is no concept of art, although there are/were many artifacts that are now interpreted as art. And in some of these cultures, they say 'no, we don't make art; we just try to make everything we make with care and attention."

Art is continually torn apart, rent asunder, dying, dead, dismembered--and continually subject to remembering, transformation, regeneration, transmigration, resurrection. It's like Orpheus on a very bad hair day where there's one limb here, one limb there, death and destruction of he himself all around yet different versions of himself in various stages of life--not even recognizable as being he himself--maybe not even he himself, by now. And now we see even very little use in linking them all to Orpheus, since the process by now involves so many hybrids, many of which quite clearly do not involve Orpheus so much as non-Orphic figures that we think it might not be like this at all.

ja
http://vispo.com

+
-> 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

Re: Charlie puts NMA's down...


I am not sure if everybody knows that Charlie is involved in a very interesting
and well funded project initiated by Paul Brown called Drawbot.

www.doc.gold.ac.uk/aikon

Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.com> wrote:
> another quote:
> "The web, Charlie says, has the alarming potential of realising
> the idea of
> the artist Joseph Beuys, that everyone is an artist. This could spell the
> end of art as we know it, when everyone becomes a producer and we
> all drown
> in a sea of mediocrity made up of billions of minutely-niched
> microchannels."
>
> i think this is great, so will better write:
>
> "when everyone becomes a producer and we all grow in a great sea of
> experimentations made up of billions of creative microchannels."
>
> why being so alarmed by JB (& others) idea , Charlie ?

Both of these have already happened, haven't they? It's like the wave and particle theories of light. They are at odds with each other but both shed some light on um light.

Not "billions" of channels--and more channels of dreck than creative microchannels--but enough of both that it almost might as well be "billions". Also, one person's creative microchannel is another's dreck.

What art is is continually under revision in a wacky wiki with no file protection and thousands of copies of what once was only a few hundred copies.

I recall McLuhan and Ong emphasizing that in some cultures, there is no concept of art, although there are/were many artifacts that are now interpreted as art. And in some of these cultures, they say 'no, we don't make art; we just try to make everything we make with care and attention."

Art is continually torn apart, rent asunder, dying, dead, dismembered--and continually subject to remembering, transformation, regeneration, transmigration, resurrection. It's like Orpheus on a very bad hair day where there's one limb here, one limb there, death and destruction of he himself all around yet different versions of himself in various stages of life--not even recognizable as being he himself--maybe not even he himself, by now. And now we see even very little use in linking them all to Orpheus, since the process by now involves so many hybrids, many of which quite clearly do not involve Orpheus so much as non-Orphic figures that we think it might not be like this at all.

ja
http://vispo.com

+
-> 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

Re: how many people on RAW


--- miklos@sympatico.ca wrote:

> >lets start counting:
> >
> >1
> >
>
> and now 2
>
>
> and now 3
> >
> >

> >Thomas Petersen wrote:
> >
> >>Hey
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>I'm just curious. Thought it would be interesting
> to know how many
> >>people are on this list. Can't find any info on
> the Rhizome site.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
> --
>
> Miklos Legrady
> 310 Bathurst st.
> Toronto ON.
> M5T 2S3
> 416-203-1846
> 647-292-1846
> http://www.mikidot.com