Rachel Greene
Since the beginning
Works in New York, Nebraska United States of America

BIO
Rhizome is friends and family for Rachel, who has been involved with the org. in one capacity or another since 1997 when it was rhizome.com!!
Rachel wrote a book on internet art for thames & hudson's well-known WORLD OF ART series: it was published in June 2004. She was a consultant and catalogue author for the 2004 Whitney Biennial. She has also written for publications including frieze, artforum, timeout and bomb.
Discussions (824) Opportunities (20) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Art of the Biotech Era


> From: "][mez][" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>
> Date: February 9, 2004 4:09:58 PM EST
> To: Rachel Greene <rachel@rhizome.org>
> Subject: Art of the Biotech Era
>
>
>>
>> Art of the Biotech Era
>>
>> EXPERIMENTAL ART FOUNDATION
>> 27 FEBRUARY - 3 APRIL
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> 10AM - 5PM DAILY
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> FREE ADMISSION
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>>
>> Art of the Biotech Era
>> CURATOR: MELENTIE PANDILOVSKI
>>
>>
>> http://www.adelaidefestival.com.au/program/biotech.asp
>>
>> Art of the Biotech Era is a project investigating cross issues of
>> art, culture and biotechnology.
>>
>> Leading national and international artists and theorists exhibit
>> works exploring biotechnology and genomics and discuss the influence
>> of this techno-scientific change of society, the ethical implications
>> of genetic engineering and the concept of aesthetics in biotech arts.
>>
>> Exhibition
>>
>> The exhibition features works by leading international and Australian
>> artists including The Tissue Culture & Art Project (Oron Catts, Ionat
>> Zurr in collaboration with Stelarc), Gina Czarnecki, Eduardo Kac,
>> Heath Bunting, Andre Brodyk, Mez, Adam Zaretsky, George Gessert, FOAM
>> (Maja Kuzmanovic, Nik Gaffney), Diane Ludin, Michalis Pichler. 27
>> February - 14 March : 10-5 Daily 16 March-3 April : 11-5
>> Tuesday-Friday; 2-5 Saturday Admission Free
>>
>> Symposium
>>
>> Biotech Culture Symposium 11am-4pm Friday 27 February Mercury Cinema,
>> Lion Arts Centre, 13 Morphett Street, Adelaide Biotech Culture
>> Symposium speakers will be addressing the issues of the politics of
>> the discipline of biotechnology, the ethical implications of genetic
>> engineering, and the relationship between
>> ethics/aesthetics/bio-technology. Presentations by Dr. Stuart Bunt,
>> Dr. Anna Munster, Ionat Zurr, Gina Czarnecki, Oron Catts, Heath
>> Bunting, Maja Kuzmanovic, Nik Gaffney, Michalis Pichler, Mike Stubbs.
>> Admission Free.
>>
>> Workshop
>>
>> Biotech Art Workshop 1-5 March 2004 Workshop Leaders: Oron Catts and
>> Gary Cass on behalf of SymbioticA, School of Anatomy & Human Biology,
>> University of Western Australia This intensive Biotech Art Workshop
>> provides hands-on exploration of biological technologies and issues
>> stemming from their use including DNA extraction, lab safety, ethics
>> in biological research, bacteria plating from body and environment,
>> breeding/plant manipulations, plant tissue culture, tissue
>> engineering and stem cells. The artists taking part in the workshop
>> will continue to work on their biotech art projects during 2004 and
>> beyond, under the supervision of the Experimental Art Foundation,
>> with the aim of the completed becoming a part of the cultural and
>> artistic world, as well as being presented at major international art
>> events. (please note: registration for the workshop is now closed)
>>
>> Publications
>>
>> A colour catalogue with information about the project, participants
>> and their work will be available during the project period. A more
>> substantial publication documenting ART OF THE BIOTECH ERA, including
>> symposium transcripts, will be published by the EAF during 2004
>> http://www.adelaidefestival.com.au/program/biotech.asp
>
> --
>> EXPERIMENTAL ART FOUNDATION curates its exhibition program to
>> represent new work that expands current debates and ideas in
>> contemporary visual art. The EAF incorporates a gallery space,
>> bookshop and artists studios.
>>
>> Lion Arts Centre North Terrace at Morphett Street Adelaide
>> PO Box 8091 Station Arcade South Australia 5000
>> Tel: +618 8211 7505 Fax +618 8211 7323
>> email: eaf@eaf.asn.au bookshop email: eafbooks@eaf.asn.au web:
>> http://www.eaf.asn.au
>> Director: Melentie Pandilovski Administrator: Julie Lawton
>> Program Manager: Michael Grimm Bookshop Manager: Ken Bolton
>>
>> Assisted by the Commonwealth Government through the Visual Arts Craft
>> Board of the Australia Council and the South Australian Government
>> through Arts SA. The EAF is proudly smoke-free.
>
>
>
>
>
> .(c)[lick].
> -
> -
>
> http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/
>

DISCUSSION

Fwd: Flying Spy Potatoes,ARCO 04,Madrid


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Jenny Marketou <jmarketou@yahoo.com>
> Date: February 8, 2004 4:56:26 PM EST
> To: rachel@rhizome.org
> Subject: Flying Spy Potatoes,ARCO 04,Madrid
>
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Flying Spy Potatoes:Acting on the City
>
> I am pleased to announce the opening of <Flying Spy
> Potatoes: Acting on the City> 2004 by Jenny Marketou
> on February 6, 2004 as part of the exhibition
> 'Breakthrough

DISCUSSION

Re: Question?


I also wouldn't characterize those who aren't interested in
participating as being subject to nationalist preferences or
gate-keeping. Seems a cynical evaluation of a group of (chiefly) highly
intelligent, net-savvy, international, free-thinking people, and it's
not exactly an inviting or inclusive mode of address towards your
potential peers. -- Rachel

On Feb 6, 2004, at 8:57 AM, Matthew Mascotte wrote:

>
> Liza-
>
> No doubt, that is the most articulate and savvy
> networking strategy i've seen in a long while...
>
>
> respects,
>
> Matthew
>
> On Thursday, February 05, 2004, at 05:12PM, liza sabater
> <liza@culturekitchen.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, February 5, 2004, at 03:52 PM, marc garrett wrote:
>>
>>> Question?
>>>
>>> So as the mapping of Internet creativity continues are the more
>>> independent
>>> groups going to be ignored due to nationalist preferences and
>>> institutional
>>> gate-keeping?
>>>
>>> If this is the case how do we change this?
>>>
>>> marc
>>>
>>
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> I say, make your organization less browser dependent and, in that same
>> vein, more interactive outside of the browser. Meaning, WAP, RSS, PDA
>> friendly. Make it easy for people to trackback, ping, linkback (or
>> whatever it is you want to call it) your content. Make it easy for
>> others to create a web of context around your site. Will it create
>> more
>> hassles like comment-spam? Absolutely, that may well be the case. But
>> the internet is not just about content, it's about people and the only
>> way you're going to get people to commit to your message is by
>> engaging
>> them in a dialogue. And just getting them into your site is not
>> enough.
>>
>> The web browser does not scale. With an aggregator, I can scan more
>> than 300 sites on a daily basis. Back in the old days, I could view
>> most of the web on a week (1995). You've just gotta make it easier for
>> people to get to furtherfield. I mean, I rarely go to Rhizome's front
>> door --because I have no incentive to do so. On the other hand, with
>> Rhizome Raw, even if it does not have the activity of its hey-day it
>> is
>> still the most interesting thing Rhizome has to offer because it is
>> Rhizome's social space. If I could have it on my aggregator, it would
>> make me even happier.
>>
>> Furtherfield is a fabulous site with a lot of interesting stuff to
>> look
>> at --but I have to go to your front door to know what's new. I'm sorry
>> but the ease of looking at more than 300 sites in under an hour will
>> kick out any non-syndicated sites from my "Must See" list. And, no,
>> RSS
>> is not just a geek thing. MyYahoo! just introduced an RSS module to
>> their services. They made email ubiquitous, I am sure that they'll do
>> the same with RSS.
>>
>> So the moral of the story is: Make it easy for your potential audience
>> to get to your content in as many ways as possible. I mean, your site
>> is supported by the BBC. Make sure you check their web-dev process. I
>> read their specs were floating somewhere on Kazaa.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> l i z a
>> =========================
>> www.culturekitchen.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

DISCUSSION

Fwd: [CTHEORY] Article 137 - The Cyborg Mother: A Breached Boundary


Begin forwarded message:

> From: ctheory@lists.uvic.ca
> Date: February 4, 2004 3:57:37 PM EST
> To: ctheory@lists.uvic.ca
> Subject: [CTHEORY] Article 137 - The Cyborg Mother: A Breached Boundary
> Reply-To: ctheory@lists.uvic.ca
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> CTHEORY THEORY, TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE VOL 27, NOS 1-2
> *** Visit CTHEORY Online: http://www.ctheory.net ***
>
> Article 137 04/02/04 Editors: Arthur and Marilouise Kroker
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> The Cyborg Mother: A Breached Boundary
> =========================
==========================
=========
>
>
> ~Jaimie Smith-Windsor~
>
>
>
> Why not tell a story in a new way? Why not think in unfinished ways?
> Without fixity? Without finality? Ask questions without answers.
> Without presuppositions and causes and effects and linear time. Why
> not. Why not "whisk yourself away from your comfortable
> position?"[1] When we live in a world of fractured identities and
> broken boundaries, why not rebel against yourself, or the
> technologies of "yourself" and discover new ways of being? Reconcile
> that everything is being shattered. Identity is being shattered and
> technology is picking up the pieces, and there stands before us an
> infinitude of recombinant possibility. Rewriting history becomes
> possible:
>
> The time of history passes through the stories of individuals:
> their birth, their experience...[2]
>
>
> The birth of my daughter:
> -------------------------
>
> Aleah Quinn Smith-Windsor
>
> born: January 31st, 2003
>
>
> A few days after Quinn was born, this quote appeared, written beside
> her incubator:
>
> Every blade of grass has an angel that bends over it and
> whispers, grow, grow. Anon.
>
> It was a near-fatal birth. Quinn was born at twenty-four and a half
> weeks gestation, three and a half months before her due date. Her
> birth weight was 700 grams, about one pound and a half.
>
> February 1, 2003 -- It is difficult to imagine such a tiny,
> perfect human being. Her feet are no larger than two
> fingernails. Her legs are about the same size as adult fingers,
> femurs measuring 4.5 centimeters. Her eyebrows curve like
> fallen eyelashes above her eyes, waiting to be wished upon.
>
>
> Morphology after the birth of my daughter:
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Immediately after Quinn's lungs were cleared she was incubated,
> stabilized and flown, with the Neonate Team, by way of helicopter
> ambulance, to the Special Care Nursery at the British Columbia
> Children's Hospital in Vancouver. We got to see her for a minute,
> tangled beneath the cords of her life support machines.
>
> February 2, 2003 -- A pump pushes breast milk down her throat,
> through a tube that goes into her belly. Sixty-five breaths per
> minute are administered by a Drager 2000 Ventilator. She
> receives extra nutrition through an artificial umbilical line,
> blood-products and medications through an Intra Venous.
> Electrodes cover her body, measure her breaths and heart beats,
> her temperature, oxygen saturation and blood pressure.
>
>
> Motherhood -- a Breached Boundary:
> ----------------------------------
>
> My daughter's birth was a post-human, cyborg moment. She became
> cyborg, "the illegitimate child of the twentieth-century
> technological dynamo -- part human, part machine, never completely
> either."[3] Using this moment to grapple with the concept and
> implications of cyborg culture reveals some important questions about
> the amalgamation between the technological and the biological, and
> "not just in the banal meat-meets-metal sense."[4] Breaching the
> bio-techno boundary forces an engagement with "new and complex
> understandings of 'life', consciousness, and the distinction (or lack
> of distinction) between the biological and the technological."[5]
> Becoming cyborg is about the simultaneous externalization of the
> nervous system and internalization of the machine. Thus symbiosis of
> human and machine makes possible the genesis of the cyborg
> consciousness. Ultimately, the breached boundary of the human body
> is a diasporatic phenomenon: the dispersion of an originally
> homogeneous entity (the body), "the diasporas of the human condition
> into several mutually incomprehensible languages."[6]
>
> Becoming cyborg is a consciousness that is embedded within the notion
> of diasporas. To confront the interface between human and machine is
> to confront cyborg consciousness. The interface is the matriarch of
> cyborg culture, assuming, "a unified role: a means of communication
> and reproduction; carrier and weaver; machine assemblage in the
> service of the species; a general purpose system of simulation."[7]
> Technology displaces motherhood, with "her inexhaustible aptitude for
> mimicry" which makes her "the living foundation for the whole staging
> of the world". Being cyborg means that infancy without motherhood is
> possible. Before the displacement of motherhood by technology can
> be imagined, however, it is first necessary to explore the
> relationship between mother and child. Within the dual
> relationship transference between mother and child, according to
> Julia Kristeva, it is possible "to posit as "object" of analysis, not
> "childhood language", but rather an infantile language."[8] Before
> literate language begins to encode the identity of the infant, and
> prior to the moment where the mirror introduces the paradoxical
> representation of reality, the infant and the mother exist within a
> symbiotic relationship defined by two basic principles: the need to
> nurture and the nurture of need. The mother-child symbiosis provides
> the necessary relationship for infantile language to be communicated.
> The infant is incapable of distinguishing between "sameness" and
> "otherness", between "subject" and "object", between itself and the
> mother.[9] The infantile language means that infants are not
> capable of imagining themselves autonomous of the Mother. But what
> if this symbiotic relationship between mother and child were
> interrupted? What happens when technology begins to work itself into
> the infantile discourse, severing the symbiosis between mother and
> child? What happens when the infant, instead becomes incapable of
> distinguishing between itself and the machine? These are the
> questions posed by the biological mother of a cyborg. This is the
> genesis of a cyborg. It begins in pre-literacy, when the child
> engages in an infantile language with the machine, and not, the
> mother.
>
> According to Julia Kristeva, "love replaces narcissism in a third
> person that is external to the act of discursive communication."[10]
> Love between humans, thus, becomes invested in a third party. What
> happens then, in cyborg culture, when that "third party" is not a
> person at all, but a machine -- a ventilator, an incubator, a
> monitor. Technology separates the dialectic relationship between
> mother and child, mediating the relations between them. In the
> production of artificial means to life, is the machine capable of
> simulating love? Is the cyborg capable of love? Or is it merely
> consuming?
>
> March 30, 2003 -- Quinn has been fighting with her ventilator.
> She's tries to tug it out of her throat, but it's glued to her
> skin. To stop her from wrestling, the doctor drugged her with
> addictive sedatives and paralyzed her so she can't move, so the
> ventilator can fully take over her body. How can such violence
> give life? So, I read her a story by Dr. Seuss about really
> small people called Whos... At the sound of my voice, she
> opened her eyes for a minute. That's not supposed to happen. I
> was asked to leave. I was disrupting the machine.
>
> Living within a mediated body means that rituals of being are also
> written by technology. Technology is mimesis, the capability of
> imitating the human condition with such exactitude that it has become
> synonymous with the skin, the flesh, the vital organs of human
> bodies. Artificial life becomes the performance of real life.
> Distinguishing between skin from machine, thus becomes difficult.
>
> February 8, 2003 -- There is a scab on her chest where the
> nurse pulled the electrode off her skin, and with it, came most
> of the right nipple.
>
> What are the implications of this violent symbiosis? Becoming cyborg
> implicates the human condition with the eternal mediation of the
> human experience, the eternal return of the machine. The human
> condition becomes the media itself. The cyborg consciousness
> becomes, like the clear glass of the incubator, an invisible
> interface through which everything is mediated -- the environment,
> the experience of living, the means to communicate, the way of
> "knowing." The relationship between mother and child itself is
> mediated by technology. Technology interrupts the relation,
> intercepts the exchange of nurturing and needing of the infantile
> language. The Mother becomes redundant: technology becomes the
> external womb.
>
> Within the discourse of cyber-feminism, the externalized,
> technological womb begins to make sense: "in Latin, it is matrix, or
> matter, both the mother and the material."[11] Technology has become
> both the mother and the matter of the consciousness, the medium
> through which the need to nurture and the nurture of need are
> fulfilled. The cyborg is thus born through this virtual non-space,
> this womb of machinic consciousness. Within the technological womb,
> human bodies and human consciousness becomes "cy-dough-plasma" --
> malleable matter, without fixed form.[12]
>
> February 27, 2003 -- ...I'm a little confused about her ears.
> They're pliable. Lacking cartilage at this stage of development
> often finds them in crumples of folded-over flesh. They require
> frequent re-positioning and remolding so they don't get all
> folded up like fortune cookies. I try not to play with them too
> much...but, it's not like you can rationalize with her yet...
> "don't crumple up your ears dear...".
>
> Externalizing the womb subjects the unformed body to manipulation.
> The consciousness, like the fetal body, becomes the art of the
> machine. Bodies and consciousness are remixed. What we perceive to
> be the body often becomes distorted in the engineering of cyborg.
>
> February 3, 2003 -- It was as if her delicate features had been
> rearranged to make room for equipment. Somehow, her perfect
> nose was in the way of the Ventilator, so they moved it off to
> the side. The machines rearrange the perfection of her body.
>
> Just as in Julia Kristeva's infantile language, there is no easy way
> to distinguish between the child and the simulated techno-Mother.
> The machine and the baby become symbiotic. "Sameness" governs the
> relationship between the baby and the machine. Their sameness means
> that they're mutually dependent on each other in order for life to
> continue.
>
> Technology is capable of simulating vital signs, of supporting life,
> of becoming Mother. The child of the techno-Mother is essentially, a
> virtual body. A simulation of vital signs that becomes internalized.
> The ventilator simulates Quinn's breathing, supporting her life
> through mimicry. Through the perfect simulation of breathing, the
> ritual of life goes forward. In cyborg culture, the lines between
> simulation and reality are blurred into irrelevancy. The cyborg is
> the interface between simulation and reality, where the simulacra
> becomes capable of living. Her body, "redesigned by means of
> life-support machines and prosthetic organs."[13]
>
> Thus, infancy has become disembodied from the biological Mother and
> goes forward unmanned, like the Predator Drone

DISCUSSION

Fwd: Call for Papers - Leonardo Music Journal 15


Begin forwarded message:

> From: "LEONARDO (mk)" <isast@well.com>
> Date: February 5, 2004 6:17:56 PM EST
> To: LEO Network <isast@well.com>
> Subject: Call for Papers - Leonardo Music Journal 15
>
> Call for Papers:
> LMJ 15 (year 2005)
>
> "The Word---Voice, Language and Technology"
>
> In the beginning of music there very likely was the Word---whether
> "hush"
> (little baby) or "hosanna"---but from the knife that kept the great
> castrato Farinelli forever boyish to the harmonizer that made Laurie
> Anderson temporarily mannish, technology has been used to tweak the
> human
> voice and to color the stories it tells. With the advent of electronic
> amplification, radio and recording, a single microphone could convey
> the
> lip-brushing intimacy of the whisper and croon well beyond the first
> row of
> the concert hall. The evolution of pop vocal styles from the 1950s
> onward
> cannot be separated from innovations in recording technology such as
> tape
> echo, double tracking, electronic reverberation and, most recently, an
> ever-expanding palette of digital effects. Vocal cut-ups and processing
> have been essential tools of the avant-garde from Walter Ruttman's film
> soundtrack experiments in the 1930s, through Cage and Reich, to Ashley
> and
> Sonami, while artists from Kurt Schwitters to Jaap Blonk have created
> purely acoustic vocal works that mimic the aural artifacts of
> technology.
>
> The interplay of the semantic content of a text and the melodic
> possibilities of the voice have made "song" the world's most common
> musical
> form, and technology-driven vocal innovations have often triggered the
> emergence of new musical genres (rap being the most conspicuous
> example).
> Between the much touted "abstractness" and "universality" of music and
> the
> seductive specificity of words there exists a poignant and powerful
> lacuna.
> The voice may be our first and most "natural" instrument of art, but
> art is
> artificial, and the link between technique and technology is more than
> a
> pun. As Voltaire said, "If it's too silly to be said, it can always be
> sung."
>
> For the next issue of LMJ we invite contributions that address the
> interplay of the voice, words and technology in any style of music.
>
> Deadlines:
> 15 October 2004: rough proposals, queries
> 1 January 2005: submission of finished articles
>
> Address inquiries to Nicolas Collins, Editor-in-Chief, at:
> ncollins@artic.edu. Finished articles should be sent to the LMJ
> Editorial
> Office at isast@sfsu.edu.
>
> Editorial guidelines and information for authors can be found at:
> http://mitpress.mit.edu/Leonardo/Authors. Note: LMJ is a peer-reviewed
> journal. All manuscripts are reviewed by LMJ editors, editorial board
> members and/or members of the LMJ community prior to acceptance.
>
> More information about LMJ - tables of contents, CD information,
> selected
> texts and more - is available at
> http://mitpress2.mit.edu/Leonardo/lmj
>


CURATED EXHIBITIONS (1)