The Rhizome Digest merged into the Rhizome News in November 2008. These pages serve as an archive for 6-years worth of discussions and happenings from when the Digest was simply a plain-text, weekly email.
|
Subject: RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.28.05 From: digest@rhizome.org (RHIZOME) Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:25:57 -0800 Reply-to: digest@rhizome.org Sender: owner-digest@rhizome.org RHIZOME DIGEST: January 28, 2005 Content: +announcement+ 1. Trebor: The Institute for Distributed Creativity +opportunity+ 2. Institute of Network Cultures: Call for Papers: The Art and Politics of Netporn 3. Jehanne-Marie Gavarini: Employment Opportunities: 3D Animation/Digital Interactive Media Tenure Track Faculty & Web Artist / Tenure Track Faculty Position 4. Liselyn Adams: Interdisciplinary Artist position offered 5. Kevin McGarry: FW: netopticon report - call for submissions +work+ 6. Rhizome.org: Just added to the Rhizome ArtBase: in-vacua.com by wayne +comment+ 7. Reinhold Grethe: mobile art and locative media +interview+ 8. Trebor: Interview with Warren Sack on New-Media Art Education 9. Thomas Petersen: Art is a software plug-in: An interview with Peter Luining +thread+ 10. Angela Cachay Dwyer, curt cloninger, patrick lichty, liza sabater, t.whid, Ivan Pope, Francis Hwang, manik: Electronic Folk Art?! 11. Jim Andrews, Pall Thayer, Michael Szpakowski: links + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 1. Date: 1.24.05 From: Trebor <trebor AT buffalo.edu> Subject: The Institute for Distributed Creativity Public Launch The Institute for Distributed Creativity http://www.distributedcreativity.org/ The research of the Institute for Distributed Creativity (iDC) focuses on collaboration in media art, technology, and theory with an emphasis on social contexts. The iDC is an independent international network with a participatory and flexible institutional structure that combines advanced creative production, research, events, and documentation. While the iDC makes appropriate use of emerging low-cost and free social software it balances these activities with regular face-to-face meetings. In May 2004 the iDC was founded by Trebor Scholz following the "Free Cooperation: Networks, Art & Collaboration" conference. http://freecooperation.org Many events of the Institute for Distributed Creativity are hosted by the Department of Media Study, State University of New York at Buffalo and by collaborating institutions in New York City and internationally. ----------------------------------------- The weblog of the iDC: http://blog.distributedcreativity.org ----------------------------------------- Events: WebCamTalk 1.0 Guest Speaker Series on New-Media Art Education (Hosted by the Department of Media Study, SUNY at Buffalo) http://newmediaeducation.org (Speakers: Adriene Jenik, Anna Munster, Axel Bruns, Christoph Spehr, Eduardo Navas, Elizabeth Goodman, John Hopkins, Joline Blais, Jon Ippolito, Lily Diaz, Lisa Gye, Megan Boler, Molly Krause, Ned Rossiter, Patrick Lichty, Randall Packer, Ricardo Miranda Zuniga, Warren Sack, William Grishold, Wolfgang Münch) 01-04.05 ----------------------------------------- iDC Researcher in Residence. Spring 2005 "Imaginary Futures" Dr. Richard Barbrook (Hypermedia Research Institute University of Westminster, London, UK) Richard Barbrook will present the Rosa Luxemburg Lecture. ----------------------------------------- New-Media Art Education Conference (Collaboration between the Institute for Distributed Creativity and The Graduate Center, City University New York) http://newmediaeducation.org 06.05 ----------------------------------------- Tropical Open Source (This international conference is a collaboration between the Institute for Distributed Creativity and Ricardo Rosas, Sao Paolo.) http://tropicalos.info/ ----------------------------------------- Reshaping the Wireless Commons A Lecture by Brooke Singer (NYC Wireless) (organized in collaboration between the Institute for Distributed Creativity and the Art Department, SUNY at Buffalo) 04.05 ----------------------------------------- Screening U.S. Premiere of: School of Missing Studies/Looking for October - LFO Contemporary meanings of liberation, Belgrade A documentary by Dusan Gligorov ----------------------------------------- Project: The Distributed Learning Project (DLP) Web-based tool for new-media art educators-- under development. The DLP is a collaboration between Trebor Scholz and Tom Leonhardt. If you would like to contribute to this project, please contact us. http://dlp.distributedcreativity.org ----------------------------------------- Please contact us to propose collaborations on events, media art projects or publications. Trebor Scholz idc AT distributedcreativity.org + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2. Date: 1.25.05 From: Institute of Network Cultures <info AT networkcultures.org> Subject: Call for Papers: The Art and Politics of Netporn > CALL FOR PAPERS and ART PROJECTS > > The Art and Politics of Netporn > > Institute of Network Cultures, > Amsterdam, The Netherlands > 6-7 October, 2005 > > WHAT IS NETPORN? Web-based media and environments that filter porn > images and traffic between industries and art/indie cultures, > corporations, ISP¹s and net users; involving daily (female and male) > activities such as blogging, webcamming, chatting, binging on porn > portals, p2p porn, live journals, confession boards, mailing lists and > zines. > > THEORY AND POLITICS: New waves of netporn censorship have a clear > affect on artistic freedom and our sexual bodies. We would like to > engage in discussions of globalization, freedom of speech, (self) > censorhip and government/institutional surveillance of traffic, of sex > cultures and networked minorities. Does netporn corroborate the image > regimes of ?cruelty,¹ a wide-spread creation of appetite for violence, > terrorism, war on innocence and sexual otherness, openness. What are > the alternatives? > > ART PROJECTS: We are looking for new openings, new definitions and > articulation of pornography, ?art¹ as solo path or collaborative > wisdom, a tactical media approach to netporn for belly wisdom and > processing media histories. As Matteo Pasquinelli ponders in ?Warporn > Warpunk! Autonomous Videopoesis in Wartime,¹ we are grinning monkeys > who seek war and torture news as a type of pornography, but can we use > netporn to nurture our inner beasts and media intellects? > > DISCUSSIONS: Netporn is an intricate fabrication of desires and > mechanisms of repression. Debate means recognizing and re-drawing the > contours of hype and hysteria, of polemics and polarization, > discussing netporn as local and global phantasms, or > cross-fertilization between economies, desire and art/queer politics. > Discussions will be opened February 2005 on a web-based mailinglist > and will continue in plenary sessions at the conference. > > Please submit 250-word abstracts for papers/panels, or art/media > projects about the following topics. In your abstracts indicate what > type of media you need for your presentation, and please include an > address where you can be reached. > > > Censorship > Representation > Aesthetics > Traffic > Games > P2p > Economy > Politics > Queer/gender/gay > Feminism > War porn > Punk Porn > Media-archeology > Geographies > - > > DEADLINE: March 15, 2005 > > PLEASE SEND YOUR ABSTRACTS to: netporn AT networkcultures.org > > Katrien Jacobs > Geert Lovink > Sabine Niederer + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 3. Date: 1.26.05 From: Jehanne-Marie Gavarini <artfutur AT aol.com> Subject: Employment Opportunities: 3D Animation/Digital Interactive Media Tenure Track Faculty & Web Artist / Tenure Track Faculty Position The Art Department at the University of Massachusetts Lowell seeks qualified applicants for a full-time, tenure-track position to teach undergraduate courses in 3D digital animation, interactive digital media, and immersive VR photography. The MFA is required as well as an active and growing record of creative and scholarly research, exhibitions and publications. The position appointment is effective September 1, 2005. An interdisciplinary approach to the teaching of 3D animation and interactive media emphasizing conceptually mature sequential narratives is desirable. Applicants must show proficiency in Lightwave, Maya, digital media authoring, video editing, audio and demonstrate an interest in and an understanding of new media theory and contemporary art and culture. Applicants must also show some experience in WEB design and Macintosh lab management. Salary and benefits are commensurate with the rank of Assistant or Associate Professor. Responsibilities will include teaching three undergraduate courses per semester, student advising, participation in senior reviews, as well as committee participation at the Department, College and University level. A minimum of three years teaching in higher education is required and industry experience is preferred. To apply, send a letter of application, resume and portfolio. Please include examples of animation and digital interactive media, examples of student work, teaching philosophy, syllabi, three letters of reference and SASE to: Animation Search Committee Art Department University of Massachusetts Lowell 71 Wilder Street - Suite 8 Lowell, MA 01854 Deadline: March 1, 2005 or until filled [...] The Art Department at the University of Massachusetts Lowell seeks qualified applicants for a full-time, tenure-track position to teach undergraduate courses in web-based art and design. The MFA is required as well as an active and growing record of creative and scholarly research, exhibitions and publications. The position appointment is effective September 1, 2005. An interdisciplinary approach to the teaching of web-based media is desirable. Applicants must show a demonstrated proficiency in JTML, CSS, DHTML, JavaScript, Flash, with ActionScript preferred. A thorough understanding of typography, color theory, interactive design principles, and web strategy experience is required. Also applicants must demonstrate an interest in and an understanding of new media theory and contemporary art and culture. Salary and benefits are commensurate with the rank of Assistant/Associate Professor. Responsibilities will include teaching three undergraduate courses per semester, participation in Macintosh lab management, overseeing the art department web site with student assistance, student advising, participation in senior reviews, as well as committee participation at the Department, College and University level. A minimum of three years teaching in higher education is required and industry experience is preferred. To apply, send a letter of application, resume, online portfolio link, other examples of web based media, and examples of student work. Also include teaching philosophy, syllabi, three letters of reference and SASE to: Web Design Search Committee Art Department University of Massachusetts Lowell 71 Wilder Street - Suite 8 Lowell, MA 01854 Deadline: March 1, 2005 or until filled + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome is now offering organizational subscriptions, memberships purchased at the institutional level. These subscriptions allow participants of an institution to access Rhizome's services without having to purchase individual memberships. (Rhizome is also offering subsidized memberships to qualifying institutions in poor or excluded communities.) Please visit http://rhizome.org/info/org.php for more information or contact Kevin McGarry at Kevin AT Rhizome.org or Rachel Greene at Rachel AT Rhizome.org. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4. Date: 1.26.05 From: Liselyn Adams <liselyn AT vax2.concordia.ca> Subject: Interdisciplinary Artist position offered Canada Research Chair (Tier II) tenure track position in Interdisciplinary Art Practice Concordia University, Montreal. The Faculty of Fine Arts seeks applications from artists with a cross-disciplinary practice for a Canada Research Chair position. Experience could include visual art, performance, design, moving image, emerging technologies, or interactive art. A demonstrated interest in diasporic or transnational issues is an asset. For full details, see http://fofa.concordia.ca/site/crc3postinge.pdf or contact Liselyn Adams, Chair, CRC Committee; Faculty of Fine Arts; Concordia University VA 250; 1395, boul. René Lévesque ouest; Montreal, QC H3G 2M5 Canada. liselyn AT vax2.concordia.ca Application Deadline March 15, 2005. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 5. Date: 1.26.05 From: Kevin McGarry <kevin AT rhizome.org> Subject: FW: netopticon report - call for submissions netopticon report Together with superficial anonymity and seemingly apparent ways of hiding or faking one's identity, the Internet delivers a new set of powerful and sophisticated instruments of surveillance. Network activity of an individual user, intercepted on the borders of ostensibly integral web realm, is easily back-traced by power holders - via IP address to ID number - and provides the agent for latent supervision of controlling eye-ear. Scouting and tight inspection of personal information, at times readily exposed, serves economical and political interests of the system, helps creating the new ways of control and improves the old ones. Established around network security commercial structures continuously populate virtual file-cabinets, simultaneously supporting the channels of supervised data distribution. netopticon - the current project of no-org.net - is an attempt to create an artistic and textual report on the topic of infringement of privacy and its protection. We are looking forward to net art works and texts dealing with resistance to manipulatively mediated concept of security, to art projects devoted to true anonymity of net-surfing and net-correspondence, to works intentionally feeding systems with falsified data, to any remarks, suggestions and ideas that would add up to a contemporary report on the topic. Although it is not exclusive condition, projects that work on the three major platforms (Linux, Macintosh and Windows) are preferred. The deadline for submissions is March, 30, 2005 http://no-org.net/netopticon/submission.php <http://no-org.net/netopticon/submission.php> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome Member-curated Exhibits http://rhizome.org/art/member-curated/ View online exhibits Rhizome members have curated from works in the ArtBase, or learn how to create your own exhibit. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6. Date: 1.24.05 From: Rhizome.org <artbase AT rhizome.org> Subject: Just added to the Rhizome ArtBase: in-vacua.com by wayne Just added to the Rhizome ArtBase ... http://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?30665 + in-vacua.com + + wayne + in-vacua.com is a frequently changing website consisting of text generation and manipulation pieces which test the notion of a visual art consisting almost entirely of words and no pictures. It is written in Perl. The organising concept is that of a 'writing machine,' a machine that may occasionally inhabit your computer. + + + Biography 'in-vacua' is Wayne Clements. 'comâ' is a witticism ruined by explanation. A 60's classic, Wayne is presently a research student at Chelsea College of Art and Design, London, where he is trying to persuade his computer to write his PhD for him. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 7. Date: 1.25.05 From: Reinhold Grether <Reinhold.Grether AT netzwissenschaft.de> Subject: mobile art and locative media stay at home the next two weeks and follow the links 1) mob art links mobile art and locative media links to art through locative/ mobile/ pervasive/ wearable/ wireless devices. mob art projects http://www.netzwissenschaft.de/mob.htm mob art research http://www.netzwissenschaft.de/mobi.htm 2) net art links a continuously updated bookmark file on net art -- 2005 in its eleventh year. http://www.netzwissenschaft.de/kuenst.htm 3) perf art links a directory to augmented/ distributed/ hybrid/ mixed/ networked/ virtual performance art virtual performance research area http://www.netzwissenschaft.de/perfa.htm virtual performance bibliography http://www.netzwissenschaft.de/perfb.htm stay at home the next two weeks and follow the links + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 8. Date: 1.24.05 From: Trebor <trebor AT buffalo.edu> Subject: Interview with Warren Sack on New-Media Art Education Interview with Warren Sack on New-Media Art Education by Trebor Scholz TS: In a recent interview members of kuda (new media center, Novi Sad) addressed the lack of non-proprietary software in the corporate world. But nevertheless, kuda strongly opts for open source / free software in education as: "The cadre of designers and programmers that relies on proprietary software to find a job, is no different than the Fordist proletarian subject but without proletarian consciousness. We can link the ideas around software to Marx' notions of the necessity for the proletariat to own the tools it uses. As of now, software and hardware tools are in not in our hands." There are examples of universities in the U.S. that are in the process of entirely switching to open source software. How do you see possibilities for open source in an American academic context? WS: As implied by Kuda, this is both a question of consciousness-raising and also of functionality. There are specific marketing and litigation strategies of disinformation that are actively undermining the necessary consciousness raising. These strategies of disinformation are similar to the ones big media and big industry have been using for at least a century: they are strategies of "seamlessness." By this I mean that powerful interests want you, the consumer and citizen, to ignore the seams that articulate the parts of computers and networks together. A perfect example of this, right now (December 2004), is AOL's current marketing campaign. AOL assures us, in television ads, that they can create "a better Internet." This is willful obfuscation. The Internet -- as a net of nets -- is, by definition, outside of the control of a single entity: AOL can't change the Internet even if it wants to. But, what AOL wants people to believe is that AOL is the Internet. And, from personally experience, I can tell you that many lay people think this is the case. When, for example, I've demonstrated to novice users who have AOL accounts that they can "see the Internet" from a standard browser that is not the AOL technology, they have been rather shocked. To them it is seamless: there is no difference between AOL and the Internet. This serves AOL's interests because people are then led to believe that there are no other alternatives. Another good example of this was Microsoft's -- legal claim of a few years ago -- that their Windows operating system and the Internet explorer web browser were inseparable: that one could not be shipped without the other. (Or, Microsoft's current run-in with the EC courts contending that its Windows Media Player is integral to the Windows operating system.) This turned out to be technically trival to prove to be false -- the application and the operating system can be separated -- but the U.S. Justice Department must have spent a pretty penny to convince the judge in charge of the case. So, my point is this: to propose open source as an alternative within any given work context requires some amount of consciousness raising that is being actively worked against by large concerns that would like the public to believe -- not just that their products are "better" -- but that no alternatives exists. But, then there is also the issue of functionality: open source software is frequently designed and implemented by experts who have little or no insight into what non-programmers might need or want. Setting up and maintaining a Linux server, installing an open source database system like Mysql, using open source alternative's to commercial software (e.g., Open Office), etc. can be a hassle even for those of us who are experts. In fact i do not have anything against non-open source software by companies that build solid tools and do not engage in disinformation campaigns. Unfortunately, it is usually the companies engaged in disinformation that also build lousy software. There is a crafty business rationale for doing this, for making your customers your alpha testers: the company saves on quality control personnel and also gets customers to check in with them frequently. "Staying in touch" with your customers by having them check in with you every week to patch the lousy software is unethical, but effective for fostering a relation of dependence. Any strategy to adapt open source software should take into account the fact that some commercial software is a nice complement to open source software. For example, working with Apple, Macromedia and Adobe software is usually a pleasure: they write solid, easy-to-use software that doesn't need to be patched every second day. These are good complements because (1) They do something better than open source. For example, one could use Gimp to edit digital photos, but Gimp is ultimately a good but imperfect attempt to mimic Adobe Photoshop. (2) Such software comes from companies that build on top of open source software, work in coalitions to establish common, non-proprietary standards, and who work hard to provide alternatives -- rather than fighting for absolute dominance and the elimination of alternatives. One must also keep in mind that open source is not anti-corporate. When Richard Stallman's notion of free software gained a wider interest, the principles and "open source" corporation-friendly moniker was established to differentiate it from Stallman's more radical idea of "free software." IBM and other large companies are now heavily invested in, develop and critically depend upon open source software. So, my answer is yes, universities have a lot to gain by moving some of their business to open source software. But, I don't think there are good open source alternatives for all categories of software. Actually it is good to remember, conversely, that there are non-commercial alternatives to several crucial categories of open source software, categories that are the foundations, the very "backbone" of the software layers of network technologies (e.g., DNS-BIND, OpenSSL, sendmail, and, arguably, the Apache web server). So, the commercial vs. open source distinction is a false dichotomy and the more important criterium to remember when one does choose to work with commercial software is to ask whether or not the company producing the software is an ethical company. An "ethical company" might be an oxymoron in a conventional Marxist's lexicon, but I think this is a crucial problematic to address if one hopes to understand our current circumstances of post-industrialization. TS: How does your writing of media philosophy enter into your teaching? Which books or essays do you find most helpful in your teaching? WS: I believe that its important to understand that technologies incorporate frozen -- i.e., reified -- social, economic and political relations. For example, if you have DSL in your home, you almost certainly have more bandwidth coming into your house than you have going out of your house. In other words, structured into the network wiring is the assumption that you are a consumer, not a producer of information because the engineering has been done to make it easier for you to download information from the Internet rather than to upload information. Information technologies contain many forms of catachresis (frozen metaphor) that more often than not started life as quirky philosophy projects and are now "frozen", but working as silicon and gold components. For example, the 19th century philosopher, George Boole, had a project (An investigation into the Laws of Thought) to try to algebraically deduce truths that is now literally printed into the very foundations of computers: we know these foundations in contemporary technology as "Boolean Circuits." I try to teach my students that each of these frozen decisions could in fact be undone and replaced with something else. What would result might be an entirely different technology. This sort of investigation/thought experiment is also the basis for my own research and scholarship: I am interested in challenging and finding alternatives to the foundations of computer science and network architectures by locating the presuppositions built into contemporary, new media technologies. An example of this kind of work is the "Translation Map" that Sawad Brooks and I did (translationmap.walkerart.org) in which we re-read the founding essay of the field of machine translation, a text written by Warren Weaver in 1949. Weaver proposes to understand translation as a problem of coding and decoding. We show the absurdity of Weaver's proposal -- and the 50 years of work in machine translation that has been done based on Weaver's proposal -- and we illustrate a possible alternative by prototyping a network technology for collaborative editing in which translation is understood to be a form of collaborative work between people, rather than as a de/coding problem to be handled exclusively by a machine. To impart this perspective to my students, I like to have them read original documents from the history of technology (e.g., like the texts included in Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Nick Montfort's "New Media Reader" (MITPress)) and also to read work from science studies and critical theory that describes technologies as assemblages of socio-technical relations. Bruno Latour's book, "Science in Action" is one thing students in my "Introduction to Digital Media" course are asked to read. TS: In a recent interview Ralf Homann, faculty at Bauhaus University, told me that Walter Gropius demanded an educational practice in the arts that focused students on economics from very early on-- Gropius thought of the artist as a polished, perfected craftsman. He claimed that academies separate art from life, from the "industry." Today, there is no such thing as "the industry" for which students could be prepared. It's not like in other areas where a predictable skill set secures a job. In new media the skill sets are drastically changing and what was justifiable and useful yesterday may be irrelevant and dated tomorrow. How do you address this dilemma? WS: On the one hand I disagree: I think there are very specific "craft" skills that are relatively stable and that can be taught to students of digital media. For example, programming is a general skill that is essential to the construction of all digital media. Even if one does not know a particular programming language, if one knows how to program it is really not a big challenge to learn another language. On the other hand, I agree: there is no one industry for which students are being prepared. Digital media of today is like writing was to Plato's Athens: it is a "solvent" being incorporated everywhere and it threatens to dissolve and rearrange disciplinary boundaries as well as industry differences. Every department in the university must today wrangle with the questions of new media. Some of the oldest departments, e.g., departments of classics, have been the most innovative in addressing the possibilities and problems of new media. A lot of what computers and networks do in industry and government is to automate processes that had previously been done by hand: forms of production, like bureaucratic procedures are being automated. Bureaucracy -- which means literally "rule by the bureau, or the office" -- is being replaced by "computercracy" -- rule by computational methods. Larry Lessig and other legal scholars have been very articulate in pointing out the legal ramifications of this kind of transformation. But, if people don't think too deeply, computercracy ends up looking a lot like bureaucracy. For instance, the so-called "desktop metaphor" that structures the interface most of us use when we operate a computer, is a relatively direct borrowing from the technology of the office -- files, folders, trashcans, desks, etc. So, the crucial challenge is to teach fundamentals -- that may in fact be "crafts" -- so that graduates can rethink computerization where ever they find themselves. about Warren Sack http://hybrid.ucsc.edu/SocialComputingLab/ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 9. Date: 1.26.05 From: Thomas Petersen <thomas AT crossover.dk> Subject: Art is a software plug-in. An interview with Peter Luining Originally published at Artificial, http://www.artificial.dk Article with images: http://www.artificial.dk/articles/luining.htm Dutch artist Peter Luining's digital artistic production spans over many styles and formats. Since he entered the early net art scene, his works have explored the nature of interactivity, dealt with the relationship between sound and minimal graphics using various aesthetic, and conceptual perspectives. His works have been presented at several prestigious venues worldwide and he has acted as a curator himself. Peter recently visited Denmark for the Read_me festival 2004 where he presented some new art works consisting of alternative add-ons ('plug-ins') which are installed as a part of the image editing software Photoshop. These plug-ins add unexpected dimensions to the existing software, making the interaction with the software the frame within which the art happens - not so much the resulting images. Thomas Petersen asked Peter about his work in general and his perspective on the digital arts scene. View Peter Luining 's work at: http://www.ctrlaltdel.org Q: You have been working with computer based art for quite a while now. Tell me about your previous work and how it has developed into your present projects. A: I started to do autonomous work for the internet in 1996. I was fascinated by the way you could easily make things interactive with html (a language in which web pages are programmed). My first work researched the possibilities of interactive sound and images. These were quite simple pieces; with a click you came to another page on which another sound and animation played. By giving people more choices on a page to navigate I created more complex works. In these early days cross-platform compatibility was the most problematic aspect. When I discovered Flash this seemed to solve the problem. With Flash my work changed from figurative to abstract, which had several reasons, but now looking back I would say one of the most decisive reasons for the abstraction was that if you used anything else than the internal vector shapes (blocks, dots, line) in Flash you would not really gain anything in the sense of byte size, which means download speed. So in fact you were hooked to the internal logic (and aesthetics) of this program. Soon after I started using Flash, I discovered that the possibilities of the program were limited, there were for example hardly any ways to do more complex things with sound, so I moved to the program Director. While keeping the abstract shapes in my work, it got more complex in the sense that I started to use more interactive elements like letting people choose their sounds from the net (e.g. objekt 14). A key experience for me was the public space project BGO MUI*5 I did for the Dutch Department of Justice in The Hague. Here I deepened the aspects of interactivity by doing a real site-specific networked multiuser installation. Because I really had problems to get the software of this project going, it made me start to think about the material (code) I was using. This process of reflection actually led to my first conceptual piece of software: ZNC browser. This is a browser, which in the first place was meant to make the process of what a piece of software does, in this case browsing, transparent. What ZNC does is translate html to ASCII numbers which in turn are translated into color and sounds. The next step for me was the investigate the direct visual surroundings of computer art work and their influence on the work. With this I mean for example the influence of the GUI (Graphic User Interface) or the type of computer on which the work runs. This investigation led to another conceptual piece called Window, which is just a window where the stage was literally cut out. I cut this out to focus all attention to the frame. During the programming process, however, I discovered that I could program it so that you actually could click through the window. This makes it look and feel like a sort of material object that you can move over your desktop. After Window I started to become interested in image editing software. To work with this kind of software has become so ordinary that you hardly think of its added possibilities anymore. Besides all the standard options these programs have the possibility to put in plug-ins (that can be made by any person with some programming knowledge). In nearly all cases these plug-ins are just meant to do special effects or to fine tune a picture. So I started to think of a series of plug-ins that would apply the ideas of new media philosophers on images. To a certain level this worked but soon I discovered that results of these conceptual media filters became uninteresting. For example the Deleuze filter, I had made, created a root structure on a picture... Too literal. I picked up the filter project and especially the search for unexpected filters in a new series called 'formulas,' in which I forced myself to ignore my programming knowledge and just started to type in code in a simple and stupid looking way, by just adding and multiplying letters or numbers in the programming language till the filter would give a black or white result or there would be no result at all. Also the filter would have the name of the code I used. This led to a series of filters which sometimes had very long names. The most exciting part came when I put these filters into the Photoshop plug-in directory. When chosen in Photoshop itself the result was that it took over Photoshop's interface completely. Q: I find your plug-in series interesting because they can infiltrate ordinary users' interaction with a well-known piece of mainstream software - actually having the potential of being used regularly. This strategy seems quite different from early experiments with e.g. alternative browsers, as these pieces could often not be used for meaningful surfing. What do you hope to achieve with the tool aspect? A: I did not really make these filters with the intention for ordinary software users to use them. They were made for an art context in the first place. Personally, I see them as artworks that transgress ordinary use of what you could call banal pieces of software. So, there is no strategy here to infiltrate. I do however have no problems when the plug-ins are used by a different group than their target audience (which is an art audience). Something like what Matthew Fuller calls 'not just art'. I do however want to stress again that this is not the underlying thought by which they where made. That software art can actually become a tool in the hands of others is an interesting side product, but my interest at the moment is first and foremost the use of the inherent aesthetics of specific software and doing something interesting (unexpected) with them. The filters were developed out of the idea of using existing software and my contemplation of its use and structure. In this connection it's also interesting to tell that for the recent show 'New Photographic Approach I' I did a screen recorded movie in which I explain what Photoshop is, what filters are and what the filters that I made do. With this work I want to get even people who don't know anything about Photoshop and filters to get into this kind of work. So the work was actually presented in a form of documentation in an 'institutional' art space, while the real things are available on the net. Q: Your 'formula' works deal directly with code as material and your Photoshop works in general comment on the everyday use of mainstream software from a position within the software. What interests you about bringing forth these aspects of software and programming? A: First there's of course the plug-in aspect. It looks like the evolution of software is moving more and more towards a few specialized host programs that everybody use (as for example Photoshop for image editing) and that give certain basic functions which can be widened by plug-ins. While in the past you saw lots of competing programs that almost could do the same, besides a few special possibilities of course, you nowadays see a few large host applications left that offer a more open structure and allow plug-ins that can do all kind of extras. The best example is the development of music software, where in the beginning there were all kinds of stand alone software synthesizers. Nowadays all serious developers of these synths make them so they can be plugged into a host application as a sequencer program like Cubase. So in fact it's just a logical step to start developing special software (plug-ins) that fit in such a host application, instead of building a whole new application that does the same and has some special functions too. Secondly 'formulas' can be seen as tools to edit and fine tune a picture. Which is in fact a sort of artisan sort of labor, a sort of craftsmanship. My plug-ins can be seen as a referrer to this craftsmanship, or better making the sort of labor you need to do when you build filters (the programming) explicit. When you open 'formulas' you see the filters that are named the same as the code and you immediately see all the work it takes to just make some filters. Q: In your view, what is the position of computer based art forms in relation to the art world in general and how do you see the future of this situation? A: I would like to refine this question because I think you can talk about 2 kinds of art circuits here: 1.) Something which you could call the 'institutional' art world (museums, galleries) and 2.) The world of new media centres (ZKM, V2) and new media festivals (Ars Electronica, Transmediale). I experience and see that these circuits are separated. At the moment you hardly see any interest of the 'institutional' art world in computer related works. In the new media (or tech) related world there's a huge interest in these kinds of works, although the only things this circuit seems to be after is works that use the latest technology and/ or socio- political implications of these kinds of works. The development I see at the moment is that, besides the hypes in the recent years of net and software art, which brought some computer works into the 'institutional' art world, this type of art seems be pushed to the 2nd circuit because that's where the expertise is (I have heard this from several fine art curators). I think they choose the easy solution, which is to get rid of all the difficult aesthetical and presentational questions, but they also seem to be unaware that the circuit where there is the tech expertise is totally uninterested in aesthetical or traditional art questions and is often only interested in the latest technology and socio- political questions. For the future I hope that somehow both worlds would open up, especially because both circuits could really gain a lot from each other. Q: Are you implying that the new media circuit may be somewhat self sufficient or not able to see the point in connecting to the traditional art world circuit? A: What I mean is that there is not really a lot of interest in the new media (art) circuit to look or to connect to the traditional art world. I think that the main reason for this is that this circuit is rooted more in the strategic and functional use of media than in formalist questions. Q: These problems are often made out to being rooted in the first circuit - i.e. the traditional art world not being able or ready to accept electronic/digital art works, thus excluding electronic and digital artworks from recent (mainstream) art history. A: I am not going to point fingers. The fact is that nowadays there are specialized new media institutes and they make it easier for (mainstream) institutions to leave anything that looks too complex or difficult to those specialized institutes. And with too complex or difficult I don't mean only technology wise but also regarding the character of the artwork. A simple example of this is what happened to me a few years ago, when I did a quite simple interactive installation that consisted of a moving set of blocks projected on a large screen that could be manipulated by a mouse. At the opening a quite popular Dutch art critic came in and was terribly excited, but after I explained that the work was interactive and you could change the work yourself, he swiftly moved on. I only can guess his motives, but the most important thing, I think, is the problematic notion of the au thor in this kind of work. This is because when you start to play, who's the author? And when you start to think about this it becomes even more complex. If for example you compare it with the notions of interactivity you can find at performances, you will find out that computer interactivity is different. You interact with software that is programmed by an artist. This has even more difficult implications than a performance where performer and audience interact and can make an artwork together. In this sense it's important to place this work in a context in which, besides digital artists, also more 'traditional' artists like Rirkrit Tiravanija are working. With the work of this accepted artist you also see a shift in concepts of interactivity. I remember a piece by him that was just a music band rehearsal room, and people just started to play and use the instruments. It wasn't cleaned so for every newcomer to this space things could have been changed from the original setting. Q: In your opinion, what is needed for the traditional art world circuit to deal more with computer based artworks? A: A serious discourse that deals with aesthetic/ formalist questions of computer based artworks. The problem so far has been that computer based work was presented in 'institutional' art spaces because it was hot, new, etc. But because of a lack of any serious discourse or critics placing these works in a wider art context, the hype was over in no time. Furthermore, as lots of traditional art institutions jumped on the bandwagon to show computer art, hardly any of them thought of how to present these works. And maybe here also artists (including myself) can be blamed. A computer screen and mouse was enough, while you could criticize this way of presentation, especially from the side that loads of interactive computer works are just too complex to experience in a white cube. So when talking about computer art I'm not only talking about a discourse but also about a mentality of the artist. I think an artist, if s/he is interested in showing her/his work in an institutional art space, the first thing s/he should think of is the way how the work should be presented. Having learned from seeing people trying to interact with others' and with my work, I decided to do presentations and performances with my work. My latest step is making screen movies of work, with sound, that just explain or tell what happens on the screen. In this sense I see myself working in the tradition of 70s conceptualists who did their art outside the institutional spaces, as for example Robert Smithson's Spiral Getty, but showed clear documents (that are artworks themselves) of these works inside the institutions. In my case the internet is of course the outside. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 10. Date: 1.24.05-1.25.05 From: Angela Cachay Dwyer <amcachay AT city.surrey.bc.ca>, curt cloninger <curt AT lab404.com>, patrick lichty <voyd AT voyd.com>, liza sabater <liza AT culturekitchen.com>, "t.whid" <twhid AT twhid.com>, Ivan Pope <ivan2 AT ivanpope.com>, Francis Hwang <francis AT rhizome.org>, manik <manik AT ptt.yu> Angela Cachay Dwyer <amcachay AT city.surrey.bc.ca> posted: Do-it-yourself robotic toys, homebrew vidgames, ASCII images, homemade software - could these be a kind of 21st century folk art? Roundtable with artists and academics Surrey Art Gallery (Surrey, BC) Sunday, February 6, 2 - 3:30pm Free admission www.surreytechlab.ca Location and directions are available from the website *********************************************************************** What is electronic folk art? Is it an art practice that is culturally specific to North America? Is anyone who appropriates electronic toys, tools and software for their art an electronic folk artist? What are the possible forms of electronic folk art? Artists and academics will share their thoughts on these questions, and whether electronic folk art exists as a distinct area of contemporary art in general and/or within the realm of new media. The invited speakers are: * Diana Burgoyne (current exhibiting artist and PHD student in Interactive Arts, Simon Fraser University) * Don Krug (theorist; folk art researcher and curriculum specialist, University of British Columbia) * Leonard Paul (electronic music composer - lauded for his score for the film The Corporation, and video game audio instructor, Vancouver Film School) * Niranjan Rajah (theorist; curator and convenor, New Forms Festival 2005) Networking reception (3:30 - 5pm) following the Roundtable. + + + curt cloninger <curt AT lab404.com> replied: cool. check: http://www.casperelectronics.com http://www.anti-theory.com/soundart/ http://www.blingmethod.com + + + patrick lichty <voyd AT voyd.com> replied: Actually, perhaps the whole circuit bending genre, which depends entirely on a "naïve style" approach to reverse engineering, might be one of the first that could be defined as folk art. I really like this idea. Is there a New Media "Outsider Art"? + + + Francis Hwang <francis AT rhizome.org> replied: On Jan 25, 2005, at 6:37 AM, patrick lichty wrote: > Is there a New Media "Outsider Art"? Well, there's plenty of digital creativity that is done by people who have no interest in contextualizing it in the world of fine arts, if that's what you mean. Sometimes I read an essay about the aesthetics of code by somebody who doesn't program very much, and I think: It's like it's the 1980s, and programmers are like Puerto Rican graffiti artists without MFAs. + + + liza sabater <liza AT culturekitchen.com> replied: color me stupid but almost all the first wave of software artists that i know personally have no MFAs. i find it oxymoronic to need an MFA to call yourself an artist these days. and does this mean PRicans can't make art? don't make me go there ;-) + + + Curt Cloninger <curt AT lab404.com> replied: >Is there a New Media "Outsider Art"? Hi Patrick, I've been trying to propagate an outsider.net.art meme for a while: http://deepyoung.org/current/outsider/ http://deepyoung.org/current/dyskonceptual/ (my wife is almost finished sewing the prizes) and http://lab404.com/373/index.html#network scroll down to "outsider art" Two articles that seem at least obtusely appicable are Steve Dietz's "Why Have There Been No Great Net Artists": http://www.afsnitp.dk/onoff/Texts/dietzwhyhavether.html and Anne-Marie Schleiner's "Fluidities and Oppositions among Curators, Filter Feeders, and Future Artists": http://www.intelligentagent.com/archive/Vol3_No1_curation_schleiner.html In 2000, Irwin Chusid applied "outsider art" criteria to pop music with some interesting results ( http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/ASIN/B00006NSX1/ ). I'm writing an article now that applies Dubuffet's "Neuve Invention" criteria to pop music, and it's turning up an interesting bunch of musicians as well (from Devendra Banhart to Cloudead). ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Some etymology and semantic clarification: 1. Dubuffet's strict definition of "Art Brut" circa 1945: anything produced by people unsmirched by artistic culture... So that the makers draw entirely on their own resources rather than on the stereotypes of classical or fashionable art. 2. 1972, Roger Cardinal introduced the term "Outsider Art," intending it to be a translation of "Art Brut" (which is probably better translated "Raw Art," or so those who know French have said). The term "Outsider Art" has since taken on a life of its own, becoming a blanket term which can includes folk art, roadside art, and prisoner art. 3. In 1982, Dubuffet acknowledged a looser genre of artists who were neither "outsider" nor "inside." He called this new genre "Neuve Invention" (which translates "Fresh Invention"). Fresh Invention artists retain elements of Art Brut's self-taught genius; but they are also academically trained, aware of current art trends, and not crazy as loons. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ So according to Dubuffet's definitions, it's going to be pretty tough to find a pure Art Brut net artist (because the internet access required for the "net art" part more or less diametrically opposes the quarantine of influence required for the "Art Brut" part). But you could easily find an electronic folk artist. And since "outsider art" is a broad and loose term, you could still find an outsider net artist. To put a fine point on it for argument's sake, I'd say Larry Carlson ( http://www.larrycarlson.com ) is an outsider net artist, whereas Cory Arcangel ( http://www.beigerecords.com/cory/ ) is best considered a Neuve Invention new media artist. regarding circuit bending, Bob Moog lives here in Asheville, North Carolina. You could say he was the first to map circuit bending capabilities to the external control console and let everybody in on the fun: http://stream.qtv.apple.com/qtv/plexifilm/moogshorttrailer_ref.mov + + + t.whid <twhid AT twhid.com> replied: One needs an MFA to be an artist!!!????? good thing MTAA has M.River for our bona fides. And wasn't Max Herman the master of Electronic Folk Art? + + + Ivan Pope <ivan2 AT ivanpope.com> replied: Sure you don't need an MFA to be an artist. But I do wish more net.art.media.art.code.art.online.art was more integrated with and aware of art history and practice. A lot of practice is just flailing around on the margins, interesting but not advancing anything. You don't need an MFA to be an artist, but you can easily not be an artist without an MFA. + + + Francis Hwang <francis AT rhizome.org> replied: Once again, my sloppy terseness threatens to get me in trouble. I certainly didn't mean that you need an MFA, or can't be Puerto Rican, to be an artist. Maybe I mean that if you're a working class artist with no formal art education, then your work is handicapped if you don't care to get an MFA or learn how to write an artist's statement. Just like if you are, say, a bunch of CS students who decide to turn an entire building into a game of Tetris, the art world might take no notice at all if you don't take the time to promote your work as art. + + + manik <manik AT ptt.yu> replied: "Uber naive und sientimentalische Dichiung-Here Schiller applied his aesthetic theories to that branch of art which was most peculiarly his own, the art of poetry; it is an attempt to classify literature in accordance with an a priori philosophic theory of ancient and modern, classic and romantic, naive and sentimental ; and it sprang from the need Schiller himself felt of justifying his own sentimental and modern genius with the naive and classic tranquillity of Goethes. While Schillers standpoint was too essentially that of his time to lay claim to finality, it is, on the whole, the most concise statement we possess of the literary theory which lay behind the classical literature of Germany."(http://14.1911encyclopedia.org/S/SC/SCHILLER_JOHANN_CHRISTOPH_FRIE DRICH_VON.htm) Language's change.From Schiller to XXI century words "naive"and "sentimental"passing thru radical changes.For so called "folk art" usual attributes are naive&sentimental. We just have to imagine Goethe and Schiller as part of "folk art"tradition:-) "Outsider art"could be better term.There's so much example for people who doesn't "contextualizing"their work with *art*,and their influence was huge,just in art. Borders between discipline considered "art"and science(for example) are very arbitrate. Actually,only folk-in-naive-style-outsider thing on this page is Mr.Hwang observation. MANIK + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 11. Date: 1.26.05-1.27.05 From: Jim Andrews <jim AT vispo.com>, Pall Thayer <palli AT pallit.lhi.is>, Michael Szpakowski <szpako AT yahoo.com> Subject: links Jim Andrews <jim AT vispo.com> posted: Should you write about or otherwise link to net.art, one of the tests of whether you've chosen significant work is simply whether it continues to be available online over the years. + + + Pall Thayer <palli AT pallit.lhi.is> replied: This might indicate that the work has some significance but I don't think I'd go so far as to say that it is a definite indicator. There's a lot of stuff still out there that is insignificant and I know of a couple that no longer exist that were quite significant. + + + Michael Szpakowski <szpako AT yahoo.com> replied: This is an interesting, well expressed and tempting proposition but *is it true?* You could mean one of two things, or both -one that the artist herself maintains her work up there ( and hence her sticking power and determination, admirable qualities to be sure, is an index of the ultimate value of the work, but of course this is subject to the financial wherewithal - and perhaps also stuff like state of mental & physical health - to maintain and publicise a site -certainly an issue in those parts of the world which are less connected) Or..if you mean it's to do with whether copies of artists' works are archived on other sites, then I think this is a partial indicator, but this is surely a bit of a beauty contest approach -I'm sure some work that is feted and celebrated now *will* stand the test of time but equally much of it will disappear. On the other hand, I'm absolutely convinced that much work that is currently ignored and marginal will move centre stage over time. I think the uncertainty is inevitable & I personally welcome it -makes life much more interesting! + + + Jim Andrews <jim AT vispo.com> replied: > > Jim Andrews wrote: > > Should you write about or otherwise link to net.art, one of the > > tests of whether you've chosen significant work is simply > > whether it continues to be available online over the years. > Pall Thayer wrote: > This might indicate that the work has some significance but I > don't think I'd go so far as to say that it is a definite > indicator. There's a lot of stuff still out there that is > insignificant and I know of a couple that no longer exist that > were quite significant. But of course. And, as Michael pointed out, there are places in the world where it is not particularly feasible to maintain sites. When the economic crash occurred in Argentina a few years ago, Postypographika disappeared, which was an early and energetic poetical net.art project by Fabio Doctorovich and friends. And when net.artists die, their sites may disappear. When my friend Ana Maria Uribe from Argentina informed me that she was ill (I didn't know how ill), I had been thinking anyway for some months of asking her if she wanted to mirror her work on my site; her work and mine go together well and, playful as her work is, she approached it very seriously. She was able to ftp her site to vispo.com and it is a permanent part of my site now, as long as my site is up. I agree that it is not a "definite indicator". However, a committment to trying to keep the work available is usually present in those who are serious about net.art. And that is something that crosses my mind in whether to write about/link to work. Then again, Kafka asked his executor to burn his work. Luckily that did not happen. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome.org is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization and an affiliate of the New Museum of Contemporary Art. Rhizome Digest is supported by grants from The Charles Engelhard Foundation, The Rockefeller Foundation, The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, and with public funds from the New York State Council on the Arts, a state agency. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome Digest is filtered by Kevin McGarry (kevin AT rhizome.org). ISSN: 1525-9110. Volume 10, number 5. Article submissions to list AT rhizome.org are encouraged. Submissions should relate to the theme of new media art and be less than 1500 words. For information on advertising in Rhizome Digest, please contact info AT rhizome.org. To unsubscribe from this list, visit http://rhizome.org/subscribe. Subscribers to Rhizome Digest are subject to the terms set out in the Member Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php. Please invite your friends to visit Rhizome.org on Fridays, when the site is open to members and non-members alike. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + |
-RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.12.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.5.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.27.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.20.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.13.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.6.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.30.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.23.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.16.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.9.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.2.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.19.2007 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.12.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.5.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.28.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.21.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.14.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.7.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.31.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.24.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.17.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.10.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.3.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.26.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.19.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.12.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.5.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.29.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.22.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.15.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.8.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.1.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.25.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.18.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.11.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.4.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.27.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.20.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.13.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.6.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.30.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.23.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.16.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.9.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.2.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.25.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.18.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.11.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.4.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.28.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.14.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.28.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.14.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.7.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.31.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.24.01 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.17.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.03.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.20.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.13.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.06.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: November 29, 2006 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.22.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.15.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.08.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.27.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.20.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.13.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.06.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.29.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.22.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.15.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.08.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.01.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 08.25.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 08.18.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 08.11.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 08.06.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 07.28.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 07.21.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 07.14.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 07.07.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.30.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.23.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.16.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.02.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 05.26.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 05.19.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 05.12.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 05.05.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.28.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.21.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.14.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.07.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.31.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.24.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.17.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.12.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.03.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.24.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.17.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.10.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.03.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.27.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.20.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.13.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.06.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.30.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.23.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.16.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.09.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.02.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.25.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.18.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.11.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.4.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.28.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.21.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.14.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.07.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.30.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.23.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.16.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.9.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.2.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.26.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.22.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.14.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.07.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.31.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.24.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.17.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.10.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.03.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.26.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.19.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.12.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.05.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.29.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.22.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.15.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.08.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.29.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.22.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.15.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.01.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.25.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.18.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.11.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.04.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.25.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.18.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.11.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.04.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.28.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.21.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.14.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.08.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.01.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.17.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.10.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.03.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.26.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.19.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.12.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.05.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.29.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.22.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.15.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.08.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.01.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.24.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.17.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.10.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.03.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.27.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.20.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.13.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.06.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.30.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.23.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.16.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.09.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.02.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.25.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.18.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.11.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.04.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.28.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.21.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.14.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.07.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.30.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.16.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.09.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.02.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.27.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.19.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.13.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.05.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.27.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.20.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.13.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.06.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.31.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.23.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.16.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.10.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.05.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.21.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.13.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.05.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.28.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.21.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.14.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.07.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.31.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.25.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.18.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.10.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.03.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.27.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.19.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.13.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.05.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.29.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.22.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.17.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.09.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.17.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.10.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.03.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.20.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.13.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.06.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.29.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.22.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.15.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.01.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.25.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.18.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.11.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.04.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.27.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.20.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.13.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.6.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.30.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.23.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.16.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST:8.9.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.02.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.26.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.19.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.12.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.5.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.28.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.21.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.14.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.7.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.2.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.26.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.19.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.12.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.5.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.28.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.21.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.14.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.7.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.31.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.23.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.15.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.8.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.3.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.24.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.17.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.10.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.1.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.27.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.18.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.12.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.6.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.30.01 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.23.01 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.29.01 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.2.00 |