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: 10.27.06 From: digest@rhizome.org (RHIZOME) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:47:00 -0700 Reply-to: digest@rhizome.org Sender: owner-digest@rhizome.org RHIZOME DIGEST: October 27, 2006 Content: +note+ 1. Marisa Olson: Call for Rhizome Site Editors +opportunity+ 2. Ceci: Tenure-Track Faculty Position in Visual Media and Gaming 3. Rachel Greene: MediaShed/Mongrel looking for European partners 4. Vicente Matallana: ARCO/BEEP NEW MEDIA ART AWARDS 5. atimko AT graystoneadv.com: New Media Position SUNY Oswego 6. llhenzl AT wisc.edu: Faculty Position in Digital Media 7. Stephanie Dinkins: HISTORIAN OF CONTEMPORARY/MODERN ART Search, SUNY STONY BROOK +announcement+ 8. lvestal AT stanford.edu: Sliding Scale:Gail Wight exhibition 9. secondary.memory AT gmail.com: Openlab 3 - Exhibition and 2 Events (Free) 10. mosaica AT yorku.ca: Mosaica-Call for projects 07 11. Pau Alsina: :::::: new video-interviews in Artnodes ::::::: 12. marc: 5+5=5. +thread+ 13. Sean Capone, patrick lichty, Jim Andrews, Geert Dekkers, T.Whid: On 8-Bit Aesthetics: Hackers or Hacks? + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome is now offering Organizational Subscriptions, group memberships that can be purchased at the institutional level. These subscriptions allow participants at institutions to access Rhizome's services without having to purchase individual memberships. For a discounted rate, students or faculty at universities or visitors to art centers can have access to Rhizome?s archives of art and text as well as guides and educational tools to make navigation of this content easy. Rhizome is also offering subsidized Organizational Subscriptions to qualifying institutions in poor or excluded communities. Please visit http://rhizome.org/info/org.php for more information or contact Lauren Cornell at LaurenCornell AT Rhizome.org + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 1. From: Marisa Olson <marisa AT rhizome.org> Date: Oct 27, 2006 Subject: Call for Rhizome Site Editors Dear all, We've recently seen some turnover among our Site Editors (formerly known as 'Superusers'), with some inactive members stepping down and some becoming "Emeritus." At this time, I would like to add four new Site Editors to our roster--and more in the future. I'm hoping that some of you will be interested in getting involved. It would be ideal to bring on people who are familiar with new media art and have a background of involvement in the Rhizome community. One of our goals with a collectively-edited reblog was to have a diversity of voices representing our diverse field, something that only happens when people are able to fully commit to this volunteer position, which entails reblogging at least ten items per month. Community participation is crucial to the Reblog's success, and I thank you for considering this commitment. Below is the official 'job description.' Please email me, off-list, if you are interested or have any questions. Rhizome's Site Editors play an important role in determining the content that appears on our website. Each Site Editor actively researches and publishes texts on our front page Reblog, including select posts from the Rhizome Raw discussion list, which Site Editors evaluate for merit, quality, and historical significance. Each of these texts is permanently archived and the discussions, announcements, reviews, essays, and other posts published from Raw are assigned searchable "metadata" terms by Site Editors, published to the Rhizome Rare discussion list, and posted on the Reblog. Site Editors are then actively involved in historicizing and initiating discourse about new media art. Thanks, Marisa + + + Marisa Olson Editor & Curator Rhizome.org at the New Museum of Contemporary Art + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2. From: Ceci <ceci AT rhizome.org> Date: Oct 23, 2006 Subject: Tenure-Track Faculty Position in Visual Media and Gaming Tenure-Track Faculty Position in Visual Media and Gaming The Arts, Media and Engineering Program (AME) (http://ame.asu.edu) at Arizona State University is announcing an opening for a tenure-track assistant professor in Visual Media and Gaming. The goal of AME is transdisciplinary research and education in the integrated development of experiential media systems. The program has established its own graduate interdisciplinary curriculum which includes AME concentrations in Electrical Engineering, Computer Science and Informatics, Dance, Music, Theater and Visual Arts, Design, Psychology, Bioengineering, Education, and a soon to be launched PhD in Media Arts and Sciences. Ten AME faculty and 30 affiliated faculty from the participating departments work collaboratively with graduate students supported by research assistantships for the creation of innovative media systems and applications. AME has state of the art media facilities. The successful candidate will take a leadership role in the design and development of the visual aspects of multimodal interactive systems and gaming technologies at AME and will also lead student training in this area. The individual hired will spearhead research in cutting-edge areas: interactive graphics and animation, interactive visual narrative, visual displays for everyday systems, gaming systems. The appointee¹s efforts will merge with efforts of other AME faculty for the achievement of significant advancements in interactive media. Teaching assignments are reasonable and will relate to the appointee¹s interests, research and creation. Required Qualifications: Doctoral degree in Media or Visual Art or closely related field OR master¹s degree in Media or Visual Art and a minimum of four years industry experience in media and/or gaming AND a creative and/or scholarly record with emphasis on visuals for digital media appropriate to rank. Desired Qualifications: Interdisciplinary experience in research and creation spanning Media, Arts and Engineering; industry experience, development of commercial or widely used public domain visual media or gaming products, funded research in visual media and gaming. Application Deadline: January 15, 2007; if not filled, every FOUR weeks thereafter until search is closed. Anticipated start date is August 16, 2007. Application Procedure: Send a letter of interest; CV; representative media products, demos of work or publications; and, names, addresses and telephone numbers for three professional references to: Chair, Visual Media and Gaming Search Committee, AME, Box 878709, Tempe, Arizona 85287-8709. Background check required for employment. For more information write to: vmg-search AT asu.edu. Arizona State University is an AA/EO employer + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 3. From: Rachel Greene <rachel AT rhizome.org> Date: Oct 24, 2006 Subject: MediaShed/Mongrel looking for European partners From: harwood AT mediashed.org Subject: MediaShed/Mongrel looking for European partners Date: October 24, 2006 8:05:13 AM EDT To: undisclosed-recipients: ; -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Sorry for cross posting: Please pass on to anyone interested. ________________________________________________________________________ Hi Mongrel/MediaShed with (Southend-on-Sea Borough Council) are looking for potential partners to join them in a CULTURE 2007 funding bid to build: "a coherent, global and complete tool for multicultural cooperation in Europe that should contribute actively to the development of a European identity from the grassroots" taken from: http://www.culture2007.info/#2007 We think the best way to achieve this is to work closely with people who would not normally see themselves as mainstream Europeans. Mongrel/MediaShed is looking for three or four groups ? from European 'marginal' locations either central/eastern European, immigrant groups, or economically impoverished. We propose to hold workshops between the host organisations involved? Create a software scheduler so people can sign up on line and organise themselves and listen to the archive. Then we will create three monthly events together. Each event will be edited down to create an audio CD. At the end of the project the partners will have created a software scheduler and a network for people to plugging into that creates a European platform for cultural participation and exchange. We propose the project be based on the successful mongrel.org.uk pilot SkintStream http://www.mediashed.org/?q=skintstream http://skintstream.mediashed.org Background The idea of SkintStream is to connect audiences and cultural spaces previously separated by economic, geographic and political factors. The aim is not to provide a platform for established musicians but to produce a network for hard-to-reach and disadvantaged groups and grass roots producers ? a ?poor to poor? network. SkintStream uses streaming technology to create an audio ?conversation? between groups separated by different types of distance(physical, cultural, economic). It also seeks to overcome institutional frameworks that are designed for passive consumption rather than open invitation and active collaboration. Passing the mic around the particpant groups allows us to reflect on the cultural space each sound is coming from and asks questions like: is geographic isolation a factor in cultural expression? Can we still think of ourselves as being in margins or centres when digital technologies allow us to bridge distances and make our own connections? Passing the Mic A SkintStream event takes the form of an internet broadcast or collaborative radio programme between different groups that are geographicly seperated by ?passing the mic? between them. For the pilot broadcast five different community groups around the world, from the UK to South Africa, each had a half hour slot in which to perform. Their contributions ranged from live music from local performers, DJ-ing and conversational pieces describing life in each location and the importance their music had for them. It was also easy to include additional sources during the event (such as Voice Over IP chatting between spaces such as through Skype) and to mix them as it suited. At the end of each half hour slot the turn was passed to the next space. During one event several rotations can be completed, allowing contributors to both take a break and to respond later to other spaces contributions. The first SkintStream event consisted of: Container Project - Clarendon (Jamaica) Sound Kitchen Studio/MMC - Johannesburg (South Africa) Nostalgie Ya Mboka - London (UK) Cue Music at Southend YMCA - Southend (UK) Regent Park Focus - Toronto (Canada) Benefits As well as broadcasting their own content, each space also receives everyone else?s live audio stream and is able to use that to build their own event, gig or party around the shared material in a way that makes sense to them. The resultant broadcast is also available to the general public over the internet using an audio application (like iTunes). The SkintStream web site describes how each participant can schedule their slot, documentation on how to stream their contribution and how anyone can record the live stream for themselves. The pilot event resulted in an incredibly rich audio CD which is as playable as and more revealing than an established radio station. The advantages of the SkintStream model include: It is a flexible model for collaborative events that can incorporate any kind of audio content; It builds international connections yet can take a different form to suit each participant group; It is scalable, accommodating more participants or longer events; It can be expanded into other media such as video, text, etc and other event formats; It is cheap ? using easily available equipment and free open source software. The pilot stream went out live on 8 June 2005 between 6pm-11pm GMT. An edited version of the pilot SkintStream session is available on CD - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- About Mongrel: Mongrel is an internationally recognised artists group specialising in digital media. We have an international reputation for our pioneering arts projects, including the first on-line commission from the Tate Gallery London and work in the permanent collections of the Pompidou Centre Paris and the Centre for Media Arts in Karlsruhe (ZKM). Combined with this we usually work with marginalised peoples who are on low incomes, socially excluded and cultural minorities. We do this buy helping people to do things for themselves, creating community software and digital arts based projects that we then promote to a state of high visibility through our international network of arts connections. The groups gain a visible voice, self reliance, self confidence and informal training allowing them to get a foot hold into mainstream training, education, culture and the economic life most of us take for granted. http://www.mongrel.org.uk About MediaShed: The MediaShed is the first "free-media" space to open in the east of England. It's a place where members can come hang out, learn, propose some training, create and propose new projects using free-media or show things they have made on one of our screening nights. The MediaShed is designed to be as open and accessible as possible, welcoming all. Free-media is best thought of as a means of doing art, making things or just saying what you want for little or no financial cost by using public domain software and recycled equipment. It is also about saying what you want "freely", using accessible media that can be taken apart and reused without unnecessary restrictions and controls - "free as in free speech". http://www.mediashed.org Interested: then Email: Harwood AT mediashed.org and we will pass the details on to Southend-on-sea BC + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Support Rhizome: buy a hosting plan from BroadSpire http://rhizome.org/hosting/ Reliable, robust hosting plans from $65 per year. Purchasing hosting from BroadSpire contributes directly to Rhizome's fiscal well-being, so think about about the new Bundle pack, or any other plan, today! About BroadSpire BroadSpire is a mid-size commercial web hosting provider. After conducting a thorough review of the web hosting industry, we selected BroadSpire as our partner because they offer the right combination of affordable plans (prices start at $14.95 per month), dependable customer support, and a full range of services. We have been working with BroadSpire since June 2002, and have been very impressed with the quality of their service. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4. From: Vicente Matallana <ube AT laagencia.org> Date: Oct 25, 2006 Subject: ARCO/BEEP NEW MEDIA ART AWARDS ARCO/BEEP NEW MEDIA ART AWARDS 2nd edition Conceded by BEEP, in collaboration with ARCO Worth 8.000 euros and 6.000 euros The goal of these awards is to advance the production and exhibition of New Media Art, and art linked to new technologies. Its purpose is to promote new high-tech art, and to foster communication between the manufacturers/creators of this new technology and those who create art. A natural collaboration, which will benefit and enrich both sides. There are two ACQUISITION PRIZES: 1) AT ARCO Prize: worth 8.000 euros. To be eligible, an artwork must be shown by a gallery at the 26th edition of ARCO, the International Contemporary Art Fair, in Madrid (15-19 February 2007), and must have a significant component involving new technology or electronic media. 2) OFF-ARCO Prize: worth 6.000 euros. Artworks presented by individual artists or collectives. The prizes will be awarded by an international jury of prestigious specialists. Registration form will be available from the 30th of October on the ARCO/BEEP NEW MEDIA ART Prize website http://www.arco.beep.es + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 5. From: atimko AT graystoneadv.com <atimko AT graystoneadv.com> Date: Oct 25, 2006 Subject: New Media Position SUNY Oswego SUNY Oswego's Communication Studies Department has a tenure track position at the assistant professor rank in the area of New Media. The ideal candidate would teach a combination of undergraduate and graduate courses, which will not only develop both beginning and advanced practical skills, but will also examine the theoretical dimensions of New Media. Committee work and advisement is expected. The successful candidate's degrees might be in any number of fields, but at least one degree should reflect a solid grounding in communication theory. A terminal degree is required. Successful candidates must be committed to teaching diverse students in a multicultural environment. The ideal candidate would have several years of teaching experience and a record of successful grant administration are desirable. For complete information about this position and application procedures, please go to: www.oswego.edu/vacancies. SUNY Oswego is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6. From: llhenzl AT wisc.edu <llhenzl AT wisc.edu> Date: Oct 26, 2006 Subject: Faculty Position in Digital Media FACULTY POSITION: DIGITAL MEDIA The Department of Communication Arts at the University of Wisconsin-Madison seeks a creative artist in digital media for the newly created Hamel Family Professorship in Communication Arts. Tenure-track, Assistant Professor position to begin Fall 2007. Develop and teach courses in the theory and practice of digital/new media. Preferred candidate should also possess skills in video production, editing, and post-production sound. MFA or advanced degree and national exhibition record required. See also http://commarts.wisc.edu. Submit curriculum vitae, letter detailing interests and capabilities, examples of creative work and/or relevant scholarly writings, and three letters of recommendation to Vance Kepley, Chair, Department of Communication Arts, University of Wisconsin, 821 University Ave., Madison, WI 53706. Deadline to assure consideration December 1, 2006. EOE/AA. Unless confidentiality is requested in writing, information regarding the applicants must be released upon request. Finalists cannot be guaranteed confidentiality. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 7. From: Stephanie Dinkins <sdink AT yahoo.com> Date: Oct 26, 2006 Subject: HISTORIAN OF CONTEMPORARY/MODERN ART Search, SUNY STONY BROOK HISTORIAN OF CONTEMPORARY/MODERN ART, THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT STONY BROOK. Open rank. For more information: http://www.art.sunysb.edu/# We seek an innovative scholar with emphasis on post-War art and a strong grounding in theory, criticism, and/or visual culture, PhD and a record of scholarship and teaching at levels appropriate to rank are expected. Start date August 2007. Application deadline: December 1, 2006. The State University of New York at Stony Brook is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer. Applications from women, people of color, individuals with disabilities, and Veterans are especially welcome. Please send letter of application, CV, selected publications, and names of three references (with mail and email addresses, plus phone numbers) to: Contemporary/Modern art Search Committee, Department of Art, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Staller Center, Stony Brook, NY 11794-5400. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome.org 2005-2006 Net Art Commissions The Rhizome Commissioning Program makes financial support available to artists for the creation of innovative new media art work via panel-awarded commissions. For the 2005-2006 Rhizome Commissions, eleven artists/groups were selected to create original works of net art. http://rhizome.org/commissions/ The Rhizome Commissions Program is made possible by support from the Jerome Foundation in celebration of the Jerome Hill Centennial, the Greenwall Foundation, the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, and the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs. Additional support has been provided by members of the Rhizome community. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 8. From: lvestal AT stanford.edu <lvestal AT stanford.edu> Date: Oct 24, 2006 Subject: Sliding Scale:Gail Wight exhibition FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 16 2006 Lisa Vestal, Publicist 650-725-3107, lvestal AT stanford.edu DIGITAL IMAGES AVAILABLE Sliding Scale: Gail Wight Stanford, CA-The Department of Art & Art History at Stanford University is pleased to present Sliding Scale: Gail Wight, an exhibition that opens November 7, on view through December 10, 2006 at the Thomas Welton Stanford Art Gallery where a reception will take place on November 10 with honored guest, Gail Wight. When conducting an experiment a scientist should always control as many variables as possible, reducing the object of the investigation to the one aspect she is seeking to understand. This insight has been the great strength of the scientific method; it has allowed enormous increases in our understanding of the world through the summation of millions of tiny investigations. As we have become increasingly aware in the last fifty years, however, conducting research at such a level of abstraction is also science?s most dangerous weakness. In ?Sliding Scale,? Gail Wight?s art playfully resists the dematerialization of the objects of scientific investigation. Mice eat through a representation of their genome, butterflies struggle to escape their pins, and beetles tell their stories. Wight?s art simultaneously takes on the two great flaws of abstract scientific thinking?oversimplification and loss of perspective. In Crossing a live mouse plays with a robotic one, and the viewer is left marveling at the incredible complexity of the living being. Recursive Mutations gives a muse the chance to redesign it own genome through its interaction with the paper it lived on. With humor, ?Sliding Scale? asks the viewer what has been lost in abstracting a mouse to its genes or to a mechanical prototype that replicates only some of its functions. As viewers zoom in and out with The Meaning of Miniscule they find that where they end up is not where they began. And Kings Play Cards reminds us all that no field, including science, is exempt from the lure of the hot new thing or the enticement of corporate dollars. Wight?s art prompts viewers to see the objects of scientific research and the larger field of science in a new and different light. Through ?Sliding Scale? Gail Wight will be adding her voice to the conference, "Imaging Environment: Maps, Models, Metaphors," November 8-10 at the Stanford Humanities Center, which brings together scholars from the sciences and the humanities to consider how the environment shapes how we study and use it. VISITOR INFORMATION: Thomas Welton Stanford Art Gallery is open Tuesday through Friday, 10 am ? 5 pm and Saturday and Sunday, 1-5 pm. Admission is free. The Gallery is located on the Stanford campus, off Palm Drive at 435 Lasuen Mall. Parking is free after 4 pm and all day on weekends. Information: 650-723-3404, www.art.stanford.edu + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 9. From: secondary.memory AT gmail.com <secondary.memory AT gmail.com> Date: Oct 24, 2006 Subject: Openlab 3 - Exhibition and 2 Events (Free) OPENLAB 3 Group Show, 4/11-11/11/2006 1-7pm Auto-Italia South London Gallery 82-86 Queens Road SE152QX Peckham, London Opening Event and Private View, 4/11/2006 4 -12 pm Closing Event, 11/11/2006 4-12 pm OpenLab is delighted to present OpenLab3, an group exhibition with an opening and closing event featuring musical performances by more than 20 artists and musicians of the OpenLab collective. OpenLab engages in the aesthetics and politics of Free Open Source Software Culture. Free Software Culture seeks to emphasise transparency of the creative process by making all stages of development available to others, enabling them to learn how the creation works and alter it for their own purposes. When this idea is applied to artistic practices, the boundaries between the artistic usage of software tools and their collaborative development become blurred. The workings of the artist's tools are exposed, and the artists are actively engaged in developing media technologies. They can modify them to suit their goals, rather than creating works by using existing tools that impose "their way of doing things" on the artwork. This group exhibition brings together interactive installations, sonic interventions, video works and animations which explore the audio-visual code of this network culture: computers start to paint pictures on their own, expose their internal circuits and "commit suicide"; birds will sing and fly around in multiple realities, the skylines of two cosmopolitan cities merge, language, meaning and time burst into fragments and recombine. The range of the combined works points to the strength of Open Source Culture â?? its increasing versatility as artistic playground essential to contemporary debates and its continued importance not just in the invention of new media realities but also in tackling themes of â??realâ?? time and space. The two music events feature sound and multimedia performances of artists who use and develop open-source tools such as PD, Supercollider, Processing and Fluxus. They will perform prepared sets and code their music live in various programing languages. Musicians will also experiment with a set of live instrument swapping. By exchanging PD-Patches, they will challenge each other in an uncharted space of sonic manipulation. The performances will span from excursions into the symphonica, experimental noise and soundscapes to electronica and beat-oriented minimal techno-sets. PARTICIPATING ARTISTS: Rob Canning, Chun Lee, Claude Heiland-Allen, Carl Forsell, Sabine Gottfried, Karsten Gebbert, Paul Webb, Rob Munro, Chiharu Kaido, Evan Raskob, U-Sun, Ryan Jordan, Oli Laruelle, Robert Atwood, Luke Jordan, Rene, Monica Subrotova & Daniel Kordik, Michael Woelkner, Andy Farnell, Martin Aaserud, Ryan Jordan & Rachel Horne, Dave Griffith & Alex McLean For more information please visit http://openlab.pawfal.org or contact Sabine Gottfried, sabine.gottfried AT gmail.com + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 10. From: mosaica AT yorku.ca <mosaica AT yorku.ca> Date: Oct 25, 2006 Subject: Mosaica-Call for projects 07 CALL FOR ONLINE PROJECTS FOR WWW. MOSAICA.CA Project Mosaica, a website devoted to contemporary Jewish culture online, is seeking projects from individuals or groups on the theme of Jews and Diaspora: Jewish Culture, Web Culture, New Culture. Once again, two 1,000 CAN $ production honoraria will be awarded to the successful candidates whose web projects address the possibilities of the virtual diaspora with this theme. CRITERIA FOR PROJECTS Projects should be innovative and address the visual possibilities of the web as well as contribute to an understanding of the multivalent nature, complexities, significance and changes in meaning of Diaspora or transnationalism. The call is intended to be as inclusive as possible: projects from all artistic disciplines are welcomed. All proposals must: * Provide a project description in 500 words including the following: a statement about the project?s relationship to Jews and Diaspora; why the web is a viable medium for the project; and an explanation of how the project will be sustainable beyond implementation. * Include a web-ready presentation * Include a CV * Include a selected portfolio of previous work in CD-R, DVD-R or video DVD (Region 1 compatible ) featuring not more than 3 images or 5 minutes video per project. * Proposals to be submitted in English or French, however we recognize that other languages may play a role in the final project. Innovative content and its adaptation to web aesthetics will be the primary consideration in the selection process. Artists will maintain copyright of their productions which will be disseminated by Mosaica on the site www.mosaica.ca and presented at public talks and screening(s).Submission material will not be returned. Applications must be submitted by December 1, 2006 Online applications are to be submitted to: mosaica AT yorku.ca Decision Date: Candidates will be notified by January 15, 2007 A condition of the honorarium is completion of the project by April 1, 2007 Mosaica: Jewish Culture, Web Culture, New Culture http://www.mosaica.ca/ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 11. From: Pau Alsina <palsinag AT uoc.edu> Date: Oct 26, 2006 Subject: :::::: new video-interviews in Artnodes ::::::: Artnodes publishes a new series of interviews with international experts in digital art and culture 20/10/2006.- Artnodes, the UOC?s internet space on the interrelations between art, science and technology, is to publish six new interviews with international experts on digital art, which are to remain on the website permanently. This series of interviews reflects on some of the hottest issues in digital art and culture, including surveillance technology, the effects of software on our daily lives and virtual reality communities. Barcelona On this occasion, the experts interviewed are Erkki Huhtamo, Andreas Broeckmann (artistic director of Transmediale), Alex Galloway, Jonah Brucker-Cohen, David Rokeby, and Marc Downie. These experts discuss issues such as the effects of software on our daily lives, the development of media archaeology, surveillance technology in artistic projects, physical toy interfaces linked to surveillance software, connected virtual reality communities and the creation of sound by virtual reality creatures. The interviews and videos, made by Pau Alsina, Alba Colombo and Pau Waelder, will remain on Artnodes permanently. Artnodes usually publishes documents to inspire theoretical reflection on or historical study of this field of interdisciplinary creativity. Available at: http://www.uoc.edu/artnodes/eng/ The Artnodes area Artnodes is an area at the Open University of Catalonia?s network dedicated to the interrelations of art, science and technology. The Artnodes area includes an academic journal, a specialist information and documentation portal and projects such as LABS or YASMIN in collaboration. Since 2003, it has organised face-to-face and virtual events relating to digital art and other intersections between art, science and technology. Best, Pau Alsina palsinag AT uoc.edu + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 12. From: marc <marc.garrett AT furtherfield.org> Date: Oct 27, 2006 Subject: 5+5=5. 5+5=5. 5 short movies by 5 film makers about 5 networked art projects. http://netartfilm.furtherfield.org Free Media - Mongrel Polyfaith - Chris Dooks Golden Shot (Revisited) - Simon Poulter Want and Need - C6 VisitorsStudio - Furtherfield 5 short movies by 5 film makers about 5 networked art projects exploring imaginative and critical approaches to social engagement. Furtherfield has commissioned 5 short movies about 5 UK-produced networked art projects which explore critical approaches to social engagement. These pieces offer alternative interfaces to the artworks and the every-day artistic practices of their producers. They introduce the motivations and social contexts of artists and artists' groups who are working with DIY approaches to digital technology and its culture, where medium and distribution channels merge. These movies each feature the concepts, contexts and techniques involved in the creation of five specific pieces of work. They include conversations between artists, audiences/participants and film- makers, talking on their own terms. ------------------------------------------------------------> Original concept and production Furtherfield, London, UK, 2006. In association with HTTP Gallery [House of Technologically Termed Praxis], London, UK. Made with the support of Stiftelsen Laangmanska Kulturfonden and Mejan Labs in Stockholm, Sweden - Arts Council of England and Awards for All in UK. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 13. From: Sean Capone <sean AT positrongraphic.com>, patrick lichty <voyd AT voyd.com>, Jim Andrews <jim AT vispo.com>, Geert Dekkers <geert AT nznl.com>, T.Whid <twhid AT twhid.com> Date: Oct 21-25, 2006 Subject: On 8-Bit Aesthetics: Hackers or Hacks? +Sean Capone posted: + Hello. Without being *too* confrontational, I would like to hear some opinions weighed in about the 'scene' of 8-bit, hack-art & machinima art and why it's worthy of so much attention. Honestly, I've tried to wrap my head around it and I'm just not getting it, especially in response to a) the recent front-page post on Rhizome on Paul Davis and b) Cory Arcangel's recent show at Team Gallery. While I won't say that 'most new media art is crap' like the recent post-discussion, my reaction to these works is dismissive at least, negative at worst. I'll ask the worst question one can ask: "Why is this 'Art'?" These works seem a bit more of an exploitation of an existing technology platform in order to fetishize a certain in-vogue nostalgia about this time period (the 80s) rather than anything about "computer art which is aesthetically aware of both its own identity and the underlying process which supports it." This seems to have a very limited agency. Why the Nintendo in particular, why not, say, the Amiga, which was a platform more widely embraced at the time by videoartist-programmer-demoscene people during the same time period? The urge to "(release) bits from their imprisonment within the restrictive, limiting boundaries of corporate software applications" is amusing but ultimately not very creative, is it; perhaps even reactionary? While these systems may certainly have potential as A/V devices, they *were* designed as video-game platforms; to invest it with liberatory hacker activism (activision?) is to give it more importance than it perhaps deserves, and serves only as a circular, self-legitmizing exercise. The gimmick, in other words, seems to come before the concept. I feel compelled to compare the silliness of the wholesale sampling and re-presentation in these works with, say, the Japanese group Delaware's highly entertaining, beautiful and original installations and performances that are inspired by the limitations of low-resolution electronic displays. Or on another level, Paul Chan's engaging, poetic and politically conscious animation video works. The difference being, something new is being created, not as nostalgia, not as a prank, but as a creative praxis. So basically, what do we take away from this work once the nostalgia factor seems too distant or antiquated, or not really that clever to start with? Davis speaks of the "intentionality of artist(s) who seek to engage the computing process at a fundamental level", you mean, like artists who write their own code to create their own electronic spaces without the safety net of pre-digested consumerist codes and signs, or at least is engaged in some type of dialogue with them on a critical or aesthetic level? Sampling/hacking culture and re-presenting it is not the issue here...or not the only issue anyway. Thanks for letting me rant--hope for productive discussion. +patrick lichty replied: + As someone who's striving to define a broad methodology of "Digital Minimalism", in context of my own cultural, critical, and aesthetic research, in context with others' work as a set of trends (8-bit/neo-retro, Digital NeoPop, DM, and so on,) I'd like to venture a few comments. <snip> > I'll ask the worst question one can ask: "Why is this 'Art'?" ************************************************************** Without sounding flip, I'd say that because a lot of people have said it is. And mainly because people like Arcangel have taken a quirky, affable demeanor and overlaid it onto a very smart contextual strategy that ties in with the emergence of so many aspects of digital culture that have become widespread. Also because there are systems in place to make media art objects that are instantly recognizeable and can enter the gallery system of economic exchange and collections. Also, if you believe Yoko Ono (from the same issue of Contemporary that Cory's in) that there are finally digital aesthetics that are stable and don't change, and can be specialized in for a long time. Is it ironic that some of the current digital contemporaries are working in systems that don't change? Not on your life. I think there's a lot of friction about 'craft', that is, the amount of work placed in a work. For example, when Cory and I did respective halves of a semester - long residency at the University of Akron last year, he had an interesting slogan. "Do as little as humanly possible", and I think this had to do with recontextualizing a cultural artifact and making it an art object, which is exactly what Kac, Debord, and Duchamp did so well. For him, it's a frustration with media art, and for me, it's been a break with technological determinism in New Media. That is, feeling that one has to use the latest and greatest technology because it's also in vogue. Slocum is a supreme craftsman. He knows the Atari 2600 kernel as well as anyone. Where Arcangel get in with context and personality, Slocum does it with virtuosity and referral to the culture of the 2600, retro, pop, I'd say perhaps even false nostalgia. Both are really good at what they do, they made the contacts, people believe in what they're doing, and there you have high art. ****************************************** These works seem a bit more of an exploitation of an existing technology platform in order to fetishize a certain in-vogue nostalgia about this time period (the 80s) rather than anything about "computer art which is aesthetically aware of both its own identity and the underlying process which supports it." ****************************************** But the contemporary art world doesn't identify with that. Actually, they don't care that much about it except in that it might have a somewhat shamanic appeal at times. They want to get something that both exploits its media and methods deeply and fits lock-step with the progression of the Western art historical tradition.. For example, Murakami cites classical Japanese culture, colonized by American pop culture. We love the manga eye, and it even got on a Vuitton Bag. But he also takes and makes odd garage kits that he insinuates into pop culture as well. That's interesting. Back to the self-referentiality of the computational process, except for bitforms, who cares about that in an art context, and still Steve presents very formal pieces from his artists, which gets the collectors. But what about Warhol? He sold a nostalgia for American Pop & Mass Culture like there was no tomorrow, and we're still recovering. But back to your idea here, much of what's on the wall has to do as much with the title and the colophon as the process, and that's back to context. Forgive me if I'm not making the connection; but I get the feeling that you're looking for recognition for works that deeply explore the computational process as method, and I honestly think that's outside the context of most of the contemporary art world. *********************************************** This seems to have a very limited agency. *********************************************** Sure. It limits your discourse. Reassures people where you're going to be in ten years, and gives them some reassurance in investing in your objects. ************************************************** Why the Nintendo in particular, why not, say, the Amiga, which was a platform more widely embraced at the time by videoartist-programmer-demoscene people during the same time period? ************************************************** Different sectors of culture. Tetris and Super Mario are the two most widely known games of all time, and were both on Nintendo. Nintendo is the platform that got the game industry out of the post 2600- crash. It has nothing to do with the art community, it has to do with the mass community, because that's what more people are going to identify with. *************************************************** The urge to "(release) bits from their imprisonment within the restrictive, limiting boundaries of corporate software applications" is amusing but ultimately not very creative, is it; perhaps even reactionary? *************************************************** Actually, it is. Read some of the interviews with Cory. For him, it's "Beyond punk"... Part of that is pure rhetoric, too. *************************************************** While these systems may certainly have potential as A/V devices, they *were* designed as video-game platforms; to invest it with liberatory hacker activism (activision?) is to give it more importance than it perhaps deserves, and serves only as a circular, self-legitmizing exercise. *************************************************** Is the platform that important, as long as it communicates message and intent? For Paul, it's usually the Atari that forms a lot of his cultural context, and for Cory, it's largely the Nintendo. It's what shaped them. But, is repurposing a game platform as an art one like calling a urinal a fountain? I think there's a different gesture here, but similarities worth watching. ************************************************** The gimmick, in other words, seems to come before the concept. I feel compelled to compare the silliness of the wholesale sampling and re-presentation in these works with, say, the Japanese group Delaware's highly entertaining, beautiful and original installations and performances that are inspired by the limitations of low-resolution electronic displays. Or on another level, Paul Chan's engaging, poetic and politically conscious animation video works. The difference being, something new is being created, not as nostalgia, not as a prank, but as a creative praxis. *************************************************** Exactly, context and intent go hand in hand and each of the artists has them. Cory, Paperrad, Paul, and that clade just clothe their work in a poppy irony and slacker package that fits with the current obsession of youth and the crossing of nostalgia for the early gen-x'ers youth. It's all pretty tight. ************************************************** So basically, what do we take away from this work once the nostalgia factor seems too distant or antiquated, or not really that clever to start with? *************************************************** There's a lot that's tying in with history here, and think of it like performance and entertainment as well, and less as comp sci. It's fun, and there is a real cultural undertone in the gallery at times that is a backlash from the uber-dry 80's and 90's. I think that there are people who actually want to have fun in the gallery; to be amused and then appreciate a sense of formalism, which Cory has in his pixelated stuff. It's a pixilated landscape you can put on your wall made by a sl/h/acker kid who wants to mess around with the stuff he grew up with while being cognizant of contemporary art politics. Whenever I was in New York, Cory was always asking me how to get that break, as I'm sure he was asking everyone. He was busting tail. *************************************************** Davis speaks of the "intentionality of artist(s) who seek to engage the computing process at a fundamental level", you mean, like artists who write their own code to create their own electronic spaces without the safety net of pre-digested consumerist codes and signs, or at least is engaged in some type of dialogue with them on a critical or aesthetic level? *************************************************** But this isn't what they're doing. They're playing with art history and cultural effects/affects and weaving it into a contextual praxis. In many ways, it goes back to Duchamp, Nauman and high modernism, which secretly, a lot of contemporary at has not let go of, and probably won't for a good while, at least until the collectors die... In my opinion, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that you're looking for an art that operates under a different operational framework than what you're looking for, and that puzzles you. I think that what you're looking for is something that's more likely in an ISEA or SIGGRAPH, which are niche cultures. In response to Paul Chan, who is also in the current Contemporary, it's intent, context, and lineage again, as Obrist asked if he had taken a nod from Brackhage (historical grounding - right there.). My read is that all of the artists (and I love Delaware, by the way, need to remember them in the DM revisions) are operating in their own spheres, aligning themselves with certain currents (I seem to have fallen in with much of what remains of Fluxus from time to time), and doing it pretty well. What do you think? +Jim Andrews replied: + That's a really interesting post. Thanks. I'm curious about your def of "technological determinism" as the "feeling that one has to use the latest and greatest technology because it's also in vogue." How does that sort of def relate to the sort of def by daniel chandler we see at http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/tecdet/tdet01.html of "technological determinism"? i also wrote a little bit about it at http://vispo.com/writings/essays/mcluhana.htm . <snip> +patrick lichty replied: + Good point - my def isn't exactly 'correct' in that in addition to Chandler's more traditional definition, I often mix in a bit of the 'panic' stance that the perceived relevance of tech art is often defined by the currentness of the technology. In many ways, I've heard people (almost) sneer at the idea of static or obsolete technology platforms. It's basic technofetishism for novel devices, that's all. Consumption, fear of obsolescence driven by the tech consumer sector, and desire of the new and shiny (why the hell else am I trying to hack one of those new Optimus OLED keyboards?). If you might have a better term, I'm all ears, no sarcasm intended. But I'm tired of it being assumed that I'm supposed to get the new machine every 18 months, and get the $1500 (or so) software upgrade so that I'm somehow 'current' in terms of techne. That's just one concept, but I think that in the long term, it's just unsustainable on so many levels. And, there is all this amazing techno-detritus (physical and cultural) which we can collage, montage, pastiche, and recontextualize. And, when I realized in 2000 or so that it isn't about the latest tech UNLESS that's the context you're critiquing, and I understood the cultural frame from the onset, I've felt this urge to inform my work historically, pare down the systems, look at how media and object can converge without sacrificing either. So from that, I've really gotten into simpler works with tighter contexts and very clear intentions and likewise clear historical references (many works; some I'm just going off, but you have to do that as a palate cleanser). +Jim Andrews replied: + I think your link between 'technological determinism' and the "feeling that one has to use the latest and greatest technology because it's also in vogue," is interesting. They are linked, it seems to me, though they are not the same thing. Daniel Chandler says "Just like these other deterministic theories, technological determinism seeks to explain social and historical phenomena in terms of one principal or determining factor. It is a doctrine of historical or causal primacy" ( http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/tecdet/tdet01.html ). As Chandler points out or implies, those who have labelled Marshall McLuhan's work, for instance, as 'technological determinism' have done so, in part, in a gesture of critique: the label tacitly critques the work as disproportionately emphasizing the role of technology concerning "historical or causal primacy". Was McLuhan a 'technological determinist'? The short answer is that McLuhan was concerned with exploring the ways in which culture and history are determined by technology, not the ways in which they aren't; he may have overstated his case, but has posed interesting questions. The term 'technological determinism', like other 'determinisms,' is a term fashioned to reject the work so labelled. Nonetheless, we do experience pressures to use "the latest and greatest technology", whether it's getting a new computer or using recent tech in our art or whatever. For instance, commercial multimedia developers find it very difficult to pitch Director projects to business clients. The clients want Flash, not Director. Because of the market penetration of the Flash plugin versus the Shockwave plugin, primarily. Also because of the uncertainty concerning the status of Director as a continuing development platform ('is it dead yet?'). And so on. As a result of the difficulties commercial multimedia developers experience pitching Director projects, the pace of development of Director slows, and Flash begins to catch up with Director concerning many features. And then even in the art world, the credibility of Director versus Flash projects comes into question regardless of the quality of the apps. Flash reaches more computers than does Director. Because, until relatively recently, the Shockwave installation was around 6 or 7 Mb whereas the Flash plugin installation required only a, what, 200 to 400 Kb download. The Shockwave plugin is now only 2 Mb. But it was 6 or 7 at a crucial time when bandwidth issues were decisive. Also, of course, Flash allows developers to do more with less programming knowledge. That also has been decisive in reaching the multimedia developer audience. Flash's strength compared with Director has been its populist approach. Populist concerning both the audience and the developer community. Its weaknesses, relative to Director, concern its slowness, its less featureful state, and its relative lack of granularity. Commercial multimedia developers creating web-based content have pretty much been forced by economic necessity to use Flash rather than Director. They haven't been in an economic position to be able to choose. This is a type of 'determinism'. The market is determining what tools they have to use to pay the bills, not their choice as to which tool they would like to use. So already we have something a little bit different from 'technological determinism' because we see that the market is very active in determining the technology, rather than a situation where the technology enjoys "causal primacy". <snip> +Sean Capone replied:+ Patrick: Thanks for your considered & frank response. This is the type of answer I was hoping for when I capitalized 'Art'; in other words, "why is this work relevant as objects within the system of production of the art world," quite a distinction from 'art' as a personal creative act.. However I remain unconvinced on several fronts. ***************************************************************** >...he had an interesting slogan: "Do as little as humanly possible"... ***************************************************************** Yeah, it shows. The question is, is this in itself an ironic statement against 'operationality'? Or does it demonstrate that the chosen method of production doesn't have that much to offer in the first place? I do believe that to be a self-styled new media artist or critical practioneer relies on a built-in sense of technological determinism to begin with. I mean, it's just naive not to assume some measure of complicity. By this I mean that, technology is a craft, culture and society is heavily invested in it, these objects are a source of fascination and a means of production and to some extent we acknowledge that we all 'understand' technology and that the genie is not going back into the bottle. While the line from Duchamp to Warhol to Arcangel et. al. is somewhat legitimate, it is not smooth or reliable. To put it bluntly, Duchamp and Warhol were actually doing pretty different things at key moments in art & cultural history. You can't merely replicate their 'automatic' processes at thi! s point. And Warhol was many things, but he was certainly not lazy about his craft. He did cast an unfortunate spell across future schools of art practice, however: by appearing to do nothing (by becoming purely automatic), one can become as big a celebrity as the celebrity culture one's images are about. ************************************************************** > Both are really good at what they do, they made the contacts, people > believe in what they're doing, and there you have high art. ************************************************************** Yup. Until the collectors realize that they aren't *just* purchasing 'affability' or a personality but objects. This seems a good place to insert a discussion on the ephemerality of New Media Art collecting.. ***************************************************************** > They want to get something that both > exploits its media and methods deeply and fits lock-step with the > progression of the Western art historical tradition.. For example, > Murakami cites classical Japanese culture, colonized by American pop > culture. ***************************************************************** Yeah, but unless I'm mistaken, Murakami samples it & injects his own exhuberance/cynicism and artistic labor (or that of his 'factory workers')--& does not simply tweak someone else's manga characters? I hate to get into a discussion about Originality vs. Creative Paucity but, well, there it is. ******************************************************************* > Back to the self-referentiality of the computational process, except > for bitforms, who cares about that in an art context, and still Steve > presents very formal pieces from his artists, which gets the > collectors... Forgive me if I'm not making the connection; but I get the > feeling that you're looking for recognition for works that deeply > explore the computational process as method, and I honestly think > that's > outside the context of most of the contemporary art world. ****************************************************************** That's actually not what I was suggesting (a la Casey Reas, Bitforms et al). The quote about 'artists involved with computational process' was from the Paul Davis quote on Rhizome's front page. But out of context with the art world? I don't know about that--Arcangel's work is heavily invested in its own process and presence as a (at the time) cutting-edge piece of consumer electronic culture. The art world has accepted this process-oreinted model within Media Arts, I do believe. But the production is a less-than-mordant cut-and-paste approach (slacker postmodernism?)as opposed to the lineage of past practicioneers of hack/electronic/computation art, since the sixties at least: Nam Jun Paik, the Vasulkas, Dan Sandin, etc (or more recent artists & theorists like Alan Rath, George LeGrady, Lynn Hershman & other 'New Image' artists)...this seems like a more relevant pre-to-post digital lineage to me than that of Warhol, Duchamp etc. HOWEVER back to the discussion, as far as their currency as 'Art' within the system of objects within the art world, these aesthetic experiments seem wholly relevant to the degree that much Art operates with fairly open ends anyway. Installation, conceptualism, Media Art left the question of 'Art' hanging open, dangling, questions asked but unanswered, art as process, flow, social experiment, event...art that moves beyond representation, in other words, into the experiential. > *********************************************************** > It limits your discourse. Reassures people where you're going > to > be in ten years, and gives them some reassurance in investing in your > objects. ************************************************************ Would seem to be the opposite to me--a limited discourse seems less reassuring lest it reveal itself as a micro-trend. Ehh, I'll take your word for it. ***************************************** > It > has nothing to do with the art community, it has to do with the mass > community, because that's what more people are going to identify with. ****************************************** Sure. Curators & gallery owners fill their shows with the mass community, but that's not their target audience, is it? It has everything to do with the art community. The art community (purchasers, collectors) seem to rely on that sense of youthful zeitgeist, as distanced from it as they actually are, because that's the narrative of the art world since the 80's (at least definitively). ******************************************************** But, is repurposing a game platform as an art one like > calling a urinal a fountain? I think there's a different gesture > here, > but similarities worth watching. > ************************************************** Yes, with apprehension. > *************************************************** > Exactly, context and intent go hand in hand and each of the artists > has > them. Cory, Paperrad, Paul, and that clade just clothe their work in > a > poppy irony and slacker package that fits with the current obsession > of > youth and the crossing of nostalgia for the early gen-x'ers youth. > It's > all pretty tight. > It's a pixilated landscape you can put on your wall made by a > sl/h/acker > kid who wants to mess around with the stuff he grew up with while > being > cognizant of contemporary art politics. > *************************************************** Yup, it's that great "I can do that too" feeling that engenders a cuddly feeling of tribal belonging...but without actually doing it, or doing it poorly, because the "youth-obsessed" codes are easily recognized and recapitulated without inquiry. (Now I feel like a bit of a reactionary, like one of those critics who didn't get Action Painting or whatever). It's all pretty tight, indeed...to the point where it almost reads as a contrived authenticity, and already seems a bit dusty...or maybe I just wouldn't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member. There goes *my* art career... ************************************************************** > But this isn't what they're doing. They're playing with art history > and > cultural effects/affects and weaving it into a contextual praxis. In > many ways, it goes back to Duchamp, Nauman and high modernism, ************************************************************** Yah, although I think the lineage starts a bit later, (see above) or at least the line isn't so smooth from Duchamp's act, taking place during manifesto-oriented High Art Culture (Dada, Surrealism etc) during the swing of Modernism from Europe to the States, to those taking place in contemporary culture, adrift on an ocean of techno-consumer waste instead of historical European tradition... Bla bla bla. In the visual arts, "static art objects are a historical given...Does [interactive art] even have a place within the art world? The grand historical narratives have come to an end, now, 'to be a member of the art world is to have learned what it means to participate in the discourse of reasons of one's culture."--Regina Cornwell. *************************************************************** > In my opinion, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that you're looking for > an art that operates under a different operational framework than what > you're looking for, and that puzzles you. I think that what you're > looking for is something that's more likely in an ISEA or SIGGRAPH, > which are niche cultures. *************************************************************** While I *do* work regularly in the field of 'high-tech' graphics, I am less invested in this world than you might think. I haven't attended Siggraph in almost ten years. I *am* looking for an electronic art that, quite the opposite to your suggestion, does not exist solely to pose statements or congratulate itself about its own techn(o)ntology. (How's that for a great artword?). To this degree, making a piece of self-conscious, visibly low-tech Nintendo art has a closer resemblance to a glamorous HDRI rendered Pixar creation than might appear: both are hopelessly enamored with its own reflection, and exist as little more than surface affectation. I *will* cite one of Cory's pieces that I adore: his Quicktime visualization of the contents of his hard-drive as multi-scalar pattern noise--that piece definitely got to me as a piece which was...well, an Object, conscious of but transcendant of it own Objecthood--you know what I mean? ******************************* > What do you think? ******************************* I think you are on the effin' money but could try to place this genre more within a critical context of digital, video & moving image arts, especially within post-80s New Media discourse...it's time to let Warhol & Duchamp off the hook as justifications for torpor and naked theft, or as Dan Clowes satirized it, the old 'tampon-in-a-teacup' trick. Why shouldn't artists have to work? +Geert Dekkers replied: + Just a quick note -- and just on the first two sections underneath. Personally, when considering Cory Archangel, I can only recall two or three objects I really like, and think are quite important. The quicktime work "data diaries" is indeed one of them, "Super Mario Clouds" is another. The link is clear -- from 60s/70s minimalism and straight on from there. The works are produced in context with art objects already circulating within the art community, as part of an ongoing dialogue. The examples I mentioned are not only bringing 60s/70s minimalism aesthetic up to date, but also letting us (well, me at least) see the 60s/70s minimalism in a new light. Apart from that, the artist Cory Archangel is important because he engages in the art community. This is his goal: ?My goal was to be considered an artist, not a computer artist, to have the computer considered in a gallery context,? Arcangel says. ?Strip away the video game part, strip away the hacking, and essentially what I?m doing is minimalist video art.? http://www.oberlin.edu/alummag/winter2004/feat_newmedia.html Of course all this doesn't mean I'm "right". In other words, doesn't mean that the art community or the society as a whole will share my opinion in the long run. We'll just have to wait and see. And as for the stress on "craft" - there are a great number of art objects produced and immersed into the art community (and I dont think that either Duchamp or Warhol are good examples) that are low tech and/or require very little effort to produce. Its obvious that this is not a criterium for their importance. So why should you ever considering entering this into the discussion? +T.Whid replied: + It should also be pointed out that Cory's current show at Team doesn't have anything to do with 8-bit. See for yourself here: <http://www.teamgal.com/arcangel/06show/index.html> Cory was the poster boy for 8-bit in the art world, but, like any other decent artist (especially young artist), he's exploring new ideas. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 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 Marisa Olson (marisa AT rhizome.org). ISSN: 1525-9110. Volume 11, number 41. 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. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + |
-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 |