i'm a bit concerned

On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, David Goldschmidt wrote:

> for the most part, its not the artists that are slinging such mean-spirited remarks. more often than not its just fools with opinions but no ability to create anything themselves.

Thanks for that idiotic categorization–were you talking about yourself?
Appropriation of other people's work is not 'creativity'.

Is that 'meanness' that you speak of that some people won't
pamper your baby-impulses and attempts to pass every single
shit-idea passing through your brain as 'great art'?

> i truly care about the newmedia art community …

Not another one. You don't even care about yourself.

> and i think that the werks you guys are creating are truly remarkable.

Aw. You guys rule. can I be one of yous?

> but somethimes when i see all of this meanness … i wonder if net.art
> will ever achieve greatness.

No, it won't. Now get over yourself.
This isn't kindergarten. Creativity is not about 'achieving greatness'.

> i have this fear that newmedia art may become impotent (like the
"underground" comics of the sixties and seventies).

It already is. Killed in its crib.

Terrence writes;

If you block it might be less mean. In regards to the potencies of new media
art are the noise posts a threat? Me thinks not. Could they not be or are
they not possibly 'the clamorous voice of the impotent'? If so, then are
their outlandish posts a manner of their empowerment or potency? Their
unabashed manner is, while unconventional in terms of new media, basically
harmless. Does this mean they are impotent or just mean because the are
acting out in some unconventional underground disenfranchised way? Perhaps
you are taking their fruitless banter too seriously. After all when other
medias get boring e-chatter is rather enlivening when you realize it
somewhat entertaining despite being really tiresome. I suppose one could
desperately try to unravel some thread of intelligence or pluck some truth
from their vitreous humor if you have nothing better to do. When you think
of it what artists don't seem mean to someone somewhere for some obscure
reason or not? It is possible that some artists quietly move ahead by more
then their creative merits would allow and there is nothing new about that.
Who knows? there might be some future reward for these e-mean people. At
least their active informal diologue is proof of an informal yet very active
new media form.

T.

>From: "David Goldschmidt" <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: "David Goldschmidt" <[email protected]>
>To: <[email protected]>
>Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: i'm a bit concerned
>Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 22:57:18 -0400
>
>i can't keep up with the rhizome listserv everyday so i may be wrong about
>this … but it seems to me that the list has become very mean lately.
>
>for the most part, its not the artists that are slinging such mean-spirited
>remarks. more often than not its just fools with opinions but no ability
>to create anything themselves. they seem more interested in being "king"
>of the list (whatever that means) instead of encouraging/supporting
>newmedia art as an emerging discipline. i mean, they don't even begin
>their own threads … they just rip others. what cowards!
>
>i truly care about the newmedia art community … and i think that the
>werks you guys are creating are truly remarkable. but somethimes when i
>see all of this meanness … i wonder if net.art will ever achieve
>greatness. i have this fear that newmedia art may become impotent (like
>the "underground" comics of the sixties and seventies).
>
>david goldschmidt
>
>
>
>david goldschmidt
>
>
>
>





_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx