Re: [thingist] For the Record

On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Peter von Brandenburg wrote:

> – however my part of the thread (which I am not attempting to ascribe to you)
> is to explore where authorship resides in a collective, self-organizing
> structure conceivably made up of as many random sub-elements as authored
> sub-elements.

I am sorry. This is not what the thread is 'about'.
There is no 'self-organizing' structure involved either.
Humans are very far from such.

> comments that contexts change (echoed in Ricardo's linked essay), even if you
> could not claim "authorship" at the time, given the current critical landscape,
> you could as well claim it now (or not).

Not really.

> > 4) I see TT more in the tradition of self organizing art groups. In my
> > opinion that excludes most of the business models that apply to Rhizome. In
> > their defense I also have to say, that when you go out to get funding these
> > days you quickly realize that funders now like to see these kind of business
> > activities. They will tell you to increase your membership, become
> > "sustainable" by making some money of your "constituents," and so on. In
> > other words, institutionalize or die.
>
> Thus the inherent contradiction TT must live under.

Certainly. That is what makes a 'good' administrator: one who can
overcome all of the above. Why is it that we are asked to accept a not
so well done job–under the premise 'it's difficult?!' Of course it's
difficult. If one wants to make big dents, one has to work
rather hard.

What's worse, in such light, M. Tribe becomes a muppet for these
agendas, and thusly 'betrays' the 'community' by subjugating or
attempting to their 'work' to such agendas. Mind you, this is not
a 'personal' attack against M. Tribe, but rather it should be becoming
somewhat apparent at least that anyone in such a position has certain
responsibilities, and yes, that certain abilities must be present
in the individual to do these things. If one wants to be cutting edge
new media revolutionary, why doesn't one come up with the innovative
SOLUTIONS?! This is_ the 'value' of such
an individual: someone who in situations is capable of intelligent
action and Beuys' 'social sculpture' was at least an attempt(
since I don't wish to enter into discussions about it) on his behalf
of such action. What's more he was capable_ of it, due to inner
capacities of his individuality.

Unfortunately, this is not what M. Tribe is doing, and one fails to
'excuse him' on grounds of supposed 'difficulties'. It would seem that
most of you fancy that 'trying' things that appear 'important'
somehow justifies lack of responsibility, or even that one is
attempting to fit in shoes that do not fit.

More, attempting to present itself as having the abilities of
a Beuys. Ahem.

But then again, Mark is not a 'singularity'–rather it's a disease
of many of current 2x and xy eastern and western 'artwork'
to cut & paste, appropriate, thieve etc etc. passive voyerism.

Which is what Picabia really_ addressed among other things.
Madre's post was very sideways'ly and poorly intended, but on target,
actually.


`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42