between the "a" and the "t"

Question to Rhizome,

Since Rhizome is not a rhizome anymore, if the New Museum is taking
over the ARTBASE, does this mean that all artists are being collected
by the New Museum? Are these pieces going into their permanent
collection? What will the relationship be, if any, between the New
Museum and artists? Wouldn't artists have to sign a copyright (or
copyleft) agreement with them?

Just asking.


On Saturday, Sep 27, 2003, at 11:19 America/New_York, Curt Cloninger
wrote:

> Hi everybody who reads rhizome raw,
>
> I just have to say that the new banner "rhizome.org –> at the new
> museum" is grossly oxymoronic. A rhizome has no central node. That's
> the famous point. You can't have a rhizome "at" anywhere. I'm not
> even sure you can have a ".org" at anywhere. Are the .org
> administrative duties housed within the New Museum org chart? Is the
> .org site server hardware housed within the new museum building?
>
> In any other community, me pointing this out would just be semantic
> nit-picking, but the whole ethos of this community (although it's
> always been grossly NYC-centric) is virtuality and world-wide-ness.
> The new site banner is antithetical to this ethos.
>
> Maybe rhizomatic strucutres are overly idealistic to begin with. The
> physical network may allow it, but human's simply can't
> paradigmatically accept it and fit it into the rest of their
> hierarchized world.
>
> Or maybe it just played out that way in this one instance.
>
> Or maybe the banner simply needs to be changed to something more
> accurate like:
> "rhizome.org –> largely funded and run by the new museum"
>
> I'm not trying to dredge up the old anti-kapitalistik stone-throwing.
> I don't have any intrinsic beef with hierarchy or making money. The
> new partnership may prove to be the best tihng for rhizome since
> sliced bacon. I'm just pointing out that the new site banner don't
> make no sense.
>
> humbly,
> curt
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

Hi Liza –

I think there has been a misunderstanding – the New Museum is not
taking over the ArtBase. Works in the ArtBase are not becoming part of
the New Museum's collection. Rhizome.org is now affiliated with the New
Museum, meaning they provide us with office space and administrative
support and we plan to work together on exhibitions and events, but
Rhizome remains an independent organizational entity with the same
mission, core principles and programs as before. Hope that clears up
your query.

Very best, Rachel


On Saturday, September 27, 2003, at 04:59 PM, Liza Sabater wrote:

> Question to Rhizome,
>
> Since Rhizome is not a rhizome anymore, if the New Museum is taking
> over the ARTBASE, does this mean that all artists are being collected
> by the New Museum? Are these pieces going into their permanent
> collection? What will the relationship be, if any, between the New
> Museum and artists? Wouldn't artists have to sign a copyright (or
> copyleft) agreement with them?
>
> Just asking.
>
>
> On Saturday, Sep 27, 2003, at 11:19 America/New_York, Curt Cloninger
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everybody who reads rhizome raw,
>>
>> I just have to say that the new banner "rhizome.org –> at the new
>> museum" is grossly oxymoronic. A rhizome has no central node. That's
>> the famous point. You can't have a rhizome "at" anywhere. I'm not
>> even sure you can have a ".org" at anywhere. Are the .org
>> administrative duties housed within the New Museum org chart? Is the
>> .org site server hardware housed within the new museum building?
>>
>> In any other community, me pointing this out would just be semantic
>> nit-picking, but the whole ethos of this community (although it's
>> always been grossly NYC-centric) is virtuality and world-wide-ness.
>> The new site banner is antithetical to this ethos.
>>
>> Maybe rhizomatic strucutres are overly idealistic to begin with. The
>> physical network may allow it, but human's simply can't
>> paradigmatically accept it and fit it into the rest of their
>> hierarchized world.
>>
>> Or maybe it just played out that way in this one instance.
>>
>> Or maybe the banner simply needs to be changed to something more
>> accurate like:
>> "rhizome.org –> largely funded and run by the new museum"
>>
>> I'm not trying to dredge up the old anti-kapitalistik stone-throwing.
>> I don't have any intrinsic beef with hierarchy or making money. The
>> new partnership may prove to be the best tihng for rhizome since
>> sliced bacon. I'm just pointing out that the new site banner don't
>> make no sense.
>>
>> humbly,
>> curt
>> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
>> -> post: [email protected]
>> -> questions: [email protected]
>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
>> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>> +
>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>> Membership Agreement available online at
>> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

Hi Curt:


I hear your point about the apparent contradiction of having a location
attached to our logo on our homepage. Our programs are rhizomatic
(decentralized, distributed, grassroots), but they are supported by a
nonprofit organization that has an office (not a distributed virtual
office but an actual little room) and a small staff (so small that
we're really more of a collective node than a distributed network of
individuals). This small nonprofit is now affiliated with the New
Museum, but our programs and the Rhizome community remain globally
dispersed and rhizomatic in nature. This affiliation won't change our
mission, but it will help ensure our ability to continue to fulfill it,
so we wanted to acknowledge the New Museum's support in a very
prominent way.

As for the NYC-centric bit, I actually keep tabs on the demographics of
Rhizome editorial projects (especially, for obvious reasons, Digest and
Net Art News) and there is not a heavy bias towards NYC. There are a
lot of New Yorkers on Raw, and Francis and I live and work here, but I
don't think "grossly NYC-centric" is a fair assessment.


Very best,

Rachel


On Saturday, September 27, 2003, at 11:19 AM, Curt Cloninger wrote:

> Hi everybody who reads rhizome raw,
>
> I just have to say that the new banner "rhizome.org –> at the new
> museum" is grossly oxymoronic. A rhizome has no central node. That's
> the famous point. You can't have a rhizome "at" anywhere. I'm not
> even sure you can have a ".org" at anywhere. Are the .org
> administrative duties housed within the New Museum org chart? Is the
> .org site server hardware housed within the new museum building?
>
> In any other community, me pointing this out would just be semantic
> nit-picking, but the whole ethos of this community (although it's
> always been grossly NYC-centric) is virtuality and world-wide-ness.
> The new site banner is antithetical to this ethos.
>
> Maybe rhizomatic strucutres are overly idealistic to begin with. The
> physical network may allow it, but human's simply can't
> paradigmatically accept it and fit it into the rest of their
> hierarchized world.
>
> Or maybe it just played out that way in this one instance.
>
> Or maybe the banner simply needs to be changed to something more
> accurate like:
> "rhizome.org –> largely funded and run by the new museum"
>
> I'm not trying to dredge up the old anti-kapitalistik stone-throwing.
> I don't have any intrinsic beef with hierarchy or making money. The
> new partnership may prove to be the best tihng for rhizome since
> sliced bacon. I'm just pointing out that the new site banner don't
> make no sense.
>
> humbly,
> curt
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

Thanks Rachel,

I'm just (nit-)picking on the illogical use of the word "at" in the
masthead. Rhizome could still prominently ackowledge the New Museum's
support in the masthead by rewording it so that it doesn't say a
rhizome is at someplace. But maybe I'm just a grammar nazi.

peace,
curt



At 11:31 AM -0400 9/30/03, Rachel Greene wrote:
>Hi Curt:
>
>
>I hear your point about the apparent contradiction of having a
>location attached to our logo on our homepage. Our programs are
>rhizomatic (decentralized, distributed, grassroots), but they are
>supported by a nonprofit organization that has an office (not a
>distributed virtual office but an actual little room) and a small
>staff (so small that we're really more of a collective node than a
>distributed network of individuals). This small nonprofit is now
>affiliated with the New Museum, but our programs and the Rhizome
>community remain globally dispersed and rhizomatic in nature. This
>affiliation won't change our mission, but it will help ensure our
>ability to continue to fulfill it, so we wanted to acknowledge the
>New Museum's support in a very prominent way.
>
>As for the NYC-centric bit, I actually keep tabs on the demographics
>of Rhizome editorial projects (especially, for obvious reasons,
>Digest and Net Art News) and there is not a heavy bias towards NYC.
>There are a lot of New Yorkers on Raw, and Francis and I live and
>work here, but I don't think "grossly NYC-centric" is a fair
>assessment.
>
>
>Very best,
>
>Rachel
>
>
>On Saturday, September 27, 2003, at 11:19 AM, Curt Cloninger wrote:
>
>>Hi everybody who reads rhizome raw,
>>
>>I just have to say that the new banner "rhizome.org –> at the new
>>museum" is grossly oxymoronic. A rhizome has no central node.
>>That's the famous point. You can't have a rhizome "at" anywhere.
>>I'm not even sure you can have a ".org" at anywhere. Are the .org
>>administrative duties housed within the New Museum org chart? Is
>>the .org site server hardware housed within the new museum building?
>>
>>In any other community, me pointing this out would just be semantic
>>nit-picking, but the whole ethos of this community (although it's
>>always been grossly NYC-centric) is virtuality and world-wide-ness.
>>The new site banner is antithetical to this ethos.
>>
>>Maybe rhizomatic strucutres are overly idealistic to begin with.
>>The physical network may allow it, but human's simply can't
>>paradigmatically accept it and fit it into the rest of their
>>hierarchized world.
>>
>>Or maybe it just played out that way in this one instance.
>>
>>Or maybe the banner simply needs to be changed to something more
>>accurate like:
>>"rhizome.org –> largely funded and run by the new museum"
>>
>>I'm not trying to dredge up the old anti-kapitalistik
>>stone-throwing. I don't have any intrinsic beef with hierarchy or
>>making money. The new partnership may prove to be the best tihng
>>for rhizome since sliced bacon. I'm just pointing out that the new
>>site banner don't make no sense.
>>
>>humbly,
>>curt
>>+ ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
>>-> post: [email protected]
>>-> questions: [email protected]
>>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>+
>>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

I think it's a good point. By the way, I am used to the dissection and
analysis of semantic details – Mark is also a grammar nazi. ;)


On Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 12:07 PM, Curt Cloninger wrote:

> Thanks Rachel,
>
> I'm just (nit-)picking on the illogical use of the word "at" in the
> masthead. Rhizome could still prominently ackowledge the New Museum's
> support in the masthead by rewording it so that it doesn't say a
> rhizome is at someplace. But maybe I'm just a grammar nazi.
>
> peace,
> curt
>
>
>
> At 11:31 AM -0400 9/30/03, Rachel Greene wrote:
>> Hi Curt:
>>
>>
>> I hear your point about the apparent contradiction of having a
>> location attached to our logo on our homepage. Our programs are
>> rhizomatic (decentralized, distributed, grassroots), but they are
>> supported by a nonprofit organization that has an office (not a
>> distributed virtual office but an actual little room) and a small
>> staff (so small that we're really more of a collective node than a
>> distributed network of individuals). This small nonprofit is now
>> affiliated with the New Museum, but our programs and the Rhizome
>> community remain globally dispersed and rhizomatic in nature. This
>> affiliation won't change our mission, but it will help ensure our
>> ability to continue to fulfill it, so we wanted to acknowledge the
>> New Museum's support in a very prominent way.
>>
>> As for the NYC-centric bit, I actually keep tabs on the demographics
>> of Rhizome editorial projects (especially, for obvious reasons,
>> Digest and Net Art News) and there is not a heavy bias towards NYC.
>> There are a lot of New Yorkers on Raw, and Francis and I live and
>> work here, but I don't think "grossly NYC-centric" is a fair
>> assessment.
>>
>>
>> Very best,
>>
>> Rachel
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, September 27, 2003, at 11:19 AM, Curt Cloninger wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everybody who reads rhizome raw,
>>>
>>> I just have to say that the new banner "rhizome.org –> at the new
>>> museum" is grossly oxymoronic. A rhizome has no central node.
>>> That's the famous point. You can't have a rhizome "at" anywhere.
>>> I'm not even sure you can have a ".org" at anywhere. Are the .org
>>> administrative duties housed within the New Museum org chart? Is
>>> the .org site server hardware housed within the new museum building?
>>>
>>> In any other community, me pointing this out would just be semantic
>>> nit-picking, but the whole ethos of this community (although it's
>>> always been grossly NYC-centric) is virtuality and world-wide-ness.
>>> The new site banner is antithetical to this ethos.
>>>
>>> Maybe rhizomatic strucutres are overly idealistic to begin with. The
>>> physical network may allow it, but human's simply can't
>>> paradigmatically accept it and fit it into the rest of their
>>> hierarchized world.
>>>
>>> Or maybe it just played out that way in this one instance.
>>>
>>> Or maybe the banner simply needs to be changed to something more
>>> accurate like:
>>> "rhizome.org –> largely funded and run by the new museum"
>>>
>>> I'm not trying to dredge up the old anti-kapitalistik
>>> stone-throwing. I don't have any intrinsic beef with hierarchy or
>>> making money. The new partnership may prove to be the best tihng
>>> for rhizome since sliced bacon. I'm just pointing out that the new
>>> site banner don't make no sense.
>>>
>>> humbly,
>>> curt
>>> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
>>> -> post: [email protected]
>>> -> questions: [email protected]
>>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
>>> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>> +
>>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>>> Membership Agreement available online at
>>> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>