Hey, all.
In a couple weeks I'll be publishing an edit of my comments as the IA
editorial for this issue. I think that the Boxer issue is something
that's driving the wedge deep in our collective psyche.
Stay tuned.
Patrick Lichty
Editor-In-Chief
Intelligent Agent Magazine
http://www.intelligentagent.com
1556 Clough Street, #28
Bowling Green, OH 43402
225 288 5813
[email protected]
"It is better to die on your feet
than to live on your knees."
—–Original Message—–
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Geert Dekkers
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 8:01 AM
To: Rhizome
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: Re: NYT review of ArtBase 101
And just to show (again and again) that art sometimes asks you go the
extra mile, an exerpt about Cy Twombly…
from brentriley.com
"I've liked his work since I was a freshman in college. His paintings
are abstract and impenetrable, the only guideposts are occasional
references to mythology buried in the scribbles and blobs of color on
canvas. Twombly is an artist that a lot of people say "I could do
that" or "It looks like my 5 year old drew that."
I smile when I hear that because I've been frustrated by his
paintings too. To crack the shell and dig out the meaning is
difficult. But I'm drawn back to him again and again."
On 1-jul-2005, at 22:05, Geert Dekkers wrote:
> Iit's not as if art works that deliberately take *too* much time
> were invented yesterday. I remember sitting through an eight hour
> piece by Jan Fabre – yes it was tedious, and yes I might have
> walked off (I actually think I did) but that's not the point. The
> point (of the piece was) – obviously – that it was EIGHT hours.
>
> And it was equally obvious that the artist didn't intend us to have
> fun. Which is good, because you don't have to have fun all the time.
>
>
> On 1-jul-2005, at 6:41, Lewis LaCook wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> — "t.whid" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Every Icon" and
>>
>>
>>> "1 Year Performance Video" are more or less linear
>>> in their time-based component, but neither of the
>>> pieces expects a viewer to keep watching.. and
>>> watching.. and watching. Both expect you to get the
>>> idea and then move on. *But* both expect you to keep
>>> running the concept in your head long after you're
>>> gone, something I'm not sure the reviewer is capable
>>> of.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> —that's making a huuuge assumption–i mean, gee, t,
>> we get it and all–boxer has less patience with the
>> conceptualism inherent in these works, it seems–i
>> like both works myself, but i can stray into
>> conceptual work and appreciate it–
>>
>> one problem might be this: boxer is applying a
>> cinematic view of net.art, and not seeing the
>> conceptual meat of something like "Every Icon"–in
>> which case Phillip hit the gist of the whole thing: it
>> IS about time…
>>
>>
>>
>> —————
>>
>>
>>
>>> I've been watching this discussion unfold, but since
>>> I'm an interested party felt that I should hold my
>>> comments back.
>>>
>>> I think that Marisa's initial post summed up my
>>> thoughts on the review fairly well. But Philip's
>>> points are a bit off-base IMHO. below:
>>>
>>> Philip Galanter wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Boxer's focus on time is, I think, quite telling.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I suspect that a
>>>
>>>
>>>> good number of internet artists started out as
>>>>
>>>>
>>> primarily visual
>>>
>>>
>>>> artists, and have somehow underestimated how much
>>>>
>>>>
>>> internet art is in
>>>
>>>
>>>> fact a *time* art, and how important that is.
>>>>
>>>> You can see this in the classroom everyday.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Student painters or
>>>
>>>
>>>> photographers who decide to take up video are
>>>>
>>>>
>>> usually (at least at
>>>
>>>
>>>> first) bad at editing. By bad I mean really
>>>>
>>>>
>>> terribly awful.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Narrative is fragmented and incoherent and then
>>>>
>>>>
>>> defended in class
>>>
>>>
>>>> critique as some kind of "higher" fine art
>>>>
>>>>
>>> aesthetic rather than
>>>
>>>
>>>> being called what it is…bad filmmaking.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Interminable static shots
>>>
>>>
>>>> are the norm. Fade to credits never comes soon
>>>>
>>>>
>>> enough. And so on.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The artist's infatuation for his/her own images
>>>>
>>>>
>>> becomes the audiences
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> burden.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can't argue with your point that many video or
>>> other time-based artists have a horrible sense of
>>> time in their work. There was one of the Cremasters,
>>> can't remember which one, that made me want to
>>> murder Mr. Barney. But equating the work in the
>>> ArtBase show with innane student video does a whale
>>> of a whopping disservice to the work in the show.
>>>
>>> Two of the artworks she takes to task for consuming
>>> too much of her time are "Every Icon" and MTAA's "1
>>> Year Performance Video." Both of these pieces have
>>> time as a significant element in the work in very
>>> deliberate and (if I do say so myself) effective
>>> ways.
>>>
>>> To brush off Simon's "Every Icon" with, "I don't
>>> know about you, but I don't have that kind of time,"
>>> isn't just dismissive, it's just plain ignorant. Yes
>>> I suppose we can all have a chuckle over her
>>> oh-so-sparkling bit of snark, but Simon's piece is a
>>> sublimely beautiful conceptualization of
>>> computational time; it's gets to the very core of
>>> how computers and humans are different in a very
>>> physical way. It deserves a serious observation but
>>> its essence seems to have completely flown over the
>>> airhead reviewer.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> These problems become multiplied when fine artists
>>>>
>>>>
>>> turn to the
>>>
>>>
>>>> internet as a new medium. That time counts
>>>>
>>>>
>>> shouldn't be a surprise.
>>>
>>> You seem to be making general points that you might
>>> make to your students. It comes off a bit
>>> condescending since you're referencing a specific
>>> show and a specific review of it.
>>>
>>> I can't think of one artist in the show that seems
>>> to have been caught off-gaurd by that whole time
>>> thing. If there is one, please clue me in.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is the rare work of music or film or stage that
>>>>
>>>>
>>> asks the audience
>>>
>>>
>>>> to take a leap of faith, to struggle through the
>>>>
>>>>
>>> entire work without
>>>
>>>
>>>> satisfaction along the way, just to get to a big
>>>>
>>>>
>>> payoff at the very
>>>
>>>
>>>> end. Music frequently begins with the
>>>>
>>>>
>>> introduction of compelling
>>>
>>>
>>>> themes that give the listener an incentive to go
>>>>
>>>>
>>> further. Good films
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> not only end well, but give the viewer rewards all
>>>>
>>>>
>>> along the way.
>>>
>>>
>>>> How much internet art does this?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Short answer: lots. But using cinema as an example
>>> misses the point of most of the work.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've seen far too many examples of internet art
>>>>
>>>>
>>> that seem to
>>>
>>>
>>>> disregard the element of real time, and thereby
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ignore or
>>>
>>>
>>>> miscalculate the experience of the audience. To
>>>>
>>>>
>>> be sure the
>>>
>>>
>>>> nonlinear nature of much internet art makes the
>>>>
>>>>
>>> compositional
>>>
>>>
>>>> problems of pacing exponentially more difficult.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But that's no
>>>
>>>
>>>> excuse…that's exactly the challenge the artist
>>>>
>>>>
>>> has willingly taken
>>>
>>>
>>>> on.
>>>>
>>>> I suppose one can be an artist and do the work and
>>>>
>>>>
>>> not care a whit
>>>
>>>
>>>> for the audience's experience. But don't blame
>>>>
>>>>
>>> the audience, or the
>>>
>>>
>>>> critic, if they click a few times and then walk
>>>>
>>>>
>>> away. It's not their
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> fault. It's yours.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> As a general point, of course you're right. But as a
>>> specific point to this specific exhibition it just
>>> doesn't hold up. Most of the work isn't particularly
>>> musical or cinematic in the show. "Every Icon" and
>>> "1 Year Performance Video" are more or less linear
>>> in their time-based component, but neither of the
>>> pieces expects a viewer to keep watching.. and
>>> watching.. and watching. Both expect you to get the
>>> idea and then move on. *But* both expect you to keep
>>> running the concept in your head long after you're
>>> gone, something I'm not sure the reviewer is capable
>>> of.
>>> +
>>> -> post: [email protected]
>>> -> questions: [email protected]
>>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
>>> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is
>>> open to non-members
>>> +
>>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
>>> out in the
>>> Membership Agreement available online at
>>> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> *********************************************************************
>> ******
>> No More Movements…
>>
>> Lewis LaCook –>Poet-Programmer|||http://
>> lewislacook.corporatepa.com/|||
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>> +
>> -> post: [email protected]
>> -> questions: [email protected]
>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
>> subscribe.rhiz
>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
>> +
>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/
>> 29.php
>>
>>
>
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
> subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/
> 29.php
>
+
-> post: [email protected]
-> questions: [email protected]
-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
-> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
+
Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
ArtBase 101 & Boxer
-
Type: discussion