Re: Call for Proposals at Readme 100 Software Art Factory

Posted by Rhizome | Mon Sep 19th 2005 10:13 p.m.

This kind of shit really pisses me off. I'm so sick of these design and technology "artists" who have no idea how to do anything, and just come up with ideas for people who did spend years learning how code.

"No need to mess around with abstruse programs or bother with dreary code. The world is full of people willing to do the hard work for you."

What the fuck? Why are you doing this in the first place if you don't take any interest in code?

Somehow people think that if they went to art school they have some kind of revolutionary ideas that every programmer is just dying to go and be their code monkey for. Because hey, they're programmers, you know.. people who live to write code for brilliant old you and have no creative ideas of their own.

I cant quite express what I feel when I see projects that are nothing but a bunch of mockups because the person who came up with it has no idea how to do anything. I can come up with a million brilliant ideas right here and now.. Hey, let's make this thing that uses google to build a complete map of human consciousness... great! Why don't I outsource it to someone who's actually brilliant, so I can really call it my own.

Assholes.
  • curt cloninger | Tue Sep 20th 2005 12:23 p.m.
    This project actually beat me to the punch. My next post in the "_ this concept" series was going to be...

    +++++++++++++++++++++

    subcontract this concept: art-starz-r-us inc.

    PRECEDENCES:
    Corporations have been hiring marketing firms to make them look good forever. Those marketing firms in turn hire graphic design firms, many of whom turn around and hire freelance designers.

    Damien Hirst, Mariko Mori, etc. subcontract out their larger installation pieces to be build by other folks.

    Teen boy groups like Menudo and New Kids on the Block are created and pimped by A&R record executives to be the next new thing. "We make you big star."

    CONCEPT:
    You long since stopped "making" art. Why waste your precious time even coming up with the concepts! You just want to be an art star, no mucking about. Skip the middle man and simply subcontract out the entire lot -- ideas, craft, implementation, and marketing. If you meet our criteria (got the look, the verve, the drive, that special something), we'll make you an art star. Our generative semiotic software will come up with your name (N.N., dextro, stanza, eBoy, Linda Lovelace, etc.) and the name of your art movement (neen, telic, etc.). We will construct an artsy public persona for you, and even hire a good looking stand-in (think Matthew Barney or Bjork) should your newly found professional art lifestyle cause you to add on some unsightly pounds. We'll select the central theme of your life's work (based on our in-house marketing studies), and begin cranking out the "pieces" proper.

    We'll come up with the ideas, implement them, pimp them around to galleries, and even hire degreed art critics to write obtuse essays about your work that reference at least five 20th century french philosophers, and of course McLuhan (out of context).

    You didn't get into this artmtaking thing to explore existence or get your hands dirty with actual media. You don't really even want to say anything in particular. You just want to say it loudly where everyone can hear it. We feel you, dog. You're our kind of contemporary artist.

    INSTRUCTIONS:
    Don't call us, we'll call you. We're not looking for talent (we got the talent); we're just looking for someone willing to "sell their soul 4 rock n' roll," as the saying goes. We'll get 85% of all profits, and we'll have the option to use your (our) brand in the Japanese toy and t-shirt market. You'll get your 15 minutes, and then some! Pleased to meet you. Hope you guessed my name (no, not charles saatchi, the other one).

    +++++++++++++++++++++

    Leonardo wrote:

    > Readme 100 software art factory presents
    >
    > Open Call for Proposals
    > Get your Software Art Piece Done for Free
    > OUTSOURCE ME!
    > http://outsource.solaas.com.ar
    >
    > Have you ever dreamt of having a piece of software art (1) you could
    > call truly yours? Or had the feeling that most media art is dull, and
    > that you could do it better? Or had a marvelous idea you could not
    > realize for lack of time, commitment or expertise?
    > Well, your chance has come.
    >
    > No need to mess around with abstruse programs or bother with dreary
    > code. The world is full of people willing to do the hard work for you.
    > That’s what outsourcing is about. Those are the rules of the global
    > electronic market.
    >
    > It doesn’t cost much. Actually, just for this time it will cost you
    > nothing.
    >
    > Leonardo Solaas, an Argentinean programmer and net artist, suggests
    > reversing the rules: only once it is not the programmer who is chosen
    > by the employer but it is the employer who is chosen by the
    > programmer. He is looking for someone to tell him what to do, thus
    > himself outsourcing the task of getting an idea.
    > Submit yours! Become his boss! Submit your ideas at
    > http://outsource.solaas.com.ar till October 3rd, and you could be the
    > lucky winner of a possibility to implement YOUR piece of software
    > art.
    > If Leonardo chooses your concept, he will become your outsourced
    > Contractor for
    > this work, and you will be his Employer.
    >
    > You could learn about Leonardo’s skills and interests (at
    > http://solaas.com.ar/outsource/leonardo) to figure out whether your
    > proposal would fit his experience.
    >
    > All this is made possible by Readme 100 Temporary Software Art Factory
    > (2) (a.k.a. the MetaEmployer). The resulting piece will be presented
    > at a festival taking place on November 4-5, 2005, in the State and
    > City Library of Dortmund, Germany.
    > _____________________________
    >
    > 1. For those who are not sure what software art is, please, learn more
    > at http://runme.org/faq.tt2
    > 2. http://readme.runme.org
  • Lee Wells | Tue Sep 20th 2005 2:13 p.m.
    Wow you are really out of control.
    Take a chill pill and don
  • Miklos Legrady | Tue Sep 20th 2005 3:21 p.m.
    >
    >the idea that you can always hire someone to do the "boring part" of
    >the work is a romantic idea.

    actually it's post-modernist. (See Kostabi)

    --

    Miklos Legrady
    310 Bathurst st.
    Toronto ON.
    M5T 2S3
    416-203-1846
    647-292-1846
    http://www.mikidot.com
  • Rob Myers | Tue Sep 20th 2005 3:59 p.m.
    On 20 Sep 2005, at 22:24, miklos@sympatico.ca wrote:

    >> the idea that you can always hire someone to do the "boring part" of
    >> the work is a romantic idea.
    >
    > actually it's post-modernist. (See Kostabi)

    Postmodernism is Romantic.

    - Rob
  • Jim Andrews | Tue Sep 20th 2005 4:35 p.m.
    > come on, lee, do you think that the mouse is just another kind of brush?
    > i'm sure you don't.
    > so let's put this way:
    > it is impossible to talk about digital art without understanding that
    > *it is digital* and this means: to be conscious that we work not just
    > with code -- what is a too broad term and not a concept -- but with
    > programming languages.
    > and language is a virus (ins't it?)
    > the idea that you can always hire someone to do the "boring part" of
    > the work is a romantic idea. inspiration does not match with media
    > creation. otherwise we will bet on tecnoxamanism...

    well said, giselle.

    could you please expand on your last sentence? why is it that "otherwise we
    will bet on" technoshamanism? what is it and why do we otherwise bet on it?

    "inspiration does not match with media creation". in writing, much changes
    in the process of writing. the most boring things to write (and read) are
    pre-configured ideas that you simply write out. same with working in other
    arts. Because so much happens in the act of writing or painting, ie, working
    through the ideas and implications and previously unrealized associations
    and consequences of the initial impetus. through the process of
    creation/writing/whatever. in my experience, this is also true of writing
    computer programs as works of art.

    some programmers who work for artists treat the artist like any other sort
    of client, ie, give them what they want, don't be too critical, they're
    paying the bill. usually this results in bad art. or it doesn't 'work for
    me', anyway. then again, i'm out of work!

    very interesting to read in this thread some thoughts and feelings on the
    tensions of this relation. hopefully it allows both artist and
    programmer--and programmer-artist--to see personal situations reflected in
    general shapes that affect art and life--and jobs, working relations--and
    the notion of an art of programming beyond Knuth's conception of it.

    ja
    http://vispo.com
  • Jim Andrews | Tue Sep 20th 2005 5:38 p.m.
    > jim.
    > so good to restart
    > (off topic: the cows -- not ours -- but those of the cow parade -- are
    > all around sao paulo! a moooo for you)

    a moooo to you too, giselle. by the way, our cows have recently been allowed
    to travel to the USA (without passports). I think the general recognition is
    that there are mad cows on both sides of the border, at this point. please
    give one of the sao paulo cows a pet for me.

    > btw:
    > technoshamanism: (Sorry for the "x". it's portuenglish....)

    i think i prefer "tecnoxamanism". but what is it?

    > this is the hype. the trend and i can't stand trendies and trendism.
    > following them, you "receive" your "to_do list".
    > give me a break. i don't. i work too hard and i do not receive
    > anything and because of this i can not just tell someone to do this
    > and that for tomorrow. i think machines are real participants, i
    > believe (in) error messages, i trust computers and their indifference
    > to my targets and passions.
    > so tecnoshamanism, the global cortex, the cyberthing does not make
    > sense for me (and for my senses)

    very interesting. so you do not seek to control or stifle the agency of
    others--or the computer--but are interested in what happens in a more open
    philosophy. that is wise and applicable to many things from art to relations
    with people--and computers.

    ja

    > in what concerns the other question, i will quote Flusser again and
    > agree with you:
    > we are conditioned by our apparatus.
  • Robert Praxmarer | Wed Sep 21st 2005 1:21 a.m.
    well some years ago I would have reacted the same way I guess
    now I don't care so much anymore, it's true that you can outsource everything but you loose control on the same time, and time is the key for the whole problem.
    computer based artworks are complex so to develop them it cost a lot of time (for the coder) but on the other hand you have to be quick because someone else could finish a stupid google art work before you. most of the people have the same ideas in electronic art, I don't exclude myself, I am always astonished if I go to a festival and see ideas, I once had, realised.
    as there are so many and the trends are changing so fast there are no real stars in tech art, which somehow is good and somehow not. it's good because everyone involved contributes his vision of what art and technology should be or could be so diversity is always a good thing to have, but as there are no stars, and therefore no money involved it's a very hard task to sustain yourself with media art, festivals don't pay fees, the big ones don't even pay flights or accomondation because you can be lucky to be in a delicate international competition.
    and the other side is the traditional art market which is undereducated in terms of media art and much too conservative for this kind of art, so computer artists will end up to make interactive furniture for snoop doggy dog and brittney spears and when mtv comes to their home, an interactive portrait of snoop will freestyle rap with him.
    snoop: hip
    computer portrait: ho
    snoop: with the
    computer portait: flow

    so finish up with wittgenstein:
    the limits of my language means the limits of my world

    and ideas have so many people, I think you have to invest time to learn to realise them yourself and then if you have understood what you are doing then u can start to outsource, so a damien hurst or matthew barney could'nt make this work alone, but they have proven beforehand that they understand what they are doing.

    anyway a discussion I had with myself and many others which could be held endless.
    greetings,
    robert praxmarer

    wrote:

    >
    > This kind of shit really pisses me off. I'm so sick of these design
    > and technology "artists" who have no idea how to do anything, and just
    > come up with ideas for people who did spend years learning how code.
    >
    > "No need to mess around with abstruse programs or bother with
    > dreary code. The world is full of people willing to do the hard work
    > for you."
    >
    > What the fuck? Why are you doing this in the first place if you
    > don't take any interest in code?
    >
    > Somehow people think that if they went to art school they have some
    > kind of revolutionary ideas that every programmer is just dying to go
    > and be their code monkey for. Because hey, they're programmers, you
    > know.. people who live to write code for brilliant old you and have no
    > creative ideas of their own.
    >
    > I cant quite express what I feel when I see projects that are
    > nothing but a bunch of mockups because the person who came up with it
    > has no idea how to do anything. I can come up with a million brilliant
    > ideas right here and now.. Hey, let's make this thing that uses google
    > to build a complete map of human consciousness... great! Why don't I
    > outsource it to someone who's actually brilliant, so I can really call
    > it my own.
    >
    > Assholes.
  • Robert Praxmarer | Wed Sep 21st 2005 1:29 a.m.
    wrote:

    >
    > This kind of shit really pisses me off. I'm so sick of these design
    > and technology "artists" who have no idea how to do anything, and just
    > come up with ideas for people who did spend years learning how code.
    >
    > "No need to mess around with abstruse programs or bother with
    > dreary code. The world is full of people willing to do the hard work
    > for you."
    >
    > What the fuck? Why are you doing this in the first place if you
    > don't take any interest in code?
    >
    > Somehow people think that if they went to art school they have some
    > kind of revolutionary ideas that every programmer is just dying to go
    > and be their code monkey for. Because hey, they're programmers, you
    > know.. people who live to write code for brilliant old you and have no
    > creative ideas of their own.
    >
    > I cant quite express what I feel when I see projects that are
    > nothing but a bunch of mockups because the person who came up with it
    > has no idea how to do anything. I can come up with a million brilliant
    > ideas right here and now.. Hey, let's make this thing that uses google
    > to build a complete map of human consciousness... great! Why don't I
    > outsource it to someone who's actually brilliant, so I can really call
    > it my own.
    >
    > Assholes.
  • Robert Praxmarer | Wed Sep 21st 2005 1:33 a.m.
    well some years ago I would have reacted the same way I guess
    now I don't care so much anymore, it's true that you can outsource everything but you loose control on the same time, and time is the key for the whole problem.
    computer based artworks are complex so to develop them it cost a lot of time (for the coder) but on the other hand you have to be quick because someone else could finish a stupid google art work before you. most of the people have the same ideas in electronic art, I don't exclude myself, I am always astonished if I go to a festival and see ideas, I once had, realised.
    as there are so many and the trends are changing so fast there are no real stars in tech art, which somehow is good and somehow not. it's good because everyone involved contributes his vision of what art and technology should be or could be so diversity is always a good thing to have, but as there are no stars, and therefore no money involved it's a very hard task to sustain yourself with media art, festivals don't pay fees, the big ones don't even pay flights or accomondation because you can be lucky to be in a delicate international competition.
    and the other side is the traditional art market which is undereducated in terms of media art and much too conservative for this kind of art, so computer artists will end up to make interactive furniture for snoop doggy dog and brittney spears and when mtv comes to their home, an interactive portrait of snoop will freestyle rap with him.
    snoop: hip
    computer portrait: ho
    snoop: with the
    computer portait: flow

    so finish up with wittgenstein:
    the limits of my language means the limits of my world

    and ideas have so many people, I think you have to invest time to learn to realise them yourself and then if you have understood what you are doing then u can start to outsource, so a damien hurst or matthew barney could'nt make this work alone, but they have proven beforehand that they understand what they are doing.

    anyway this discussion I had with myself and many others for years it's endless, and everyone has a different basis.
    greetings,
    robert praxmarer

    wrote:

    >
    > This kind of shit really pisses me off. I'm so sick of these design
    > and technology "artists" who have no idea how to do anything, and just
    > come up with ideas for people who did spend years learning how code.
    >
    > "No need to mess around with abstruse programs or bother with
    > dreary code. The world is full of people willing to do the hard work
    > for you."
    >
    > What the fuck? Why are you doing this in the first place if you
    > don't take any interest in code?
    >
    > Somehow people think that if they went to art school they have some
    > kind of revolutionary ideas that every programmer is just dying to go
    > and be their code monkey for. Because hey, they're programmers, you
    > know.. people who live to write code for brilliant old you and have no
    > creative ideas of their own.
    >
    > I cant quite express what I feel when I see projects that are
    > nothing but a bunch of mockups because the person who came up with it
    > has no idea how to do anything. I can come up with a million brilliant
    > ideas right here and now.. Hey, let's make this thing that uses google
    > to build a complete map of human consciousness... great! Why don't I
    > outsource it to someone who's actually brilliant, so I can really call
    > it my own.
    >
    > Assholes.
  • Haim | Wed Sep 21st 2005 7:37 a.m.
    Old painters like Leonardo or Michelangelo had a whole team of apprentices
    working for them; a sculptor like Calder had his big metallic artworks
    assembled and soldered not far away from where i am writing, in a factory near
    Tours. On the other side they understood perfectly what was going on in the
    process of the making and were able to control and manage it efficiently.
    So, does someone need be code literate to do computer art? Or simply computer
    literate? I think it is all about control, the control you keep or not on the
    making of your artwork. Even with pieces of software that don't need
    code-writing, like Photoshop or Flash (you can write code in Flash, i know, but
    it is not a requisite to use it), you cannot simply go and say, i'd like it to
    be like this and like that, more green here, this faster and written bigger,
    and so forth and so on; if you don't know your tool, you lose control on your
    artwork. It is in the knowledge and the experience of the creating process that
    happens the making of the artwork. There are no transcendental ideas just
    waiting for brilliant minds to pick them up and then henchmen silently doing
    the dirty part of the job. Even conceptual art needed some kind of concrete
    expression. Furthermore, I think that an honest technical knowledge of your
    tool allows for the development of new projects; knowing what it is all about
    avoids getting "brilliant" ideas that are very heavy in terms of cost of time,
    and whose aim could be reached in a far cheaper way.
    So, of course i am not against collaborative art-making, each one contributing
    their skills. But if i had THE idea (is there such a thing?) and if i hired
    someone else to do it, i would feel awkward to put only my name on it.
    More and more pieces of software are becoming user-friendly, writing the code
    for you. Of course you still have to learn how to use the program. But, hey,
    who said it was easy to become an artist?
    --
    _________cyrill duneau---dolmensniper
  • Robert Praxmarer | Sat Sep 24th 2005 7:44 p.m.
    wrote:

    >
    > This kind of shit really pisses me off. I'm so sick of these design
    > and technology "artists" who have no idea how to do anything, and just
    > come up with ideas for people who did spend years learning how code.
    >
    > "No need to mess around with abstruse programs or bother with
    > dreary code. The world is full of people willing to do the hard work
    > for you."
    >
    > What the fuck? Why are you doing this in the first place if you
    > don't take any interest in code?
    >
    > Somehow people think that if they went to art school they have some
    > kind of revolutionary ideas that every programmer is just dying to go
    > and be their code monkey for. Because hey, they're programmers, you
    > know.. people who live to write code for brilliant old you and have no
    > creative ideas of their own.
    >
    > I cant quite express what I feel when I see projects that are
    > nothing but a bunch of mockups because the person who came up with it
    > has no idea how to do anything. I can come up with a million brilliant
    > ideas right here and now.. Hey, let's make this thing that uses google
    > to build a complete map of human consciousness... great! Why don't I
    > outsource it to someone who's actually brilliant, so I can really call
    > it my own.
    >
    > Assholes.
    +
    -> post: list@rhizome.org
    -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    -> 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
Your Reply