Hey you kids - get off my lawn.

Posted by M. River | Sun Apr 23rd 2006 7:03 a.m.

...around 12 out of 195

I'm not interested in your MFA

Straight video delivered via the internet is called
youtube.

If someone already made the same artwork 6 years ago,
why should you get money for it?

Asking for money based on some else's suffering is
called United 93, the movie.

It's Sunday morning and I have not had coffee.

M.River of MTAA, making friends on the internet since
97'

http://mteww.com
http://tinjail.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
  • Jason Van Anden | Sun Apr 23rd 2006 8:01 a.m.
    Dear Sunday Morning Curmudgeon:

    Nice missive ... please provide details:

    Which artwork from six years ago? Flight 93? What video? Video iPod?

    Still around, just super busy prepping for May 3rd Dorkbot:
    http://dorkbot.org/dorkbotnyc/03.may.2006/

    Digging the threads,
    Jason Van Anden
    www.smileproject.com

    On 4/23/06, Mark River <mriver102@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > ...around 12 out of 195
    >
    > I'm not interested in your MFA
    >
    > Straight video delivered via the internet is called
    > youtube.
    >
    > If someone already made the same artwork 6 years ago,
    > why should you get money for it?
    >
    > Asking for money based on some else's suffering is
    > called United 93, the movie.
    >
    > It's Sunday morning and I have not had coffee.
    >
    > M.River of MTAA, making friends on the internet since
    > 97'
    >
    >
    > http://mteww.com
    > http://tinjail.com
    >
    > __________________________________________________
    > Do You Yahoo!?
    > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    > http://mail.yahoo.com
    > +
    > -> 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
    >

    --
    Jason Van Anden
    http://www.smileproject.com
  • Lee Wells | Sun Apr 23rd 2006 10:01 a.m.
    I came up with 12 good ones as well.
    Funny.

    Some are even similar to pieces done 6 months ago.

    On 4/23/06 9:03 AM, "Mark River" <mriver102@yahoo.com> wrote:

    > ...around 12 out of 195
    >
    > I'm not interested in your MFA
    >
    > Straight video delivered via the internet is called
    > youtube.
    >
    > If someone already made the same artwork 6 years ago,
    > why should you get money for it?
    >
    > Asking for money based on some else's suffering is
    > called United 93, the movie.
    >
    > It's Sunday morning and I have not had coffee.
    >
    > M.River of MTAA, making friends on the internet since
    > 97'
    >
    >
    > http://mteww.com
    > http://tinjail.com
    >
    > __________________________________________________
    > Do You Yahoo!?
    > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    > http://mail.yahoo.com
    > +
    > -> 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

    --
    Lee Wells
    Brooklyn, NY 11222

    http://www.leewells.org
    http://www.perpetualartmachine.com
    917 723 2524
  • Jason Nelson | Mon Apr 24th 2006 11:06 a.m.
    Although I agree with some of the evaluation, something I couldn't place
    at first bothered me about Mark's comment. It wasnt so much any exact
    phrase but rather the tone of "its been done before".

    What is disconcerting is that somehow much of what we do is defined by
    the next new use of technology or the next technical innovation or application
    of a theme or idea to that application.

    But then it seems if we do that, if we follow this, then we are living in a hit and run
    art field. Where each new idea is brought up, turned into a few works and then
    the rush is on for the next thing.

    In poetry certain forms have been around for thousands of years, so who cares
    if someone last year created an interactive video engine for dogs and dog killers,
    and now this year someone wants to do it again. I am thinking hell yes, I wonder
    what that persons take will be on the whole videos for dogs and dog killer thing.

    Sorry for the rant...but wanted to throw a vote out there for all the rehashes and
    repeats. Bravo on your allegiance to historical 2005 or god forbid 2000.

    Jason Nelson

    Mark River <mriver102@yahoo.com> wrote:
    ...around 12 out of 195

    I'm not interested in your MFA

    Straight video delivered via the internet is called
    youtube.

    If someone already made the same artwork 6 years ago,
    why should you get money for it?

    Asking for money based on some else's suffering is
    called United 93, the movie.

    It's Sunday morning and I have not had coffee.

    M.River of MTAA, making friends on the internet since
    97'

    http://mteww.com
    http://tinjail.com

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    http://mail.yahoo.com
    +
    -> 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

    ---------------------------------
    Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2c/min or less.
  • Alexis Turner | Mon Apr 24th 2006 11:52 a.m.
    I agree with Mark, not the least reason of which is that it is nice to know that
    I am not the only grumpy bitch on the list.

    net.art hasn't found itself yet. It's still bumbling along in the dark trying
    to figure out what makes it different than other media, and how the power of the
    processor can push it to do things that have never been done before, or how to
    express ideas that have been out of reach for various reasons (complexity,
    etc). So, yes, innovation is necessary, and the same-old-same-old rehashed
    stuff is not getting us anywhere. net.art will keep being a sad and pathetic
    copy of other media until it can figure out what makes it unique...and that
    won't happen until it stops mimicking and framing itself within everything that
    has come before.
    -Alexis

    On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Jason Nelson wrote:

    ::Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 01:06:24 -0700 (PDT)
    ::From: Jason Nelson <newmediapoet@yahoo.com>
    ::To: list@rhizome.org
    ::Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Hey you kids - get off my lawn.
    ::
    ::Although I agree with some of the evaluation, something I couldn't place
    :: at first bothered me about Mark's comment. It wasnt so much any exact
    :: phrase but rather the tone of "its been done before".
    ::
    :: What is disconcerting is that somehow much of what we do is defined by
    :: the next new use of technology or the next technical innovation or application
    :: of a theme or idea to that application.
    ::
    :: But then it seems if we do that, if we follow this, then we are living in a hit and run
    :: art field. Where each new idea is brought up, turned into a few works and then
    :: the rush is on for the next thing.
    ::
    :: In poetry certain forms have been around for thousands of years, so who cares
    :: if someone last year created an interactive video engine for dogs and dog killers,
    :: and now this year someone wants to do it again. I am thinking hell yes, I wonder
    :: what that persons take will be on the whole videos for dogs and dog killer thing.
    ::
    :: Sorry for the rant...but wanted to throw a vote out there for all the rehashes and
    :: repeats. Bravo on your allegiance to historical 2005 or god forbid 2000.
    ::
    :: Jason Nelson
    ::
    ::Mark River <mriver102@yahoo.com> wrote:
    :: ...around 12 out of 195
    ::
    ::I'm not interested in your MFA
    ::
    ::Straight video delivered via the internet is called
    ::youtube.
    ::
    ::If someone already made the same artwork 6 years ago,
    ::why should you get money for it?
    ::
    ::Asking for money based on some else's suffering is
    ::called United 93, the movie.
    ::
    ::It's Sunday morning and I have not had coffee.
    ::
    ::M.River of MTAA, making friends on the internet since
    ::97'
    ::
    ::
    ::http://mteww.com
    ::http://tinjail.com
    ::
  • M. River | Mon Apr 24th 2006 12:51 p.m.
    Heya Jason and all

    First off, here is my general 'sorry
  • Jim Andrews | Mon Apr 24th 2006 4:19 p.m.
    The reason some literary forms can continue is not because poets and poetry
    readers don't care whether the work is significantly new. It's because when
    expectations around a particular form have hardened into stone, departing in
    a strong and contemporary vein from those expectations can sometimes result
    in fresh experience, fresh work. Though that tactic itself may by now have
    been exhausted even in the realm of print. The 'archeological' approach.

    If a digital tool has a programming language associated with it then,
    depending on how slow it is and how much it actually does allow access to
    resources, and how responsive and ranging those resources are, it can have
    extrordinary range. There is no proof, and probably never will be, that
    there are thought processes of which humans are capable and computers are
    not. Which suggests that programmability imbues machines potentially with at
    least the range and flexibility of thought itself.

    So I am inclined to agree with Alexis. And add that the most definitive
    attribute of computers is their programmability. That is what separates them
    from other machines. That is what gives them their radical flexibility as
    machines. Programming is to digital art what English is to international
    communications.

    ja
    http://vispo.com

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org]On Behalf Of
    Jason Nelson
    Sent: April 24, 2006 1:06 AM
    To: list@rhizome.org
    Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Hey you kids - get off my lawn.

    Although I agree with some of the evaluation, something I couldn't place
    at first bothered me about Mark's comment. It wasnt so much any exact
    phrase but rather the tone of "its been done before".

    What is disconcerting is that somehow much of what we do is defined by
    the next new use of technology or the next technical innovation or
    application
    of a theme or idea to that application.

    But then it seems if we do that, if we follow this, then we are living in
    a hit and run
    art field. Where each new idea is brought up, turned into a few works and
    then
    the rush is on for the next thing.

    In poetry certain forms have been around for thousands of years, so who
    cares
    if someone last year created an interactive video engine for dogs and dog
    killers,
    and now this year someone wants to do it again. I am thinking hell yes, I
    wonder
    what that persons take will be on the whole videos for dogs and dog killer
    thing.

    Sorry for the rant...but wanted to throw a vote out there for all the
    rehashes and
    repeats. Bravo on your allegiance to historical 2005 or god forbid 2000.

    Jason Nelson
  • Jason Nelson | Mon Apr 24th 2006 6:54 p.m.
    Mark and others reading,

    Dont apologize. I think my perspective is a bit screwy, and I tend
    to, like others on the list, think of what I do, or the artwork I see on the
    web in literary terms. Which certainly doesnt address 90 percent of
    the work we see online.

    Of course, as others have noted, we want to be innovative and far reaching,
    and far thinking etc...and other far, fars. Hell, I'm frustrated at my newest work:
    http://www.secrettechnology.com/pandemic/ cause I seem to be rehashing
    older themes (for me at least). And I am insanely jealous of those with programming backgrounds who can spin out new technical innovations.

    But, ass, rump, I think that establishing and reexploring some sort of base work, some digital form, some style that could be played with again and again, then new artists/writers would have an entry point into our work, and would have a place to start
    in becoming a net/digital/cyber etc... artist/writer...

    well its nearly eleven in Australia and I am going out to see some Anzac day action...

    happy Anzac day!!!

    Jason Nelson

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    http://mail.yahoo.com
  • ryan griffis | Mon Apr 24th 2006 8:54 p.m.
    On Apr 24, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Jim Andrews wrote:

    > Programming is to digital art what English is to international
    > communications.

    That doesn't sound so "radically programmable" Jim...
    i was thinking Spanglish/creole/etc would be a more interesting
    location of innovation...
    but then again, i'm monolingual for the most part, and not much of a
    programmer. So i guess i'm not very innovative in either case.
    ryan
  • Jim Andrews | Mon Apr 24th 2006 10:28 p.m.
    > > Programming is to digital art what English is to international
    > > communications.
    >
    > That doesn't sound so "radically programmable" Jim...
    > i was thinking Spanglish/creole/etc would be a more interesting
    > location of innovation...

    > but then again, i'm monolingual for the most part, and not much of a
    > programmer. So i guess i'm not very innovative in either case.
    > ryan

    You mean "radically flexible", Ryan?

    International communication can of course happen other than in English--and,
    as you point out, other languages may be more suitable for innovation--just
    as digital art can um sort of happen without programming, at least by the
    artist, but it is hard to imagine a public life of broad international
    communications without learning some English.

    ja
    http://vispo.com
Your Reply