Does the artbase have an historicization function?

Posted by Carlo Zanni | Wed Jul 2nd 2003 10:34 a.m.

Does the artbase have an historicization function?

Does the artbase have "quality" as distinguishing mark?

what happened with " Hole in the Sky " by Tom Scarpino (Hi Tom) http://www.rhizome.org/object.rhiz?14018
it's not a great thing for the reputation and the reliability of the artbase.
Above all because it's a "curatorial oriented" process and not an automatic one.

1- Everybody depends from others, but in this case the work it's the same.

2- There isn't a duty in knowing my 2001 work (even if it passed through the list) but once this thing has been emphasized ,
why any official voice wrote me back?. ... everybody can make a mistake.. where is the problem?

I'm really disappointed from this behavior
i was expecting an answer from the artbase crew.

Thank you

cz

http://www.zanni.org
  • Eryk Salvaggio | Wed Jul 2nd 2003 noon
    Zanni,

    Did you send copies to the artbase people, or just to the list? I find that
    Rhizome admins don't read the mailing list very often, or at least they
    don't respond to the mailing list. They are "too busy." None of my letters
    to Mark Tribe have ever been answered either, but I assume because they have
    been sent here, and not directly to him, and he is "too busy."

    Second, in defense of rhizome, I think you are mistaken, it is more of an
    automatic process than a curational one. Mostly, it is people look at the
    work, determine if it is net.art or not, and from there, the artist takes
    control of the process. I don't think they are interested in quality or
    originality all that much. I don't know who runs the selection process
    either, but I would email them directly.

    -e.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "zanni.org" <cz@zanni.org>
    To: <list@rhizome.org>
    Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 9:34 AM
    Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Does the artbase have an historicization function?

    > Does the artbase have an historicization function?
    >
    > Does the artbase have "quality" as distinguishing mark?
    >
    >
    > what happened with " Hole in the Sky " by Tom Scarpino (Hi Tom)
    http://www.rhizome.org/object.rhiz?14018
    > it's not a great thing for the reputation and the reliability of the
    artbase.
    > Above all because it's a "curatorial oriented" process and not an
    automatic one.
    >
    > 1- Everybody depends from others, but in this case the work it's the same.
    >
    > 2- There isn't a duty in knowing my 2001 work (even if it passed through
    the list) but once this thing has been emphasized ,
    > why any official voice wrote me back?. ... everybody can make a
    mistake.. where is the problem?
    >
    > I'm really disappointed from this behavior
    > i was expecting an answer from the artbase crew.
    >
    > Thank you
    >
    > cz
    >
    > http://www.zanni.org
    > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
    > -> 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
    >
  • carlo zanni | Wed Jul 2nd 2003 12:29 p.m.
    >>Did you send copies to the artbase people

    I sent an email to Mark and Rachel

    >>I think you are mistaken, it is more of an automatic process than a
    curational one
    >>I don't think they are interested in quality or originality all that much.

    I was thinking the opposite... if so: bad political choice..
    what is the reason for submitting an artwork to the artbase?

    cz
  • marc garrett | Wed Jul 2nd 2003 12:34 p.m.
    >what is the reason for submitting an artwork to the artbase?

    so an 'in-house' converted, paying audience can see it of course ;-)

    marc

    > >>Did you send copies to the artbase people
    >
    > I sent an email to Mark and Rachel
    >
    > >>I think you are mistaken, it is more of an automatic process than a
    > curational one
    > >>I don't think they are interested in quality or originality all that
    much.
    >
    > I was thinking the opposite... if so: bad political choice..
    > what is the reason for submitting an artwork to the artbase?
    >
    > cz
    >
    >
    >
    > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
    > -> 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
    >
    >
  • Rachel Greene | Wed Jul 2nd 2003 5:45 p.m.
    Hi

    I will forward these emails to Alena our artbase coordinator. She might
    be abroad however. I personally have little experience with the
    Artbase, and don't follow its policy.

    Carlo, I got your email from two days ago, but didn't understand it --
    you seemed to be comparing your work to someone else's. Reading your
    posts I am more confused. You don't like a project that was accepted
    into the artbase? It's too similar to yours? You want to know how
    projects are selected, and what the quality control process is -- have
    you looked here -- http://rhizome.org/artbase/policy.htm -- if you have
    a particular question about why one work was chosen and not another,
    you will have to wait for Alena to respond, I am afraid.

    Generally speaking though, I think to expect Rhizome staff, or any list
    subscriber for that matter, to have the same reading/response strategy
    would be specious. Your expectations will not be met. These days I
    rarely read Rhizome Raw emails sequentially, for example.

    This might seem obvious, but not everyone responds to emails as quickly
    as one would like. Frankly, that is par for the course, and not likely
    to change. I hope you can hang on.

    On Wednesday, July 2, 2003, at 11:34 AM, marc.garrett wrote:

    >> what is the reason for submitting an artwork to the artbase?
    >
    > so an 'in-house' converted, paying audience can see it of course ;-)
    >
    > marc
    >
    >
    >>>> Did you send copies to the artbase people
    >>
    >> I sent an email to Mark and Rachel
    >>
    >>>> I think you are mistaken, it is more of an automatic process than a
    >> curational one
    >>>> I don't think they are interested in quality or originality all that
    > much.
    >>
    >> I was thinking the opposite... if so: bad political choice..
    >> what is the reason for submitting an artwork to the artbase?
    >>
    >> cz
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
    >> -> 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
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    >
    > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
    > -> 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
    >
  • carlo zanni | Wed Jul 2nd 2003 6:39 p.m.
    Dear Rachel,

    >>> you seemed to be comparing your work to someone else's. Reading your
    posts I am more confused. You don't like a project that was accepted into
    the artbase?

    I'm not comparing my work to someone else's. The fact is that TS's work is
    the SAME I did 2 years ago and the problem is that ArtBase listed it.
    There isn't a duty to know my 2001 work (even if it passed through the list)
    but once this thing has been emphasized, I think artbase people have to pay
    attention because this fact hides two key issues : memory and authorship.

    I just want to defend my work. It's not possible to historicize a work
    already done by another artist 2 years before.
    Simple and Clear.

    cz
  • Alena Williams | Thu Jul 3rd 2003 3:50 p.m.
    Hi cz:

    When I read your initial post, I thought (as you seem to suggest below) that
    you were simply informing us that you did a similar project which may have
    been made before "Hole in the Sky." Although originality is one of the
    factors we consider when deciding whether or not to include an artwork, it
    is virtually impossible to avoid all duplication (on a large and small
    scale) in the archive. In fact, many artists have explored similar issues
    using similar means but, on some level or another, have ultimately produced
    projects which each exhibit their own unique characteristics. Although the
    Rhizome staff at times does encourage artists to submit their work to the
    archive, we rarely solicit the submission of projects with methods similar
    to those of museum curators, who, for example, exhaustively vet their
    potential purchases for originality and so on.

    Moreover, despite the fact that the ArtBase remains to be one of the most
    comprehensive archives of new media art, it is by no means entirely
    exhaustive. As a result, a number of projects appropriate to the archive
    and its aims (as your project appears to be) have not been included in the
    archive, simply because artists do not venture to submit their work. Posting
    to the list does not automatically initiate this process.

    Nevertheless, this duplication is certainly not intentional, and I apologize
    for any personal offense you may have taken to our inclusion of "Hole in the
    Sky" in the ArtBase. But especially since your project is currently not in
    the archive and I did not come across your project as a past submission--I
    just checked my records, but please let me know if I am mistaken--to not
    include "Hole in the Sky" simply because your project exists somewhere else
    seems a bit extreme. It is a more serious matter, of course, if you think
    that your intellectual property has been infringed in some way.

    Best regards,
    Alena

    + + +

    Alena Williams
    ArtBase Coordinator
    Rhizome.org

    > Does the artbase have an historicization function?
    >
    > Does the artbase have "quality" as distinguishing mark?
    >
    >
    > what happened with " Hole in the Sky " by Tom Scarpino (Hi Tom)
    > http://www.rhizome.org/object.rhiz?14018
    > it's not a great thing for the reputation and the reliability of the artbase.
    > Above all because it's a "curatorial oriented" process and not an automatic
    > one.
    >
    > 1- Everybody depends from others, but in this case the work it's the same.
    >
    > 2- There isn't a duty in knowing my 2001 work (even if it passed through the
    > list) but once this thing has been emphasized ,
    > why any official voice wrote me back?. ... everybody can make a mistake..
    > where is the problem?
    >
    > I'm really disappointed from this behavior
    > i was expecting an answer from the artbase crew.
    >
    > Thank you
    >
    > cz
    >
    > http://www.zanni.org
    > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
    > -> 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
    >
  • Paul St George | Sun Jul 27th 2003 6:51 a.m.
    I want to support the idea that a number of artists can respond to an
    absence in the same way. In 2001, Carlo Zanni and Tom Scarpino
    responded to an absence by using the icon for an absent digital
    image. If you visit http://www.paulstgeorge.com/shopping/ you will
    see that I used the same tactic in 1999.

    Can I take this opportunity to submit my art work to the ArtBase?
  • Paul St George | Sun Jul 27th 2003 7:09 a.m.
    I want to support the idea that a number of artists can respond to an
    absence in the same way. In 2001, Carlo Zanni and Tom Scarpino
    responded to an absence by using the icon for an absent digital
    image. If you visit http://www.paulstgeorge.com/shopping/ you will
    see that I used the same tactic in 1999.

    Can I take this opportunity to submit my art work to the ArtBase?
  • christopher otto | Mon Jul 28th 2003 6:23 p.m.
    i think the broken image has been an interesting new idea added to vocabulary with the www - i used it first in connect/disconnect [no longer extant] to show missing webcam users around 96/97 - then later to play with realities and the dot.com crash in 2000 by posting broken stickers on advertisements around san francisco. i had a tshirt too, but only two people bought it. check them out at

    http://userpages.umbc.edu/~cotto1/brokenimages/
Your Reply