Would be ineterested quite alarmingly in responses to this question:
Are "digital poetry" and net art two distinct genres? And, perhaps more importantly, should they be?
bliss
l
Anningan (in progress) http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
http://www.lewislacook.com/
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
meditation, net art, poeisis: blog http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
———————————
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
"digital poetry" vs net art
-
Type: discussion
Comments
>the original poem also exists in it's own right
this is actually a really interesting point. i have been concerned
that so much recent "net art" is only "net" art because it is on the
net, but is really more design (or whatever else) thrown up there and
not something that references its context, its site-specificity, or
network conditions in any way. somehow i want to insist on this
self-reflexivity, despite the fact that i don't ask a photo to
reference its conditions as such.. i just happen to like it when it
does…
it's also interesting to think about the concealed form or life of an
"object" prior to its final incarnation in its destined media.
remember that the VGIK filmmakers made "films" on paper in meager
times… the whole ephemeral media debate re-raises this issue with
regard to the life_span_ (and archival properties) of a new media
object.
with poetry, i wonder how, as you say, it exists "in its own right."
do you mean that it is a poem first and then becomes digitized? in
what form does the "digital poem," as lewis put it, exist? are you
referring to something jotted down on paper prior to its digitization
or something that exists as an intellectual entity? my hunch is that
you may mean that poetry exists as poetry before (or above) its
existence in any specific media, but i find it hard to divorce the
creative form from its medium if only because it will inevitably be
schematized in relation to its medium–it is, afterall, something
expressed and defined in relation to its interpretation, as you say
here:
>but your visit creates a unique iteration
and that interpretation (or "visit") is always-already predetermined
by the material conditions of its iteration, insofar as (a) that is
the dimension by which it can be actualized or read, and (more so–b)
the base-matter that comprises that materiality will always be
constitutively comprised of cultural precursors; the cultural
conditions for representing and interprteting (and all in
between–protocol, etc) are bound up in the formula of the poem's (or
image's, or treatise's, or code's, or network's, etc.) medium.
marisa
_________________
Marisa S. Olson
Associate Director
SF Camerawork
415. 863. 1001
"Marisa S. Olson" <[email protected]> wrote:Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 15:07:24 -0800
To: lewis lacook
From: "Marisa S. Olson"
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: "digital poetry" vs net art
>me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its
>medium…i want a net art that literally requires the net work in
>order to manifest itself…
i agree. you should post this (below) back to the list (or i can
redirect it if you didn't save it.) i'm happy to see more of this
kinda discussion, rather than all the flaming that goes on… and i
think others would be, too…
best,
~mo
>hi marisa…
>
>i agree that "digital poetry" is often a romantic term…
>
>what i'm looking for is perhaps this…i've been thinking lately
>about the distinction between functional and decorative, and how it
>applies to art on the web…a lot of the "digital poetry" crowd is
>comprised of artists who make animations of words–at best, the
>reactivity and interaction required of the user is touching rollover
>buttons===which in flash, we know, takes almost no knowledge of code
>at all…these works seem to me to be remaking cinema, which, as you
>and i know, we already have…
>
>i guess it boils down to this: what's the difference between say, a
>piece by mez and the recent gogolchat by jimpunk and christophe
>bruno? because it's here i see the distinction most
>clearly…gogolchat is highly functional:::it explores
>user-interaction…it requires the network in order to manifest
>itself (that being for me one of the true signs of a pure net
>work…mez's connection to the network, at least in regards to her
>multimedia works, is less tangible////the work does require the
>network, but in a passive way, that is, it requires email list-servs
>for distribution, and takes much of its language from a kind of
>pantomime of code itself…///it's more interactive than digital
>cinema, but less so than a work like gogolchat (or chris fahey's
>ada1852)—-
>
>me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its
>medium…i want a net art that literally requires the net work in
>order to manifest itself…
>
>bliss
>
>l
>
>
>
> "Marisa S. Olson" wrote:
>
> >Are "digital poetry" and net art two distinct genres? And, perhaps
> >more importantly, should they be?
>
>lewis,
>
>an interesting question, though i do wonder if "digital poetry" isn't
>a romanticization of work (text-based or otherwise) constructed
>and/or experienced in/with digital media.
>
>of course you know that your question involves defining the
>"products" of two practices that tend to defy
>definition–particularly among these object-oriented lines. however,
>i would most certainly say that there is a "poetics" of "net art," in
>the sense that there are specific rhetorical, narratological,
>structural conditions under which the work is made, represented,
>distributed, accessed, interpreted, etc.. the means, modes, and
>vehicles by which it signifies….
>
>marisa
>
>
>_________________
>Marisa S. Olson
>Associate Director
>SF Camerawork
>415. 863. 1001
>
>
>
>Anningan (in progress)
> http://www.le
>wislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
>
>http://www.lewislacook.com/
>
>http://artists
>.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
>
>meditation, net art, poeisis: blog
>http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>Do you Yahoo!?
>U2
>on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
_________________
Marisa S. Olson
Associate Director
SF Camerawork
415. 863. 1001
Anningan (in progress) http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
http://www.lewislacook.com/
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
meditation, net art, poeisis: blog http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
———————————
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
>Are "digital poetry" and net art two distinct genres? And, perhaps
>more importantly, should they be?
lewis,
an interesting question, though i do wonder if "digital poetry" isn't
a romanticization of work (text-based or otherwise) constructed
and/or experienced in/with digital media.
of course you know that your question involves defining the
"products" of two practices that tend to defy
definition–particularly among these object-oriented lines. however,
i would most certainly say that there is a "poetics" of "net art," in
the sense that there are specific rhetorical, narratological,
structural conditions under which the work is made, represented,
distributed, accessed, interpreted, etc.. the means, modes, and
vehicles by which it signifies….
marisa
_________________
Marisa S. Olson
Associate Director
SF Camerawork
415. 863. 1001
[d.fine + d.volute::]
.core dumping + re.hash mode[m]
.re.sist.or dross + spewing.statics.in.polemic.placements.
[sick.making]
.
. . …. …..
pro][tean][.lapsing.txt
.
.
www.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/
http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/
http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf
…. . .??? …….
sometimes the destinction is clouded
constructed around the net(.)work
the original poem also exists in it's own right
but your visit creates a unique iteration
orbital, a generative poetry engine
http://www.herenorthere.org/orbital
two one two dot two two eight dot one zero seven dot two four zero…
"Marisa S. Olson" wrote:
> >Are "digital poetry" and net art two distinct genres? And, perhaps
> >more importantly, should they be?
>
> lewis,
>
> an interesting question, though i do wonder if "digital poetry" isn't
> a romanticization of work (text-based or otherwise) constructed
> and/or experienced in/with digital media.
>
> of course you know that your question involves defining the
> "products" of two practices that tend to defy
> definition–particularly among these object-oriented lines. however,
> i would most certainly say that there is a "poetics" of "net art," in
> the sense that there are specific rhetorical, narratological,
> structural conditions under which the work is made, represented,
> distributed, accessed, interpreted, etc.. the means, modes, and
> vehicles by which it signifies….
>
> marisa
>
> _________________
> Marisa S. Olson
> Associate Director
> SF Camerawork
> 415. 863. 1001
> + be me
> -> 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
Does that mean that I could be a [passive] [aggressive]?
marc
> Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 17:57:13 -0500
>
> B+:"Should/shouldn't is a matter of curatorial
> classification; why not
> leave it there?
>
> L><:oh, ideally it is left at that! but lately i've
> been thinking about the differences and similarities
> between works, thinking in taxonomic terms/////and
> with net art, one distinction i've made is that
> between functional works and decorative works////
> 1.) functional works]]]]]use code toward some
> end///high degree of user-interaction
> 2.) decorative works]]]]use almost no code///no
> interaction
>
> one is open to the user, the other is closed////
> and these two classes, like all art, are indicative of
> political minds////
> i see functional works as more open, as
> democratic…with true software art being the ultimate
> expression of this///the work is a tool///the work is
> (hopefully, if the artist has her head on straight)
> freely available…..the work is a means of production
> in the case of software art///in any case, in any
> functional net artwork, the user can collaborate with
> the work, leaving authorship in the air…the user
> becomes the author, is empowered///or at least the
> user contributes literally to the manifestation of the
> work///
>
> decorative work is simply decorative///it's closed,
> ego-centric, doesn't allow silence to be silence,
> doesn't let the user in, the user is passive and
> unable to become empowered….
>
> of course, i prefer functional works////and i'm afraid
> my own bias there colors my perception of decorative
> works////which are often quite beautiful and
> intriguing///
>
> B+:What is your position on the critical significance
> of poietic *intent*?
>
> L><:Ideally, intent should play no part in a user's
> experience of a work////in the end, the work stands on
> its own, and ideally the user must look at the work
> isolated from any intent the author had====but if the
> author is successful, the intent's there, and the user
> feels it…
>
> it's all warmed over new criticism really…
>
> bliss
> l
>
>
> =====
>
> Anningan (in progress)
http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
> http://www.lewislacook.com/
> http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
> meditation, net art, poeisis: blog http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
> http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
> _______________________________________________
> _arc.hive_ mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lm.va.com.au/mailman/listinfo/_arc.hive_
> This list is proudly supported by VA. http://www.va.com.au
>
> yes…you're definitely passive aggressive…or proactive about passivity…
(i'm not arguing for the end of the spectacle…just for a new art)
bliss
l
You are a Unit of Verse in the Unitverse
great stuff here, and you raise some very pertinent
points…
i'm not privileging the network as in the
institutions, but the physical network itself….i
mean, the nodes of people and machines connected
together we call the net…
why squish my soft self into algorithms? what attracts
me is the fact that the mchine is a manifestation of
the human mind itself…there's nothing cold and alien
to human thought in code….code is human thought,
just abstracted and taken to an (at times) ridiculous
literalness…
actually, it's the desire for having fewer limits that
attracts me…i like my work to be porous, to have
spaces to be filled in by the user…this makes for a
lot of unpredictability (which is why i often talk
about interaction as communion with the user, about
the user sharing the creation of the work)…
you know, i never would have imagined that such a
simple question would have opened such a hot debate,
or subjected me to so much ire….i wonder why….
but, yes, this is good stuff….i'm glad a few people
are actually thinking instead of just reacting…
bliss
l
— ruth catlow <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> lewis lacook wrote:
> >me, i just want a net art that is truly an art
> fitted to its medium…i
> want a net art that literally requires the net work
> in order to manifest
> itself…
>
> I think this gives the institutions and the
> structures of the net work
> far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we
> only want art that
> requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are
> you so eager to
> squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced
> imaginations into
> the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of
> mathematically determined
> structures?
>
> I know that my own attraction to 'net art that
> literally requires the
> net work in order to manifest itself' is linked to a
> desire for the
> safety of limits, control, submission paired up
> paradoxically with a
> ridiculous programmed fear and respectful awe of the
> superior
> intelligence/functionality ascribed to the 'coded'
> art work. (I do
> regard this attraction as perverse-hehe)
>
> Perhaps it is similar to a call for evidence of
> craft in art, a proof
> that the artist is doing something that most people
> consider themselves
> incapable of doing. Or a call for provable rigour.
> It is definitely a
> step towards cyborgism which I don't have a problem
> with per se but
> which I find it hard to get excited about.
>
> Also don't think we can overlook the many different
> ways that artists
> come to be net artists often starting with the
> 'decorative, and how it
> applies to art on the web… making animations of
> words–at best, the
> reactivity and interaction required of the user is
> touching rollover
> buttons===which in flash, we know, takes almost no
> knowledge of code'
>
> The animations and 'decorations' represent one of
> the roots/routes to
> net art . Or do we insist that in order to enter a
> 'pantheon of net art'
> the artist is prepared to dedicate a significant
> proportion of their
> practice to learning and manipulating code. If this
> is what we are
> saying, then if we want a burgeoning of excellent
> and relevant work we
> need to set up apprenticeships for the learning of
> the craft of code,
> otherwise we may find that we are excluding a whole
> gamut of artists
> with insight and talent but no facility for code and
> therefore no way to
> communicate. And what about how that time might
> otherwise be usefully
> spent, researching and exploring other relevant
> human issues. Or perhaps
> this is finally an admission that like in films we
> now need a team of
> people with different areas of expertise to
> accomplish a net art work.
>
> The net does not just provide a distinct medium but
> represents a
> platform for a distinct but very diverse culture
> with a distinct means
> of distribution. I think that 'net art that
> literally requires the net
> work in order to manifest itself' maybe could
> include art that needs the
> audience to receive knowledge of its existence
> through their emails in
> order for it to resonate. Some very simple image and
> text web pages are
> very successful in communicating poetics as true and
> rigorous and
> relevant as any net work exclusive works. And the
> fact that I receive
> them in my inbox influences how the pieces are
> received.
>
> Thanks Lewis for starting this up
>
> cheers
>
> Ruth
>
> furtherfield.org
>
>
>
>
> >
> > i agree. you should post this (below) back to
> the list (or i
> > can
> > redirect it if you didn't save it.) i'm happy
> to see more of
> > this
> > kinda discussion, rather than all the flaming
> that goes
> > on… and i
> > think others would be, too…
> >
> > best,
> > ~mo
> >
> >
> >
> > >hi marisa…
> > >
> > >i agree that "digital poetry" is often a
> romantic term…
> > >
> > >what i'm looking for is perhaps this…i've
> been thinking
> > lately
> > >about the distinction between functional and
> decorative,
> > and how it >applies to art on the web…a lot
> of the
> > "digital poetry" crowd is
> > >comprised of artists who make animations of
> words–at best,
> > the
> > >reactivity and interaction required of the
> user is touching
> > rollover
> > >buttons===which in flash, we know, takes
> almost no
> > knowledge of code
> > >at all…these works seem to me to be
> remaking cinema,
> > which, as you
> > >and i know, we already have…
> > >
> > >i guess it boils down to this: what's the
> difference
> > between say, a
> > >piece by mez and the recent gogolchat by
> jimpunk and
> > christophe
> > >bruno? because it's here i see the
> distinction most
> > >clearly…gogolchat is highly
> functional:::it explores
> > >user-interaction…it requires the network
> in order to
> > manifest
> > >itself (that being for me one of the true
> signs of a pure
> > net
> > >work…mez's connection to the network, at
> least in regards
> > to her
> > >multimedia works, is less tangible////the
> work does require
> > the
> > >! network, but in a passive way, that is, it
> requires email
> > list-servs
> > >for distribution, and takes much of its
> language from a
> > kind of
> > >pantomime of code itself…///it's more
> interactive than
> > digital
> > >cinema, but less so than a work like
> gogolchat (or chris
> > fahey's
> > >ada1852)—-
> > >
> > >me, i just want a net art that is truly an
> art fitted to
> > its
> > >medium…i want a net art that literally
> requires the net
> > work in
> > >order to manifest itself…
> > >
> > >bliss
> > >
> > >l
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Marisa S. Olson" wrote:
> > >
> > > >Are "digital poetry" and net art two
> distinct genres?
> > And, perhaps
> > > >more importantly, should they be?
> > >
> > >lewis,
> > >
> > >an interesting question, though i do wonder
> if "digital
> > poetry" isn't
> > >a romanticization of work (text-based or
> otherwise)
> > constructed
> > >and/or experienced in/with digital media.
> > >
> > >! of course you know that your question
> involves defining
> > the
> > >"products" of two practices that tend to
> defy
> > >definition–particularly among these
> object-oriented lines.
> > however,
> > >i would most certainly say that there is a
> "poetics" of
> > "net art," in
> > >the sense that there are specific
> rhetorical,
> > narratological,
> > >structural conditions under which the work
> is made,
> > represented,
> > >distributed, accessed, interpreted, etc..
> the means, modes,
> > and
> > >vehicles by which it signifies….
> > >
> > >marisa
> > >
> > >
> > >_________________
> > >Marisa S. Olson
> > >Associate Director
> > >SF Camerawork
> > >415. 863. 1001
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Anningan (in progress)
> > > http://www.le
> > >wislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
> > >
> > >http://www.lewislacook.com/
> > >
> > >http://artists
> > >.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
> > >
> > >meditation, net art, poeisis: blog
> > >http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Do you Yahoo!?
> > >U2
> > >on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from
> Greatest Hits CD
> >
> > _________________
> > Marisa S. Olson
> > Associate Director
> > SF Camerawork
> > 415. 863. 1001
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Anningan (in progress)
> >
>
http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
> >
> > http://www.lewislacook.com/
> >
> >
>
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
> >
> > meditation, net art, poeisis: blog
> http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> >
>
———————————————————————–
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from
> Greatest Hits CD
>
=====
Anningan (in progress) http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
http://www.lewislacook.com/
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
meditation, net art, poeisis: blog http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
>
Re: "digital poetry" vs net art
"Wally Keeler" <[email protected]> dit:
You are a Unit of Verse in the Unitverse
indeed i am, wally…and a small one, at that! (thank god!)
bliss
l
I kind of think that I am proactive in respect of declaring vulnerability,
taking away the gloss/sheen of spectacle-like illusion. Also, I believe that
there is 'no one way' to declare war on the spectacle ~ each has a rhythm to
tune into, sometimes friendly & of course collisions must occur, sometimes
meetings happen, sometimes exploration has its own rewards.
marc
> > yes…you're definitely passive aggressive…or proactive about
passivity…
>
> (i'm not arguing for the end of the spectacle…just for a new art)
> bliss
> l
>
> + KNORRRRRRR
> -> 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
>
>
lewis lacook wrote:
>me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its medium…i
want a net art that literally requires the net work in order to manifest
itself…
I think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net work
far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that
requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to
squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into
the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined
structures?
I know that my own attraction to 'net art that literally requires the
net work in order to manifest itself' is linked to a desire for the
safety of limits, control, submission paired up paradoxically with a
ridiculous programmed fear and respectful awe of the superior
intelligence/functionality ascribed to the 'coded' art work. (I do
regard this attraction as perverse-hehe)
Perhaps it is similar to a call for evidence of craft in art, a proof
that the artist is doing something that most people consider themselves
incapable of doing. Or a call for provable rigour. It is definitely a
step towards cyborgism which I don't have a problem with per se but
which I find it hard to get excited about.
Also don't think we can overlook the many different ways that artists
come to be net artists often starting with the 'decorative, and how it
applies to art on the web… making animations of words–at best, the
reactivity and interaction required of the user is touching rollover
buttons===which in flash, we know, takes almost no knowledge of code'
The animations and 'decorations' represent one of the roots/routes to
net art . Or do we insist that in order to enter a 'pantheon of net art'
the artist is prepared to dedicate a significant proportion of their
practice to learning and manipulating code. If this is what we are
saying, then if we want a burgeoning of excellent and relevant work we
need to set up apprenticeships for the learning of the craft of code,
otherwise we may find that we are excluding a whole gamut of artists
with insight and talent but no facility for code and therefore no way to
communicate. And what about how that time might otherwise be usefully
spent, researching and exploring other relevant human issues. Or perhaps
this is finally an admission that like in films we now need a team of
people with different areas of expertise to accomplish a net art work.
The net does not just provide a distinct medium but represents a
platform for a distinct but very diverse culture with a distinct means
of distribution. I think that 'net art that literally requires the net
work in order to manifest itself' maybe could include art that needs the
audience to receive knowledge of its existence through their emails in
order for it to resonate. Some very simple image and text web pages are
very successful in communicating poetics as true and rigorous and
relevant as any net work exclusive works. And the fact that I receive
them in my inbox influences how the pieces are received.
Thanks Lewis for starting this up
cheers
Ruth
furtherfield.org
>
> i agree. you should post this (below) back to the list (or i
> can
> redirect it if you didn't save it.) i'm happy to see more of
> this
> kinda discussion, rather than all the flaming that goes
> on… and i
> think others would be, too…
>
> best,
> ~mo
>
>
>
> >hi marisa…
> >
> >i agree that "digital poetry" is often a romantic term…
> >
> >what i'm looking for is perhaps this…i've been thinking
> lately
> >about the distinction between functional and decorative,
> and how it >applies to art on the web…a lot of the
> "digital poetry" crowd is
> >comprised of artists who make animations of words–at best,
> the
> >reactivity and interaction required of the user is touching
> rollover
> >buttons===which in flash, we know, takes almost no
> knowledge of code
> >at all…these works seem to me to be remaking cinema,
> which, as you
> >and i know, we already have…
> >
> >i guess it boils down to this: what's the difference
> between say, a
> >piece by mez and the recent gogolchat by jimpunk and
> christophe
> >bruno? because it's here i see the distinction most
> >clearly…gogolchat is highly functional:::it explores
> >user-interaction…it requires the network in order to
> manifest
> >itself (that being for me one of the true signs of a pure
> net
> >work…mez's connection to the network, at least in regards
> to her
> >multimedia works, is less tangible////the work does require
> the
> >! network, but in a passive way, that is, it requires email
> list-servs
> >for distribution, and takes much of its language from a
> kind of
> >pantomime of code itself…///it's more interactive than
> digital
> >cinema, but less so than a work like gogolchat (or chris
> fahey's
> >ada1852)—-
> >
> >me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to
> its
> >medium…i want a net art that literally requires the net
> work in
> >order to manifest itself…
> >
> >bliss
> >
> >l
> >
> >
> >
> > "Marisa S. Olson" wrote:
> >
> > >Are "digital poetry" and net art two distinct genres?
> And, perhaps
> > >more importantly, should they be?
> >
> >lewis,
> >
> >an interesting question, though i do wonder if "digital
> poetry" isn't
> >a romanticization of work (text-based or otherwise)
> constructed
> >and/or experienced in/with digital media.
> >
> >! of course you know that your question involves defining
> the
> >"products" of two practices that tend to defy
> >definition–particularly among these object-oriented lines.
> however,
> >i would most certainly say that there is a "poetics" of
> "net art," in
> >the sense that there are specific rhetorical,
> narratological,
> >structural conditions under which the work is made,
> represented,
> >distributed, accessed, interpreted, etc.. the means, modes,
> and
> >vehicles by which it signifies….
> >
> >marisa
> >
> >
> >_________________
> >Marisa S. Olson
> >Associate Director
> >SF Camerawork
> >415. 863. 1001
> >
> >
> >
> >Anningan (in progress)
> > http://www.le
> >wislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
> >
> >http://www.lewislacook.com/
> >
> >http://artists
> >.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
> >
> >meditation, net art, poeisis: blog
> >http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> >
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >U2
> >on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
>
> _________________
> Marisa S. Olson
> Associate Director
> SF Camerawork
> 415. 863. 1001
>
>
>
>
> Anningan (in progress)
> http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
>
> http://www.lewislacook.com/
>
> http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
>
> meditation, net art, poeisis: blog http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
>
>
> ———————————————————————–
> Do you Yahoo!?
> U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
<body>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Some long winded thoughts written
when I am half asleep. I may take
ALL of them, back tomoorow;-)</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">as one of the artists in the metaphorical
dock, (i.e using flash which
takes little or knowledge of code) I though I ought to saw something
regards to this thread…</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">One of the most frustrating aspects
of working on the net is the
limitation on the word 'interaction', particulally when used in the context
of art & poetry.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">The rigor of the belief of programmer/artist=function=user=random
is
taken as read and that somewhere between the first and forth step 'the
net' intervenes and a random 'unique' quality asserts itself. This (it is
argued) can only take play within coded works that have the specialist
knowledge this dialogue. The random quality looked for, is brought
about by the users interaction with the function which cannot be pre-
ordained by the programmer/artists and are so suggested as the 'truest'
forms of internet works. </span></font><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">What have been labelled decorative
works do not have the same
equation. Purists would argue that because of the inability for little (if
any) interaction the random element does not occur therefore the
presence of the network is not obvious (or necessary) therefore these
works should be seen as secondary or inadequate forms of net art.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Looking at the at this argument in
detail the first question that needs to
be asked is what does the word random mean? Random could be seen
as unexpected or left to chance. In terms of programming however,
how much really is is left to chance? Simplisticly, the responses of the
work are programmed so that a specific chain of event will occur. The
illusion of the net work itself is that the pages occur magically on the
users screen without them being aware of the complex set of
commands that brought them there. The user themselves is pleased
with this magic. It is thrilling and exciting and for the most part many will
not want to know how the trick is done. Once one knows there is a false
bottom on the top hat where the magicians rabbit appears then the
spectacle loses its glamour. It is my feeling that sometimes during the
code/decoration argument this suggestion of superiority of code is used
in part to retain this illusion of this magical quality, much in the same
way as in fine art the 'skill' of the brushwork often can take precedent
over the form of the painting.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">It can them be said that although
the functions of the works may be
mechanized, the random quality is then in the interactive methods
employed by the artist/programmer for example: by allowing the user to
actually work in and add to the work itself by added text, images or
dialogue. The artists/programmer can never be fully sure of what may
be added to the work so the shape of the work itself becomes bigger
and beyond their original control. The debate generally asserts that the
internet is the only media where this kind of activity takes place and
works that do not include such methods are not consistant with that
media. </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Why do other forms of artwork evade
this kind of interactiveness? The
common idea is that the network is the only place where this full and
free interaction is possible but a more accurate statement could be that
it is the only place where full and free interactions with artworks are
</span></font><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"><i>allowed. </i>One could (if one didn't
mind a short prison term;-) go into any
museum or gallery and 'interact' with any form of artwork there. Painting
could be overlaid with pen, sculptures added to, text, reassembled. The
reason that we do not do this is tied up with the artist as genius (and
their for the work as special) and permission/authorship of the work
(and prison, amongst others) but it could be done. The question why we
don't want to do this is almost more interesting than this one. Perhaps a
simplistic answer is the interaction the majority of viewers of art are
looking for is not a 'hands on' one, but one of exchange of emotion, an
empathy or catharsis…..?</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">The second reason of why interactivety
does not take place in other
forms of art may have to do with the fact that it is that free and open
does not necessarily equate to more interesting and/or beautiful or
'work' better. One of the great arguments for the decline in popularity
amongst viewers of modern art is that the artworks 'could be done by
anyone', the question remains should they? Does making artworks
interactive and open increase or decrease the 'function' of that work?
This is not a reiteration of the artist as somehow special or gifted, but
there could be an argument (that I not going into here!) that artists are
the guardians of a specific form of communication through which it is
possible to open doors that would otherwise remain closed. What is the
function perhaps, not of net art but art itself? Should and could there be
a line drawn under a work where it does not need 'interaction' (or
adding to) to become more than it is or to increase its functionality?</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Functionality therefore could be seen
as the root of this debate. What is
the function of net art? In defence of the decorative it is worth
considering a quote written by ruth chandler regarding the cyber-
domestic aesthetic (ah - knew I would get it in somewhere!)</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">"..</span></font><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-size:10pt">Bergson posits no fundamental difference in kind between </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">the materiality of the mind and the
material world. The body is in an </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">open network with the material world.
It is the relational speeds and </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">slownesses of other durations that
touch upon this vision of the body </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">is in an open network with the mobile
material world. " This might
</span></font><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">indicate that there are other 'net works'
in action when questioning the
functionailty or interactivity of a piece i.e the human presenceof the
artist and user. This random quality of these two presence takes the
idea of both into a greater and more elusive field. Once human
presence is added to this equation 'the random' becomes subjective.
Emotion, pain, experience, dream, moods and desire cannot be coded
into a work. In this respect a minimal or lo-tech work becomes as
interactive and its function (arguably) an flexible as the most advanced
script - though this is generally not accepted as the effect/random is
immeasurable. One can physically see how a coded piece changes and
distorts with the additions and play of a thousand users. Unfortunately a
file has yet to be invented that can hold emotional or communicative
change.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">As a footnote thought, as construction
on the network increases and the
debates over ownership and copyright of net works increase it is
possible that permission for 'free' interaction will decrease, and
functionanlity of the work controlled much more tightly. Whether this
kind of work will be seen as quite so radical under those possible
circumstances is open to question. </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><br></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> lewis lacook
wrote:</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> >me, i just
want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its medium…i</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> want a net art
that literally requires the net work in order to manifest</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> itself…</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> I think this
gives the institutions and the structures of the net work</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> far too much
respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> requires the
cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> squash your squishy,
expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> the predetermined
and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> structures?</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> I know that my
own attraction to 'net art that literally requires the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> net work in order
to manifest itself' is linked to a desire for the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> safety of limits,
control, submission paired up paradoxically with a</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ridiculous programmed
fear and respectful awe of the superior</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> intelligence/functionality
ascribed to the 'coded' art work. (I do</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> regard this attraction
as perverse-hehe)</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> Perhaps it is
similar to a call for evidence of craft in art, a proof</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> that the artist
is doing something that most people consider themselves</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> incapable of
doing. Or a call for provable rigour. It is definitely a</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> step towards
cyborgism which I don't have a problem with per se but</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> which I find
it hard to get excited about.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> Also don't think
we can overlook the many different ways that artists</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> come to be net
artists often starting with the 'decorative, and how it</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> applies to art
on the web… making animations of words–at best, the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> reactivity and
interaction required of the user is touching rollover</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> buttons===which
in flash, we know, takes almost no knowledge of code'</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> The animations
and 'decorations' represent one of the roots/routes to</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> net art . Or
do we insist that in order to enter a 'pantheon of net art'</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> the artist is
prepared to dedicate a significant proportion of their</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> practice to learning
and manipulating code. If this is what we are</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> saying, then
if we want a burgeoning of excellent and relevant work we</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> need to set up
apprenticeships for the learning of the craft of code,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> otherwise we
may find that we are excluding a whole gamut of artists</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> with insight
and talent but no facility for code and therefore no way to</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> communicate.
And what about how that time might otherwise be usefully</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> spent, researching
and exploring other relevant human issues. Or perhaps</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> this is finally
an admission that like in films we now need a team of</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> people with different
areas of expertise to accomplish a net art work.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> The net does
not just provide a distinct medium but represents a</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> platform for
a distinct but very diverse culture with a distinct means</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> of distribution.
I think that 'net art that literally requires the net</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> work in order
to manifest itself' maybe could include art that needs the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> audience to receive
knowledge of its existence through their emails in</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> order for it
to resonate. Some very simple image and text web pages are</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> very successful
in communicating poetics as true and rigorous and</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> relevant as any
net work exclusive works. And the fact that I receive</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> them in my inbox
influences how the pieces are received.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> Thanks Lewis
for starting this up</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> cheers</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> Ruth</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> furtherfield.org</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > i
agree. you should post this (below) back to the list (or i</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > can</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > redirect
it if you didn't save it.) i'm happy to see more of</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > this</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > kinda
discussion, rather than all the flaming that goes</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > on…
and i</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > think
others would be, too…</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > best,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ~mo</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >hi
marisa…</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >i
agree that "digital poetry" is often a romantic term…</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >what
i'm looking for is perhaps this…i've been thinking</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > lately</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >about
the distinction between functional and decorative,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > and
how it >applies to art on the web…a lot of the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > "digital
poetry" crowd is</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >comprised
of artists who make animations of words–at best,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >reactivity
and interaction required of the user is touching</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > rollover</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >buttons===which
in flash, we know, takes almost no</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > knowledge
of code</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >at
all…these works seem to me to be remaking cinema,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > which,
as you</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >and
i know, we already have…</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >i
guess it boils down to this: what's the difference</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > between
say, a</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >piece
by mez and the recent gogolchat by jimpunk and</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > christophe</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >bruno?
because it's here i see the distinction most</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >clearly…gogolchat
is highly functional:::it explores</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >user-interaction…it
requires the network in order to</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > manifest</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >itself
(that being for me one of the true signs of a pure</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > net</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >work…mez's
connection to the network, at least in regards</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > to
her</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >multimedia
works, is less tangible////the work does require</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >!
network, but in a passive way, that is, it requires email</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > list-servs</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >for
distribution, and takes much of its language from a</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > kind
of</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >pantomime
of code itself…///it's more interactive than</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > digital</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >cinema,
but less so than a work like gogolchat (or chris</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > fahey's</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >ada1852)—-</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >me,
i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > its</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >medium…i
want a net art that literally requires the net</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > work
in</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >order
to manifest itself…</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >bliss</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >l</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >
"Marisa S. Olson" wrote:</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >
>Are "digital poetry" and net art two distinct genres?</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > And,
perhaps</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >
>more importantly, should they be?</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >lewis,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >an
interesting question, though i do wonder if "digital</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > poetry"
isn't</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >a
romanticization of work (text-based or otherwise)</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > constructed</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >and/or
experienced in/with digital media.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >!
of course you know that your question involves defining</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >"products"
of two practices that tend to defy</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >definition–particularly
among these object-oriented lines.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > however,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >i
would most certainly say that there is a "poetics" of</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > "net
art," in</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >the
sense that there are specific rhetorical,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > narratological,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >structural
conditions under which the work is made,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > represented,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >distributed,
accessed, interpreted, etc.. the means, modes,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > and</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >vehicles
by which it signifies….</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >marisa</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >_________________</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >Marisa
S. Olson</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >Associate
Director</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >SF
Camerawork</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >415.
863. 1001</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >Anningan
(in progress)</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >
http://www.le</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >wislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >http://www.lewislacook.com/</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >http://artists</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >meditation,
net art, poeisis: blog</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >Do
you Yahoo!?</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >U2</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > >on
LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > _________________</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > Marisa
S. Olson</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > Associate
Director</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > SF
Camerawork</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > 415.
863. 1001</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > Anningan
(in progress)</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > http://www.lewislacook.com/</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > meditation,
net art, poeisis: blog http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> ></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > ———————————————————————–</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > Do you Yahoo!?</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> > U2 on LAUNCH
- Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> + KNORRRRRRR</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> -> post: [email protected]</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> -> questions:
[email protected]</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> +</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> Subscribers to
Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> Membership Agreement
available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
<div align="left"><br></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> o</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">/^ rssgallery.com</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> ][</span></font></div>
</body>
> From: ruth catlow <[email protected]>
>
> lewis lacook wrote:
>> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its medium…i
> want a net art that literally requires the net work in order to manifest
> itself…
>
> I think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net work
> far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that
> requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to
> squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into
> the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined
> structures?
My reading of lewis's statement is that he calls for network art that
fundamentallly uses the network. i.e. not network art that could just as
easily be displayed on a disconnected computer in a gallery. But pieces that
use the network in some way to become themselves. And this should not
necessarily mean the network of wires and routers and IP protocols but the
network of information or the network of human activity. There are of course
many works that do this already, so Im not saying much … and, Im not
claiming value for this approach. But I think to equate this with wanting
art that fits in a white cube gallery is missing a point? Maybe there's a
May68 type slogan here: The Network Is Not A Gallery Cheers, Ivan
thank you, this is EXACTLY what i meant! (& yes, this
art already exists!)
bliss
l
— Ivan Pope <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> > From: ruth catlow <[email protected]>
>
> >
> > lewis lacook wrote:
> >> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art
> fitted to its medium…i
> > want a net art that literally requires the net
> work in order to manifest
> > itself…
> >
> > I think this gives the institutions and the
> structures of the net work
> > far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that
> we only want art that
> > requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why
> are you so eager to
> > squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh
> sourced imaginations into
> > the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of
> mathematically determined
> > structures?
> My reading of lewis's statement is that he calls for
> network art that
> fundamentallly uses the network. i.e. not network
> art that could just as
> easily be displayed on a disconnected computer in a
> gallery. But pieces that
> use the network in some way to become themselves.
> And this should not
> necessarily mean the network of wires and routers
> and IP protocols but the
> network of information or the network of human
> activity. There are of course
> many works that do this already, so Im not saying
> much … and, Im not
> claiming value for this approach. But I think to
> equate this with wanting
> art that fits in a white cube gallery is missing a
> point? Maybe there's a
> May68 type slogan here: The Network Is Not A Gallery
> Cheers, Ivan
>
=====
Anningan (in progress) http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
http://www.lewislacook.com/
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
meditation, net art, poeisis: blog http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
> > lewis wrote:
> >> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its medium…i
> > want a net art that literally requires the net work in order to manifest
> > itself…
>
ruth wrote:
> > I think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net work
> > far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that
> > requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to
> > squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into
> > the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined
> > structures?
ivan wrote:
> My reading of lewis's statement is that he calls for network art that
> fundamentallly uses the network. i.e. not network art that could just as
> easily be displayed on a disconnected computer in a gallery. But pieces that
> use the network in some way to become themselves. And this should not
> necessarily mean the network of wires and routers and IP protocols but the
> network of information or the network of human activity. There are of course
> many works that do this already, so Im not saying much … and, Im not
> claiming value for this approach. But I think to equate this with wanting
> art that fits in a white cube gallery is missing a point?
It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular,
Greenbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work or
writing). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of my own
blunt thoughts.
As for:-
> Maybe there's a
> May68 type slogan here: The Network Is Not A Gallery
Hurrah! :-D
cheers
Ruth
furtherfield.org
Hi Lewis,
In respect of current projects we are embarking on at furtherfield, we use =
the 'network' as part of the conceptual function but not as a means to an e=
nd, therefor it is part of the art (presentation) itself. For instance the =
FurtherStudio project is an online digital art residency. It uses software =
designed especially for the project, it can only be experienced via the net=
. The public visits and participates online, also creating their own versio=
ns of what they witness/view online, whilst being able to ask the artist(s)=
, collaborators questions in chat mode. While the work (at the same time) c=
an be seen being created online. Plus to spice it up, while this is happeni=
ng - certain visiting artists will pilfer other artists work from the Inte=
rnet & then redesigning and remake them (live) for all to see. A live perfo=
rmance that everyone can be part of, even though there are invited digital =
artists chosen for the online residency.
Then there is…
Skin/Strip Online is a collaboration between Completely Naked, curators of =
interactive live arts events, and Furtherfield.org. An interactive, digital=
photography installation in which the participating audience create expres=
sive images of their own naked bodies, displaying them next to others in th=
e context of an artwork. The general public are invited to express their na=
ked identities in a work that explores social activity and communication an=
d frees us from mediated ideas of the 'perfect' body. This project is a cel=
ebration of difference and expression. Furtherfield is collaborating with C=
ompletely Naked to stage Skin/Strip Online as an online event. Skin Strip e=
xhibition events have already taken place at The Museum of the Unknown in L=
ondon, UK and at the Centre of Contemporary Culture in Barcelona, Spain. Th=
e exhibitions clearly represented distinct expressions of cultural identity=
connected with their geographical locations and we anticipate a similar di=
stinctness with Skin Strip Global.
Even though we do not literalize the use of network function, it cannot exi=
st without net art or network fundementals…
marc
> RUTH:It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular=
, Greenbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work o=
r writing). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of =
my own blunt thoughts.
>
> LL: Oh no, no greenberg…i mean, there's a purist ethos involved, but i'=
m definitely not advocating any dogmatic approach…simply saying i'm more =
attracted to works like that, and trying to examine the distinction —-and=
the wonderful blurrings of that distinction!
> bliss
> l
>
>
>
>
> >
> "digital poetry" vs net art
> ruth catlow <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>
> > > lewis wrote:
> > >> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its medium.=
..i > > want a net art that literally requires the net work in order to man=
ifest > > itself…
> >
>
> ruth wrote:
>
>
> > > I think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net wor=
k > > far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art th=
at > > requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to=
> > squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into=
> > the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined > =
> structures?
>
>
> ivan wrote:
>
>
> > My reading of lewis's statement is that he calls for network art that >=
fundamentallly uses the network. i.e. not network art that could just as >=
easily be displayed on a disconnected computer in a gallery. But pieces th=
at > use the network in some way to become themselves. And this should not =
> necessarily mean the network of wires and routers and IP protocols but th=
e > network of information or the network of human activity. There are of c=
ourse > many works that do this already, so Im not saying much … and, Im =
not > claiming value for this approach. But I think to equate this with wan=
ting > art that fits in a white cube gallery is missing a point?
>
>
> It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular, Gre=
enbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work or wri=
ting). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of my ow=
n blunt thoughts.
> As for:-
>
>
> > Maybe there's a
> > May68 type slogan here: The Network Is Not A Gallery
>
>
> Hurrah! :-D
>
>
> cheers
> Ruth
>
>
> furtherfield.org
>
>
> + KNORRRRRRR
> -> 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
>
>
yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
bliss
l
(one doesn't have to literalize the network…these projects are collaborative and use the network in creative (and very human) ways….which is why i love them!
furtherfield <[email protected]> wrote:Hi Lewis,
In respect of current projects we are embarking on at furtherfield, we use the 'network' as part of the conceptual function but not as a means to an end, therefor it is part of the art (presentation) itself. For instance the FurtherStudio project is an online digital art residency. It uses software designed especially for the project, it can only be experienced via the net. The public visits and participates online, also creating their own versions of what they witness/view online, whilst being able to ask the artist(s), collaborators questions in chat mode. While the work (at the same time) can be seen being created online. Plus to spice it up, while this is happening - certain visiting artists will pilfer other artists work from the Internet & then redesigning and remake them (live) for all to see. A live performance that everyone can be part of, even though there are invited digital artists chosen for the online residency.
Then there is…
Skin/Strip Online is a collaboration between Completely Naked, curators of interactive live arts events, and Furtherfield.org. An interactive, digital photography installation in which the participating audience create expressive images of their own naked bodies, displaying them next to others in the context of an artwork. The general public are invited to express their naked identities in a work that explores social activity and communication and frees us from mediated ideas of the 'perfect' body. This project is a celebration of difference and expression. Furtherfield is collaborating with Completely Naked to stage Skin/Strip Online as an online event. Skin Strip exhibition events have already taken place at The Museum of the Unknown in London, UK and at the Centre of Contemporary Culture in Barcelona, Spain. The exhibitions clearly represented distinct expressions of cultural identity connected with their geographical locations and we anticipate a similar distinctness with Skin Strip Global.
Even though we do not literalize the use of network function, it cannot exist without net art or network fundementals…
marc
> RUTH:It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular, Greenbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work or writing). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of my own blunt thoughts.
>
> LL: Oh no, no greenberg…i mean, there's a purist ethos involved, but i'm definitely not advocating any dogmatic approach…simply saying i'm more attracted to works like that, and trying to examine the distinction —-and the wonderful blurrings of that distinction!
> bliss
> l
>
>
>
>
> >
> "digital poetry" vs net art
> ruth catlow <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>
> > > lewis wrote:
> > >> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its medium…i > > want a net art that literally requires the net work in order to manifest > > itself…
> >
>
> ruth wrote:
>
>
> > > I think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net work > > far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that > > requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to > > squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into > > the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined > > structures?
>
>
> ivan wrote:
>
>
> > My reading of lewis's statement is that he calls for network art that > fundamentallly uses the network. i.e. not network art that could just as > easily be displayed on a disconnected computer in a gallery. But pieces that > use the network in some way to become themselves. And this should not > necessarily mean the network of wires and routers and IP protocols but the > network of information or the network of human activity. There are of course > many works that do this already, so Im not saying much … and, Im not > claiming value for this approach. But I think to equate this with wanting > art that fits in a white cube gallery is missing a point?
>
>
> It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular, Greenbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work or writing). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of my own blunt thoughts.
> As for:-
>
>
> > Maybe there's a
> > May68 type slogan here: The Network Is Not A Gallery
>
>
> Hurrah! :-D
>
>
> cheers
> Ruth
>
>
> furtherfield.org
>
>
> + KNORRRRRRR
> -> 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
>
>
Anningan (in progress) http://www.lewislacook.com/Anningan/AnningansDoor.html
http://www.lewislacook.com/
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html
meditation, net art, poeisis: blog http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/
———————————
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
Andreas Broeckmann states…
"They do not aim at a beautiful or effective artistic expression, or at
convincing representation of an abstract principle, but use the fact of the
machinic and interpersonal communication across the network, the
technological structure and functions of the network dispositive, and
amplify, mock or playfully subvert them."
marc
> RUTH:It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular,
Greenbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work or
writing). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of my
own blunt thoughts.
>
> LL: Oh no, no greenberg…i mean, there's a purist ethos involved, but i'm
definitely not advocating any dogmatic approach…simply saying i'm more
attracted to works like that, and trying to examine the distinction —-and
the wonderful blurrings of that distinction!
> bliss
> l
>
>
>
>
> >
> "digital poetry" vs net art
> ruth catlow <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>
> > > lewis wrote:
> > >> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its
medium…i > > want a net art that literally requires the net work in order
to manifest > > itself…
> >
>
> ruth wrote:
>
>
> > > I think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net work
> > far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that
> > requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to > >
squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into > >
the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined > >
structures?
>
>
> ivan wrote:
>
>
> > My reading of lewis's statement is that he calls for network art that >
fundamentallly uses the network. i.e. not network art that could just as >
easily be displayed on a disconnected computer in a gallery. But pieces that
> use the network in some way to become themselves. And this should not >
necessarily mean the network of wires and routers and IP protocols but the >
network of information or the network of human activity. There are of course
> many works that do this already, so Im not saying much … and, Im not >
claiming value for this approach. But I think to equate this with wanting >
art that fits in a white cube gallery is missing a point?
>
>
> It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular,
Greenbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work or
writing). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of my
own blunt thoughts.
> As for:-
>
>
> > Maybe there's a
> > May68 type slogan here: The Network Is Not A Gallery
>
>
> Hurrah! :-D
>
>
> cheers
> Ruth
>
>
> furtherfield.org
>
>
> + KNORRRRRRR
> -> 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
>
>
RUTH:It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular, Greenbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work or writing). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of my own blunt thoughts.
LL: Oh no, no greenberg…i mean, there's a purist ethos involved, but i'm definitely not advocating any dogmatic approach…simply saying i'm more attracted to works like that, and trying to examine the distinction —-and the wonderful blurrings of that distinction!
bliss
l
>
"digital poetry" vs net art
ruth catlow <[email protected]>
> > lewis wrote:
> >> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its medium…i > > want a net art that literally requires the net work in order to manifest > > itself…
>
ruth wrote:
> > I think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net work > > far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that > > requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to > > squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into > > the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined > > structures?
ivan wrote:
> My reading of lewis's statement is that he calls for network art that > fundamentallly uses the network. i.e. not network art that could just as > easily be displayed on a disconnected computer in a gallery. But pieces that > use the network in some way to become themselves. And this should not > necessarily mean the network of wires and routers and IP protocols but the > network of information or the network of human activity. There are of course > many works that do this already, so Im not saying much … and, Im not > claiming value for this approach. But I think to equate this with wanting > art that fits in a white cube gallery is missing a point?
It's just that I thought I got a whiff of a kind of purist, muscular, Greenbergian ethos (which I've never experienced in any of Lewis's work or writing). I'm glad I did too, as it catalyzed the sharpening of a few of my own blunt thoughts.
As for:-
> Maybe there's a
> May68 type slogan here: The Network Is Not A Gallery
Hurrah! :-D
cheers
Ruth
furtherfield.org