Google's Live Query Is Not Bad Art

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, t.whid wrote:

> >Although somewhat conceptually derivative of Jevbratt's Stillman Projects
> >(though in a more utilitarian, obvious manner), the work exhibits great
> >conceptual speed, demonstrating its conceptual foundation rapidly, but
> >convincingly, as a digestive interface to a collective behavioral analysis
> >of the cultural context of search. The interface to this digested data
> >(information) is minimalist, but this supports the goals of the work. It
> >proves (reproves: there is not shortage of evidence), that there is much
> >more involved in data and information art than interface. A related
> >weakness of the work is that its object is ontologically unclear for the
> >average viewer: many people think that they are looking at data, when in
> >fact they are looking at highly processed information. But it may not be
> >appropriate to blame Google for this defect.
> >
>
>
> very funny.
>
> one question.
>
> how is it not data? once the queries are stored and stamped with
> time, date, and geographic position (ip#) is it not data at that
> point?

I was speaking of the presentation layer of the work, which shows the
information generated from the data. However the conceptual speed - or
ability of a work to demonstrate its concept laconically (or at least
congruently) relative to the breadth of its implementation - is what I
think makes it not bad art. I agree with another post, the data is
important to making Zeitgeist interesting, but the raw, unprocessed data
would not be digestible without being processed into information and given
through some kind of interface. (Paper would do just as well in this
case… but I don't see that as a defect. Artists who assume that
interaction is really important may disagree…) But the single html doc
certainly gives a fast view both into the cultural semiosis, and
importantly, the underlying data. As you indicate, you can see in
Zeitgeist insight into the data: "stamped with time, date, and geographic
position (ip#)". But you don't actually see any data - the db records for
the billions of hits.

Of course, this analysis might falter on the grounds that information (by
common definition, is meaningfully processed from data) is just data (by
common definition, raw and unprocessed) for yet another process. This is
an old issue. (Think of the unix '|' operator.) But I argue that the
intention of Zeitgeist as a work is to present information, not data. Not
that we must take a work's intention seriously, however, but it is pretty
undeniable that this is how Zeitgeist wants to be read.

>
> i agree that it's information before it's archived.
>
> what i find fascinating about it is the fact that it is information
> that has always been there and is only now able to be watched in
> realtime. people have always looked for information about what
> they're interested in. they would go to libraries, friends,
> dictionaries, magazines, encyclopedias and etc. now they go to
> Google. all of this collective curiosity captured, it's awesome (no
> spicoli intonation to that 'awesome').
>
> as to the question of wether Live Query is art or not; it's
> irrelevant in my opinion. my definition of art goes to intent. if
> someone says they're making art, who am i to argue? Google doesn't
> say they're making art. but then, as alan said, if a contemporary
> duchamp comes along and calls it art, who am i to argue? the
> question: is it good art? not, is it art?
>
> Google's Live Query is only an interface to the real art. Google
> could be called a conceptual work that once you've understood what's
> happening the interface (or visual) doesn't matter anymore. once one
> has memorized a poem, who needs the paper it's typed on?
>

I'm sorry I am not familiar with live query… somehow I conflated
Zeitgeist into this thread… but it sounds like the now defunct Magellan
search engine's feature called "Search Voyeur", that was included in
switch's taxonomy of web art, 1997.

http://switch.sjsu.edu/web/art.online2/SwitchCrit/Listing.html


>
>
> –
> <twhid>
> http://www.mteww.com
> </twhid>
> + the internet is not your life.
> -> 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
>
>