Some random thoughts on the state of the art...

On the contrary, I feel that netart and computer based art in general is
veering more towards the pure manipulation of arbitrary data. The data is
there, let's see if we can capture it and make it do something other than
what it was meant to do as in Carnivore, Gogolchat and others. There aren't
that many yet but the ones that are emerging seem to be coming in as an
important force and it seems a reasonable way to go.

That's my two cents.

Pall
–
Pall Thayer
kennari/myndlistamadhur
artist/teacher
Fjolbrautaskolinn vid Armula (www.fa.is)
http://www.this.is/pallit
http://www.this.is/pallit/isjs
http://www.this.is/pallit/harmony

—– Original Message —–
From: "Mark River" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 4:21 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Some random thoughts on the state of the art…


> Some random thoughts on the state of the art…
>
> 1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image and
> video manipulation over text and vector graphics
> within net art. Although some have used image as a
> main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind) a
> form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
> Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more access
> to broadband, better software, or the change in
> political climate.
>
> 2. Along or against this trend, new works are being
> made using what Cory Archangel may have coined "Dirt
> Style Design" or Low-Fi net art. These works look back
> to the "Heroic Period" of Net.art as well as the pop
> home pages of the net. Think Hampster Dance (circa
> 1997) meets one38.org. Reasons? Who knows? Maybe it's
> the same reasons as in thought 1.
>
> 3. When looking at net art as well as art in general
> of late, I've been trying to use the American movie
> rating system. Not as a quality judgement but as
> another way to look at content. "G" and "PG" seem to
> be the ratings of the time. I am looking for an
> interesting PG-13 or up. Other people have pointed out
> to me that using movie ratings to look at visual art
> is like comparing apples to oranges but it has been a
> good exercise for me.
>
> The reason for the post is that for the last year or
> so I have felt net art has been in a holding pattern.
> Great art works are being made and attention is
> finally being given, but I miss the time of
> experimentation. Thoughts 1,2 and 3 have let me know
> that net art might change again as all art can.
>
> Anyway, that's it for now. Send back hate mail as I
> know you like to do. ;)
>
> =====
> http://mteww.com
> http://tinjail.com
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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, after I sent the post I was thinking of other
directions that I skipped over and data mining and
manipulation was among them. Portals was another.

— Pall Thayer <[email protected]> wrote:
> On the contrary, I feel that netart and computer
> based art in general is
> veering more towards the pure manipulation of
> arbitrary data. The data is
> there, let's see if we can capture it and make it do
> something other than
> what it was meant to do as in Carnivore, Gogolchat
> and others. There aren't
> that many yet but the ones that are emerging seem to
> be coming in as an
> important force and it seems a reasonable way to go.
>
> That's my two cents.
>
> Pall
> –
> Pall Thayer
> kennari/myndlistama<eth>ur
> artist/teacher
> Fjolbrautaskolinn vid Armula (www.fa.is)
> http://www.this.is/pallit
> http://www.this.is/pallit/isjs
> http://www.this.is/pallit/harmony
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "Mark River" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 4:21 PM
> Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Some random thoughts on the
> state of the art…
>
>
> > Some random thoughts on the state of the art…
> >
> > 1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image
> and
> > video manipulation over text and vector graphics
> > within net art. Although some have used image as a
> > main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind)
> a
> > form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
> > Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more
> access
> > to broadband, better software, or the change in
> > political climate.
> >
> > 2. Along or against this trend, new works are
> being
> > made using what Cory Archangel may have coined
> "Dirt
> > Style Design" or Low-Fi net art. These works look
> back
> > to the "Heroic Period" of Net.art as well as the
> pop
> > home pages of the net. Think Hampster Dance (circa
> > 1997) meets one38.org. Reasons? Who knows? Maybe
> it's
> > the same reasons as in thought 1.
> >
> > 3. When looking at net art as well as art in
> general
> > of late, I've been trying to use the American
> movie
> > rating system. Not as a quality judgement but as
> > another way to look at content. "G" and "PG" seem
> to
> > be the ratings of the time. I am looking for an
> > interesting PG-13 or up. Other people have pointed
> out
> > to me that using movie ratings to look at visual
> art
> > is like comparing apples to oranges but it has
> been a
> > good exercise for me.
> >
> > The reason for the post is that for the last year
> or
> > so I have felt net art has been in a holding
> pattern.
> > Great art works are being made and attention is
> > finally being given, but I miss the time of
> > experimentation. Thoughts 1,2 and 3 have let me
> know
> > that net art might change again as all art can.
> >
> > Anyway, that's it for now. Send back hate mail as
> I
> > know you like to do. ;)
> >
> > =====
> > http://mteww.com
> > http://tinjail.com
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up
> now.
> > http://mailplus.yahoo.com
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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


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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

and if you look at keywords recently,
everybody keeps saying generative…

(hmmm… text and maybe not vectors)

i kind of noticed this more with your reference to people going back to
video imagery (mark); tools like flash are useful but they're very
clinical, my own work included (and maybe you too Pall) …if you have
to pigeon hole it… lots of interesting things happen when the work
uses a connected medium and media, [and/but] you still can't beat a
good photograph or a live gig…

thought about hampster dance too, and thought maybe rhizome should host
a hampster[*.*]ance raw festival, maybe not…

>>> 3. When looking at net art as well as art in general
>>> of late, I've been trying to use the America movie
>>> rating system.

you'll have to remind me how it works.. we only have a poodle over
here, but he seems to think war is fine…




On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 08:43 am, Pall Thayer wrote:

> [email protected]

Mark River wrote:

>Some random thoughts on the state of the art…
>
>1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image and
>video manipulation over text and vector graphics
>within net art. Although some have used image as a
>main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind) a
>form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
>Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more access
>to broadband, better software, or the change in
>political climate.
>

A good point Mark. I was looking back at the Salvaggio Museum, which is
maybe somehow "net.art". I remember when I started it I was coming off a
very literary state of mind, and this is something I've noticed with
other works as of late, as well, there is an influx of writers and
hypertextual art forms. I don't really know what the connection is
between realism and narrative, per se, but I see one in my own work even
if I don't understand it.

I've been looking at some websites, like requiemforadream.com and
donniedarko.com, based on movies [and done by the same guy, I think] and
integrating "realism" into a very effective web-based narrative. I feel
like hypertext narrative is struggling to come into full force on the
web, especially with the flash influence hovering over everything. Young
Hae Chang's Heavy Industries stuff won a webby for crossing over
hypertext into flash, now, whoever gets a decent narrative built into
images and interactivity and sound/motion will be the next really strong
artist to emerge on the field. I really hope it's not done in flash, but
more than likely it will be [donnie darko + requiem for a dream are both
flash based and borrow heavily from a lot of net.art's usual suspects.]


>
>2. Along or against this trend, new works are being
>made using what Cory Archangel may have coined "Dirt
>Style Design" or Low-Fi net art.
>

Zdeno Hlinka uses the term "trashcode" for his own work back in 99, I
think, which was the first I had really heard for the deliberate lo-fi
aesthetic [following jodi].


>
>3. When looking at net art as well as art in general
>of late, I've been trying to use the American movie
>rating system. Not as a quality judgement but as
>another way to look at content. "G" and "PG" seem to
>be the ratings of the time. I am looking for an
>interesting PG-13 or up.
>

The Ascii Nudes? http://www.salsabomb.com/nude/


>Other people have pointed out
>to me that using movie ratings to look at visual art
>is like comparing apples to oranges but it has been a
>good exercise for me.
>

Comparing apples and oranges is a pretty good grounding excersize. :)
But I'm not sure what is relevant about getting a naughtier rating? Not
to be dismissive, I'm just curious- wouldn't anything worse than a PG-13
get into violence, sex, and foul language? Do you think people are
afraid because of the open nature of the internet, fears of libraries
banning thier websites, etc?


-e.

On Friday, January 10, 2003, at 10:30 PM, Eryk Salvaggio wrote:

>
>
> Mark River wrote:
>
>> Some random thoughts on the state of the art…
>>
>> 1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image and
>> video manipulation over text and vector graphics
>> within net art. Although some have used image as a
>> main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind) a
>> form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
>> Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more access
>> to broadband, better software, or the change in
>> political climate.
>>
>
> A good point Mark. I was looking back at the Salvaggio Museum, which
> is maybe somehow "net.art". I remember when I started it I was coming
> off a very literary state of mind, and this is something I've noticed
> with other works as of late, as well, there is an influx of writers
> and hypertextual art forms. I don't really know what the connection is
> between realism and narrative, per se, but I see one in my own work
> even if I don't understand it.
>
> I've been looking at some websites, like requiemforadream.com and
> donniedarko.com, based on movies [and done by the same guy, I think]

hey eryk,

the sites or the films?? Darren Aronofsky was the director on requiem,
(he did Ydh too, and is doing the next batman, believe it or not), and
Richard Kelly did darko. i agree, the sites borrowed heavily from net
art.

apologies, that's my only comment.

~tho~

i think mriver may be acting disingenuously in his comments as our
current project has to do with video ;-)

take care

Are you writing from Japan TWhid? Your fonts are all weird.

Anyway, I was saying the same guy did the websites, but I know different
guys did the movies. I think both websites were by soulbath.com.


-e.






t.whid wrote:

>
> On Friday, January 10, 2003, at 10:30 PM, Eryk Salvaggio wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Mark River wrote:
>>
>>> Some random thoughts on the state of the art…
>>>
>>> 1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image and
>>> video manipulation over text and vector graphics
>>> within net art. Although some have used image as a
>>> main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind) a
>>> form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
>>> Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more access
>>> to broadband, better software, or the change in
>>> political climate.
>>>
>>
>> A good point Mark. I was looking back at the Salvaggio Museum, which
>> is maybe somehow "net.art". I remember when I started it I was coming
>> off a very literary state of mind, and this is something I've noticed
>> with other works as of late, as well, there is an influx of writers
>> and hypertextual art forms. I don't really know what the connection
>> is between realism and narrative, per se, but I see one in my own
>> work even if I don't understand it.
>>
>> I've been looking at some websites, like requiemforadream.com and
>> donniedarko.com, based on movies [and done by the same guy, I think]
>
>
> hey eryk,
>
> the sites or the films?? Darren Aronofsky was the director on requiem,
> (he did Ydh too, and is doing the next batman, believe it or not), and
> Richard Kelly did darko. i agree, the sites borrowed heavily from net
> art.
>
> apologies, that's my only comment.
>
> ~tho~
>
> i think mriver may be acting disingenuously in his comments as our
> current project has to do with video ;-)
>
> take care
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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
>

the pure manipulation of arbitrary data
seems a reasonable way to go




—– Original Message —–
From: "Pall Thayer" <[email protected]>
To: "Mark River" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 12:43 AM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Some random thoughts on the state of the art…


> On the contrary, I feel that netart and computer based art in general is
> veering more towards the pure manipulation of arbitrary data. The data is
> there, let's see if we can capture it and make it do something other than
> what it was meant to do as in Carnivore, Gogolchat and others. There
aren't
> that many yet but the ones that are emerging seem to be coming in as an
> important force and it seems a reasonable way to go.
>
> That's my two cents.
>
> Pall
> –
> Pall Thayer
> kennari/myndlistamadhur
> artist/teacher
> Fjolbrautaskolinn vid Armula (www.fa.is)
> http://www.this.is/pallit
> http://www.this.is/pallit/isjs
> http://www.this.is/pallit/harmony
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "Mark River" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 4:21 PM
> Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Some random thoughts on the state of the art…
>
>
> > Some random thoughts on the state of the art…
> >
> > 1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image and
> > video manipulation over text and vector graphics
> > within net art. Although some have used image as a
> > main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind) a
> > form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
> > Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more access
> > to broadband, better software, or the change in
> > political climate.
> >
> > 2. Along or against this trend, new works are being
> > made using what Cory Archangel may have coined "Dirt
> > Style Design" or Low-Fi net art. These works look back
> > to the "Heroic Period" of Net.art as well as the pop
> > home pages of the net. Think Hampster Dance (circa
> > 1997) meets one38.org. Reasons? Who knows? Maybe it's
> > the same reasons as in thought 1.
> >
> > 3. When looking at net art as well as art in general
> > of late, I've been trying to use the American movie
> > rating system. Not as a quality judgement but as
> > another way to look at content. "G" and "PG" seem to
> > be the ratings of the time. I am looking for an
> > interesting PG-13 or up. Other people have pointed out
> > to me that using movie ratings to look at visual art
> > is like comparing apples to oranges but it has been a
> > good exercise for me.
> >
> > The reason for the post is that for the last year or
> > so I have felt net art has been in a holding pattern.
> > Great art works are being made and attention is
> > finally being given, but I miss the time of
> > experimentation. Thoughts 1,2 and 3 have let me know
> > that net art might change again as all art can.
> >
> > Anyway, that's it for now. Send back hate mail as I
> > know you like to do. ;)
> >
> > =====
> > http://mteww.com
> > http://tinjail.com
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> > http://mailplus.yahoo.com
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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
>


—
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002

Neil: "you'll have to remind me how it works.. we only
have a poodle over here, but he seems to think war is
fine…"

G General Audiences. All ages admitted.

PG Parental Guidance Suggested. Some material may not
be suitable for children.

PG-13 Parents Strongly Cautioned. Some material may
be inappropriate for children under 13.

R Restricted. Under 17 requires accompanying parent
or adult guardian.

NC-17 No one 17 and under admitted.

I think there is also a rating system for games

e: "Not to be dismissive, I'm just curious- wouldn't
anything worse than a PG-13 get into violence, sex,
and foul language? Do you think people are afraid
because of the open nature of the internet, fears of
libraries banning thier websites, etc?"

Well, my thought was more along the lines of "What is
the scope of narative used in net art and are we tied
to abstraction due to our relation to broader art
forms?" Adam Killer gets a PG 13 so may ASCII porn. My
work tends to be G or PG and some what abstract. I
feel that "adult content" in art is shunned by the
public but is used within books, film, music and
games. Exceptions are out there.

For me it is not a question of self censorship or a
call for more R net art but a look for where the lines
may be.

I still thinking about the rest. "Generative" was an
ineteresting note. And yes, realism means more than
useing images (What is that old art line: "Photographs
lie as well?"). Can one say data a pure truth?

Okay, TWhid. I am trying to locate the vid work in all
of this. Busted.


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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Some random thoughts on the state of the art…

Why you think you are going to be attacked by everyone
is beyond me. But if you are after discussion, here it
is. I favor chatting over the senseless 'txt' violence &
respect you as an individual genuinely interested in
debate…

>1. I've noticed a recent increase in the use image and
video manipulation over text and vector graphics
within net art. Although some have used image as a
main tool for some time (Brad Brace comes to mind) a
form of realism seems to be on the rise. Reasons?
Perhaps digital cameras becoming common, more access
to broadband, better software, or the change in
political climate.

It seems to me that 'true' realism can only be defined via
experience & not via interpretation of aesthetics or notions.
Re-interpretation is issued forth by broadcasting channels
allover the world, which is presumed as information, yet in
reality it is interpretation. So with the aspect of people
who use digital cameras to declare their own ideas, thus
reclaiming a space for their own intentions - I am all for
it.

Whether the medium is visual/networked or text, is not
really the issue. I feel that it is much more to do with
consciousness and intention; which can move beyond the
limitation of medium specifications. I prefer the idea of
the individual as medium, not the tool. Therefore, the
message is not what one chooses to use, but also what one
is trying to say.

People(us)have all been mediated to some degree, with lies
in the art world, as well as in the media-press. For the
first time people, not just artists are in control of
how representation is seen and heard (potentially). That's
why America's government are keen to close down the American
people's options on how they use the Internet. People are now
reclaiming the media (just like Jello Biafro suggested). This
can only be a good thing, for it makes people aware of how
manipulation happens using the various processes that have
been learned by professionals in the media. They are learning
new skills and with this finding out other things at the same
time, that the official media are not telling them.

Blogs have been springing up everywhere on the net. I feel it
has much more to do with people becoming aware of how to declare
their humanity (in whatever context)on the Internet.

>2. Along or against this trend, new works are being
made using what Cory Archangel may have coined "Dirt
Style Design" or Low-Fi net art. These works look back
to the "Heroic Period" of Net.art as well as the pop
home pages of the net. Think Hampster Dance (circa
1997) meets one38.org. Reasons? Who knows? Maybe it's
the same reasons as in thought 1.

I tend to think that when one moves backwards, one is
psychologically afraid of something (I could be wrong).
The 'heroic period' is a mythology invented by those who
were lucky enough to be accepted by institutions at the
time. A harking back to a certain time, but in reality it
was elitist. And open only a to few. The real 'heroic
period' is now, because it is a time when the Internet &
its many users/artists can collaborate to do something
that is potentially exciting (at last).

As in design, it does not mean anything without a context.
The reason why certain people are choosing to stick to a
'genre' is obviously a decision - & that is their right as
a creative individual. But changes in concepts/reasons/
function of a web site it seems, does tend to reflect certain
philosophies, especially in Internet art. It says who that
individual or group is. To me, what is more important, is how
that group is changing things, emotionally, tactically,
creatively as a function on the net, as well as in the everyday
world.


>3. When looking at net art as well as art in general
of late, I've been trying to use the American movie
rating system. Not as a quality judgment but as
another way to look at content. "G" and "PG" seem to
be the ratings of the time. I am looking for an
interesting PG-13 or up. Other people have pointed out
to me that using movie ratings to look at visual art
is like comparing apples to oranges but it has been a
good exercise for me.

Although at the same time I can understand the motive
for such an action, as stated above.I personally, do not
like rating anything that I see and usually try to judge by
its own reasoning's first, although culturalized aspects do
regularly invade my judgment, more than I would like it to.

I am a great believer in 'content', in whatever context.
Like yourself, I can see that Net Art is changing. It is
a many headed horse, traveling in directions that (hopefully)
have no finality. I feel that I am exploring, discovering
new ways of reading, looking, experiencing and whether it is
code, image, text is of no importance - what is important
is that the creator's intentions are real. This is where
interpretation comes in again.

What I have noticed is that the idea of relational experience
via Net Art is a common factor that seems to be offering new
horizons of inter- connectedness. This means that
non-specialization is taking effect, the democratization of
creativity via the use of accessible technology. This, is not
a bad thing, and is celebrated too little, and can be dissed
in disguise, using obscure language that stays in the realm
of institutional remits. So, I say again - it is now that the
real challenge is taking place, the real 'heroic period' is
here now, not then…

with respect - marc garrett


http://www.furtherfield.org
http://www.furthernoise.org
http://www.dido.uk.net
We Can Make Our Own World.

marc.garrett wrote:

>
>
>I tend to think that when one moves backwards, one is
>psychologically afraid of something (I could be wrong).
>

I'm curious why pages looking like one38.org is a step backwards? :)


>
>The 'heroic period' is a mythology invented by those who
>were lucky enough to be accepted by institutions at the
>time. A harking back to a certain time, but in reality it
>was elitist. And open only a to few.
>

Hmmm, I have to disagree. I was around for the "heroic period" and found
it extraordinarily open. I was an unknown 17 year old from a suburb and
I was able to fly to Europe, give lectures, attend lectures, hang out
and have dinner with JODI and some people from I/O/D…

Whether this makes me part of the elite- a very real possibility of
right place / right time, I don't know, but I didn't feel like there was
a lot of condescention from anyone in the community at the time.
(Although I've never aggressively persued the title of "heroic period"
artist, since I don't see a bulk of my work having been done in those
years, and I don't really feel it's important to be a part of the "first
wave," even if I was hanging around for it.) There were some critics and
some mailing list admins etc etc etc who didn't have what could be
precisely open arms, but there was certainly no condescention from the
artists themselves. A lot of the work was open -Alexei's desktop expo,
the 7-11 list (+ keiko suzuki), and I am sure there are more.



>The real 'heroic
>period' is now, because it is a time when the Internet &
>its many users/artists can collaborate to do something
>that is potentially exciting (at last).
>

I feel like there are some exciting things happening, but I don't feel
any of this matches the initial excitement of "the heroic period." But
also, the heroic period is what? 1994 to 1999? I mean a lot of that
excitement was just the excitement of the net. I've been feeling for a
while that the novelty of "net.art" in its purest definition - art that
reflects a network prescence- is less interesting now that it is widely
used. The next wave will, as you said, be linked to blogs, personal
expression, an exploration of what can be said with the medium more so
than exploring what the medium is. You'll always have both, I think, but
now that we have figured out how to mix paints it's only natural to
start looking at what we can say with them. As you say:


>I am a great believer in 'content', in whatever context.
>Like yourself, I can see that Net Art is changing. It is
>a many headed horse, traveling in directions that (hopefully)
>have no finality. I feel that I am exploring, discovering
>new ways of reading, looking, experiencing and whether it is
>code, image, text is of no importance - what is important
>is that the creator's intentions are real. This is where
>interpretation comes in again.
>

Intentions sure, but I think we're going to move into an area where
results are looked at with a stronger eye, as well- I think the
experimentation for experimentations sake might start running out of
gas. Specifically in web art; maybe not new media as a whole.


-e.

>

Hi Eryk,


>I tend to think that when one moves backwards, one is
>psychologically afraid of something (I could be wrong).
>

e:I'm curious why pages looking like one38.org is a step backwards? :)

m:Yeah ok - you know I didn't mean that you cute ass.
(or you haven't read my nice emails to you)
I rate your site, and I would never consider your
imaginings, collaborative or singular as a step backwards.

>The 'heroic period' is a mythology invented by those who
>were lucky enough to be accepted by institutions at the
>time. A harking back to a certain time, but in reality it
>was elitist. And open only a to few.

e: Hmmm, I have to disagree. I was around for the "heroic period" and found
it extraordinarily open. I was an unknown 17 year old from a suburb and
I was able to fly to Europe, give lectures, attend lectures, hang out
and have dinner with JODI and some people from I/O/D…

Whether this makes me part of the elite- a very real possibility of
right place / right time, I don't know, but I didn't feel like there was
a lot of condescention from anyone in the community at the time.
(Although I've never aggressively persued the title of "heroic period"
artist, since I don't see a bulk of my work having been done in those
years, and I don't really feel it's important to be a part of the "first
wave," even if I was hanging around for it.) There were some critics and
some mailing list admins etc etc etc who didn't have what could be
precisely open arms, but there was certainly no condescention from the
artists themselves. A lot of the work was open -Alexei's desktop expo,
the 7-11 list (+ keiko suzuki), and I am sure there are more.

m: This must be a situational thing, because for me it was very different,
and I am not hard to get on with. Not like some neurotic self 'id' driven
dudes who are not interested in anything else other than their own singular
mission. I sneaked in using a heath bunting copy 'id', which he forged for
me at the 'next 5 minutes' conference in 95, Amsterdam; and my experience
which is a barometer I tend to trust (not always a precise one I am the
first to admit), was that there were a lot of institutions touting for
talent, and if the talent was affiliated to institutions themselves, the
likelihood of exchange for the artist was more likely to be recognised.
Having said this, times are different now, although it has taken a while,
many projects that I embark on are taken seriously; and to be 'extra' honest
they are what I have been trying to do for ages. But now a shift has taken
place and caertain people are able to realize the intentions/ideas behind
certain projects easier.

Another thing that is easily forgotten, is that branding is an important
part of 'singular' net activity. Many types of groups have branded
themsleves as a certain 'item', so that they are easier to see, which is
quite inportant if the content is pretty much obscure or challenging in some
respects. Networks are hard to brand as a philosophy or art practise.

In my early net days, I was literally a net artist, using BBS systems &
exchanging information via the phone line, to groups like 'New World
Disorder' & 'Fast Breeder', using 'linux' setups, from 92. Even using actual
payphones for projects as well, linked up with pirate radio broadcasts. But
because I had personally made the decision that creativity does not have to
come from institutions to be valid. I found that this kind of idea was
not going to get you much attention. Certain people assumed that I was
threat and reacted in a negative way towards me and some of the dudes I
worked with at the time. I was only trying make real what certain other
groups were advocating but in reality were not acting out. But there is no
bitterness, some of those people who saw my type as a threat are no longer
seeing me in such a way, may be I've got more cute and less threatening
these days. Although I can hear in the background, in this space (as one
friend is reading over head as I write this), some chance - lol.

My most positive and encouraging experience of collaboration is from when
'backspace.org' was thriving in London. I found it the most free thinking
and flexible environment that I have ever been part of. And everyone was
very excited, all type of people from all walks of life were working
together. Non - specialization was part of its function, not necessarily its
dictate, it just felt right. People were open abput exchanging ideas and
sharing them and collaborating on mutual terms. Sadly it no longer exists,
and much of that kind of collective unity is missing now. So if one is
accused of wanting to hark back to a certain period, that's one of mine.


>The real 'heroic
>period' is now, because it is a time when the Internet &
>its many users/artists can collaborate to do something
>that is potentially exciting (at last).
>

e:I feel like there are some exciting things happening, but I don't feel
any of this matches the initial excitement of "the heroic period." But
also, the heroic period is what? 1994 to 1999? I mean a lot of that
excitement was just the excitement of the net. I've been feeling for a
while that the novelty of "net.art" in its purest definition - art that
reflects a network prescience- is less interesting now that it is widely
used. The next wave will, as you said, be linked to blogs, personal
expression, an exploration of what can be said with the medium more so
than exploring what the medium is. You'll always have both, I think, but
now that we have figured out how to mix paints it's only natural to
start looking at what we can say with them. As you say:


>I am a great believer in 'content', in whatever context.
>Like yourself, I can see that Net Art is changing. It is
>a many headed horse, traveling in directions that (hopefully)
>have no finality. I feel that I am exploring, discovering
>new ways of reading, looking, experiencing and whether it is
>code, image, text is of no importance - what is important
>is that the creator's intentions are real. This is where
>interpretation comes in again.
>

m:Personally, at the moment I am enjoying playing around with java script &
learning bits of pearl (in a limited way). Java script is an amazing way of
creating& it reminds me of painting, like scripts for a palette. As in
ASCII, I have always been keen on viewing it and using it.

I am not like 'Daniel' who seems to be advocating single user programs
(single medium). Although, this does not mean that I think that others
should not continue to carry on with such endeavors. Multi-program use, is
probably just my own fascination. I am much more interested in the micro
connecting to the macro, thus relational connections in many different ways.
I believe that if our networked imaginations are to somehow sustain a way of
being free from dictated agendas, there must be some form of freedom from
singular thought, not just physically, emotionally, psychologically and
strategically. Lateral consciousness is thinking of the bigger picture,
taking on Quantum ideas as possibilities for imaginative directions and
network thought can enhance this type of liberated thought.

Regarding to network activity or creativity or status, this has as you say
has calmed down dramatically in various parts of the world. But in the UK,
there is a type of revolution happening here, spinning of the back of BT
being too slow to implement adsl lines. http://consume.net are a good
example of how things are gearing towards individuals/groups now using nodes
all over the country to broadcast their music/art etc. It is true that the
differentiation between net art and web art may be less significant.
Especially now that certain institutions have taken in those who were
advocating such philosophies at the so called 'heroic period'. In the UK,
things are hotting up, getting very exciting cuz of all the network stuff
and because of the blog situation, linked very much to networked groups and
its applications. Be ready, it's bubbling… you got warchalking, loads of
ace stuff happening which once again liberates the way we use technology for
the user via free access.

e:Intentions sure, but I think we're going to move into an area where
results are looked at with a stronger eye, as well- I think the
experimentation for experimentations sake might start running out of
gas. Specifically in web art; maybe not new media as a whole.

m:I agree, I do not consider myself as an experimenter for its sake. Like
yourself, I have values that motivate my work and sculpture its outcome.
Exploring is not experimentation, it is acknowledging experience and
learning, then afterwards one declares the results in a format that
communicates in some way. As a web artist and net artist, I do not like to
fall into either catagory, for I have been seeing some interesting & thought
provoking work in either camps & I know that you are not pitting them
against each other, but there are those who would love one camp to fall to
make room for the other. I do not believe in this sort of divide and rule
tactic as
a healthy way to go forward; it follows the masculine rule of survival of
the fittest. We have got to be intuitive and playful, hopeful, fresh to let
others in who are offering us alternative ways of being, seeing, hearing,
feeling etc.

best wishes - marc

> From: Mark River <[email protected]>

> Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Some random thoughts on the state of the art…
>
> Some random thoughts on the state of the art…

> 2. Along or against this trend, new works are being
> made using what Cory Archangel may have coined "Dirt
> Style Design" or Low-Fi net art. These works look back
> to the "Heroic Period" of Net.art as well as the pop
> home pages of the net.
> The reason for the post is that for the last year or
> so I have felt net art has been in a holding pattern.
> Great art works are being made and attention is
> finally being given, but I miss the time of
> experimentation. Thoughts 1,2 and 3 have let me know
> that net art might change again as all art can.

> From: Daniel Young <[email protected]>
> Exploring The Uses of the Medium vs. Exploring The Nature of the Medium
>
> I fully agree with Mr. Salvaggio's statement that it is time for "an
> exploration of what can be said with the medium more so than exploring what
> the medium is" and "now that we have figured out how to mix paints it's only
> natural to start looking at what we can say with them."
>
> I wouldn't call this impending focus on content or meaning a "wave." For me
> the communicative or functional use of a medium is more like the full body of
> water out of which the first wave of exploration comes. I hope the uses of the
> medium will remain the main focus of artists for all time.

I guess it is the lot of all artists at all times to both look back at a
golden (heroic?) age, while simultaneously believing that the golden age is
now.
I guess it is also always incumbent upon us to have short memories.
I would like to quote you from the intro. to a book called 'Art +
Telecommunication' published in 1984:

'This publication is intended to indicate some aspects - and possibilities -
of the use of modern telecommunications technology by artists and
artist-theoreticians, who have taken part in or organised artists
telecommunications projects. The illustrations document recent activities
and projects using simple, cheap and accessible telecommunications hardware
and systems. Such telecommunications events do not, unlike other kinds of
artwork, originate from a solitary artist but grow from what Roy Ascott
calls a "dispersed authorship". Such authorship is only possible through the
use of "interactive systems".
Artists, while fully concious of their situation - and of that of all other
private users of electronic systems - still consider it a part of their task
to research, analyse and formulate a critique of the "electronic space"
created by these media, and to at least try to infiltrate, however
fugitively, some other content and meaning than that for which they have
been designed and developed. The artist also reserves the right to abandon
this space as a place for art activity, after they have examined it and its
implications, by their own methods and to their own satisfaction.
A glance at the aspects of telecommunications that the artists in this
publication find interesting - interactivity, accessibility, collective
working, breaking down of hierarchies, decentralisation - should make it
clear that we are dealing here with something more important than a few naiv
technology freaks who have found themselves a new toy.'

So, I would just say get out there and boogie. There never was a heroic age.
There is just a continuum. Nothing comes from nothing.
Cheers, Ivan

–
Ivan Pope
[email protected]

http://www.ivanpope.com
http://www.tochki-inc.com

"Faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death"
Hunter S. Thompson