What Is Pure Manipulation? Why Is It Reasonable?

It seems to me a reasonable way to go because it's pretty much what all
mediums have gone through at some stage or another. It's extracting
something that is unique and inherent in the medium and using it, not
necessarily in a 'coherent' manner as such, more in an exploratory manner.
Carnivore is nothing but a little program that monitors network traffic by
recording IP and port numbers, but once you have those numbers it becomes
like a painter with an empty canvas and a pallet full of paints. You can do
anything you want regardless of what those numbers really mean or what the
system was meant to do. That's when the elements of a network become like
clay in the hands of the netartist. Where the network truly becomes a medium
and not merely a venue.

Pall

—– Original Message —–
From: "Daniel Young" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 10:24 AM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: What Is Pure Manipulation? Why Is It Reasonable?


> I address August Highland's comment that "the pure manipulation of
arbitrary data seems a reasonable way to go" which comment came in response
to the statement by Pall Thayer that "it seems a reasonable way to go" when
"netart and computer based art in general is veering more towards the pure
manipulation of arbitrary data" and the approach of "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."
>
> My feeling in both Carnivore and Gogolchat (and Mr. Highland's work) is of
being overwhelmed by incomprehensible activity. I intend no disrespect. I
just find it all baffling and lacking in the coherence and sense of purpose
I look for in art.
>
> I would like to hear more about the goals of "pure manipulation" and what
exactly makes it a "reasonable" way to make art in this world. What are the
purposes to which it is being used? What is it drawing attention to? What is
it focusing on? Is it intended to communicate meanings to those who
experience it?
>
> Daniel Young
> + 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 internet is no more interesting than a phone.

This does not mean you cannot have an interesting phone call.

Imagine a phone service you could call, and it would tell you all about
the phone.

This would be interesting for a little while. But probably not for long.

You can listen to the music made by a touchtone phone.

Some numbers are more musical than others.

Some people know how to play "Mary Had a Little Lamb," or "Ode to Joy"
on the phone.

Still- the audience for this type of music is limited.

Some artists might attempt to put out cds with compositions based on
actual phone numbers.

The audience for this cd would be limited as well.

There is an audience for prank phone calls.

There are phone numbers where people can call up and leave jokes.

Or scream.

Or listen to other people's confessions.

They Might Be Giants has a phone number you can call where they play you
songs.

OK Soda used to have a phone service.

The announcer on the phone would make bird sounds.

Imagine if the announcer just told you the phone number you were calling
from.

Or played music back based on your phone number.

Maybe you could jam along with him.

If that happened, would that be enough to question the meaning of
authorship?

I don't think it would.

A popular phone number to call are those of dating services.

People seem to like to talk to each other.

I do.

I don't like hearing busy signals.

I don't like when the operator tells me I've made a mistake.

I don't like the dial tone.

I don't like hearing the phone ring on the other end.

But I do like when the phone rings on my end.

I think that maybe this is what I would like to do with internet art.

Have it so other people hear the phone ring.

Maybe they can have a good conversation.



-e.








Pall Thayer wrote:

>It seems to me a reasonable way to go because it's pretty much what all
>mediums have gone through at some stage or another. It's extracting
>something that is unique and inherent in the medium and using it, not
>necessarily in a 'coherent' manner as such, more in an exploratory manner.
>Carnivore is nothing but a little program that monitors network traffic by
>recording IP and port numbers, but once you have those numbers it becomes
>like a painter with an empty canvas and a pallet full of paints. You can do
>anything you want regardless of what those numbers really mean or what the
>system was meant to do. That's when the elements of a network become like
>clay in the hands of the netartist. Where the network truly becomes a medium
>and not merely a venue.
>
>Pall
>