patrick lichty
pl@voyd.com
Works in Oak Park, Illinois United States of America

PORTFOLIO (1)
BIO
Patrick Lichty (b.1962) is a technologically-based conceptual artist, writer, independent curator, animator for the activist group, The Yes Men, and Executive Editor of Intelligent Agent Magazine. He began showing technological media art in 1989, and deals with works and writing that explore the social relations between us and media. Venues in which Lichty has been involved with solo and collaborative works include the Whitney & Turin Biennials, Maribor Triennial, Performa Performance Biennial, Ars Electronica, and the International Symposium on the Electronic Arts (ISEA).

He also works extensively with virtual worlds, including Second Life, and his work, both solo and with his performance art group, Second Front, has been featured in Flash Art, Eikon Milan, and ArtNews.

Discussions (18) Opportunities (1) Events (4) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

What's Postinternet Got to do with Net Art?


Well, that may be true, but there were some good points made..."

Replace with:
"Well, that may be false, but there were some good points made...

DISCUSSION

What's Postinternet Got to do with Net Art?


(continued)
Maybe this takes me back to Adorno and the idea that art should be somehow committed, especially in this age of atrocity. But have we instead climbed into Stimpy's belly button, where "fun awaits us if you climb inside..." Or is this the sort of movement that the culture of the Long Tail creates, 'snack' movements propagated by cliques that create conversation which are eventually discarded for not having enough 'there', ideology, rigor, or elsewhat? Or is this just the shape of 2013 epistemology?

I'm just throwing this out, because I feel like I honestly don't have a clue anymore. I'm not looking for a new Dada Soiree or a Futurist Manifesto, but honestly, I ask WTF? at times... I'd really love to see some people take some risks that aren't aimed at commenting on the art world, art fairs or Marina Abramovic (I'm just as guilty as anyone else here).

The most interesting thing I've seen lately was that idiot who flew their Phantom Quad-drone around Manhattan without being adept enough at flying it not to ram it repeatedly into the side of buildings to the point of destroying it.

Somehow, I just have this gut feeling that in the 'Post New Media' era, we're flailing around, looking for a signpost. The problem is, at the end of the Long Tail, there's pervasive production and plenty of Warhol's 15 minutes/15 fans to go around. All while Marina Abramovic and Jay-Z dance, causing Hyperallergic to say that if you aren't a superstar or making work about cats, you don't really matter (2013 most powerless in the art-world list). And, in my writing this critique I also add myself to that list. ;)

This is submitted as a proposition, and I could be completely off base, but it's just what it looks like. What I'm eating isn't very filling, and does that mean we are in the era of 'post-affect' too?

I don't know.


DISCUSSION

What's Postinternet Got to do with Net Art?


I'm finding all kinds of interesting tidbits in this thread - like looking at rings in a tree. Michael Connor was talking with me once about participating in an "inter-generational" conversation about these "things we do" (as Sarah Cook and Steve Dietz aptly put us in 'post New Media' times, and the Surfers put us in 'post Web 1.0' times, and now here is 'post-internet' after the New Aesthetic, which Curt Cloninger pretty much eliminated the 'new' from, and James Bridle even confessed that NA 'wasn't about aesthetics'.

Sure, I could be classified at a 90's OG who has reinvented constantly, but I sort of get tired of this. I find it sort of funny that Tom seems to have the appearance of a little intergenerational angst.

I have this as well philosophically with the shift from Poststructuralism to OOO/Speculative Reality and sensate/performance philosophy.

In many ways, I've begun to feel jaded, and it was articulated wonderfully when Ian Bogost wrote about the New Aesthetic, while claiming to be a 'movement' (SxSW), lacked an ideology, like the Futurists, Dadaists, and Situationists, and so on.

And with the recent conversation in which the panelist stated that there wasn't any significant net art before 2006. with the defense being, "Well, that may be true, but there were some good points made...", I'm left dully frustrated.

I mean, before 2000, there were not the number of academically-trained digital media artists or programs there are today. Furthermore, I don't think there was a 'good old days' where, in an Andy Hardy-esque way (hey that reference is even before MY time), where the kids got together and put on a show called New Media. But something was happening, and Lev, Mark, et al created some of the taxonomy. It just helps if you have a name to refer to when you have something that didn't exist before.

But in the last ten years or so, there seem to be this series of art-strategic moves where groups define quanta or 'movements' that seem to be more specific descriptions, local phenomena or epistemological branding for whatever reason, persona, institutional, or otherwise.

But I agree with Bogost in that there seems to be something missing. Not in the 'kids off my lawn' sort of way, but in the way where I feel like the stakes are too small to get that excited about. When they removed Clergyman and the Seashell from the Surrealist film program, Artaud came in with some friends and started busting heads.


OPPORTUNITY

CFP/CFW: Selfies and the New Photography


Deadline:
Wed Jan 15, 2014 11:35

Selfies and the New Photography
50 Artists/50 Selfies
Curated by Patrick Lichty

Call for Photos/Essays
Whether it is for an avatar for Facebook, self-portraits for online dating, or endless personal self-documentation for social media, the selfie (cell phone photo shot either through the back camera or via a mirror) is the emblematic form of photography in online culture. Due to its ubiquity in media culture, one asks what its social function resides and how that shapes the representation of the “public face” as media stream. Invited artists include Vagner Whitehead, Joe DeLappe, and Bibbe Hansen.

Selfies and the New Photography will consist of 50 artists from around the world along with an interpretation of their selfie.

CALL FOR WORK/ESSAYS
Selfies and the New Photography will consist of an online site and on-demand full-color catalogue, where proceeds will be given to the Autism Society.

ARTISTS
Please submit a best possible resolution image of your selfie, plus a 100-word description of your selfie or how you feel the selfie represents society or how we view ourselves.

Artists will be offered an at-cost access to the POD site for the catalogue.

DEADLINE:
January 15, 2014, firm.

CRITICAL ESSAYS
Selfies and the New Photography invites scholars in Photography and New Media to inquire about inclusion in the catalogue. Essays should be 1250-4000+ words in length, and images are invited.

Intellectual Property Disclaimer:
By entering this exhibition, the artists and scholars accept to give reproduction rights as necessary for the production and promotion of the exhibition. A majority of the proceeds will be given to the charity listed.

Sponsorship:
Selfies and the New Photography is made possible by Intelligent Agent, a New Media service organization based in New York City.

Please submit all work and queries to selfie@voyd.com


DISCUSSION

Video of Post Net Aesthetics is Now Online


With deference to Michael and Caitlin,
What I see here as the issue that I am hashing out is what I call (satirically) a move into a "post-discursive" or "Post-Scholastic" period. When The New Aesthetic got taken to task for being "new" and in furtherfield this week James Bridle just admitted that "It wasn't about aesthetics", and I hear the tacitly wrong assertion that there wasn't any contemporary art online before 2006 (even it exaggerated), I'm left very frustrated. When we have good writers like Charlotte Frost and Marisa Olson delving into the deserving 90's, we also have a lot of 'striped' discussion going on where we could say, "Well, we know _that's_ not correct, but there are some good points here..." I find that frustrating, too.

We're in an era that's a little too propositional about things like movements and historiography. Yes, good things are being said, but I think a little more care needs to be taken to the acuteness of the statement being made and accountability for sketchy polemic. The problem is that some of these spurious assertions becomes canon, then it's virtually undoable.

This is not so much an indictment of the above, but of a general lack of discursive mindfulness in contemporary culture. Michael makes a good point - some good things ARE being said, and Caitlin's right, too - the 2006 comment needs to be held accountable.

Culture is too important to be fast and loose with the facts, or worse yet, to possibly be innocent of them.