jacky Sawatzky
Since 2004
Works in Toronto Canada

PORTFOLIO (7)
BIO
Jacky Sawatzky is a multi- media artist. Originally from Winnipeg, Canada, she spent most of her life in the Netherlands were she completed the majority of her formal training and later moved to Vancouver to complete an MFA degree at Simon Fraser University. Her recent projects focus on the development of situations and tools that allow a broad public to share and express their individual points of view while collaborating in a larger social context. They are intended to create an awareness of the concepts behind digital technology and explore the influence this technology has on our perception and consumption of such.

Her work has shown at conferences, festival and galleries in Europe and North-America.
Discussions (14) Opportunities (0) Events (3) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: the unrepublic of art


hi all,

thanks for your insights all of you.

I have to clarify myself when I am talking about juried and influence,
I was predominantly talking about the historical context, art -history,
to give an example of myself what I have been exposed for someone
growing up and living in Holland Rembrandt, Vermeer, and not to forget
Mondriaan. Or writing in english other then the language I grew up
in dutch makes a big difference how I express myself and how I see the
world.

Being older I now have a choice which painting, media works, book,
films, ext, I find interesting. Though this interest is formed by what
I have been exposed to before and the content of this exposure was for
a part determined by the school curriculum. (just an average public
school) thus juried by the process of history (maybe if I was exposed
to Duchamp in addition to the others I would have not disliked high
school art so much. I found it stupid. ) It's a base I can't ignore
even negating art-history means for me that I dealing with it.

I am from opinion that independent thinking is acknowledging ones
dependence, MAYBE it's because this dependence is unique,
individualized, and so results in independent thought.
Maybe that was makes art so unique and so powerful at times, that each
individual has an individual and a collective experiences and views and
there own way of dealing with art-history. Art is complex dynamic of
give and take, time and place, of history and no-history, a system that
is in flux I don't know, really mostly I don't understand what makes
me pause, but I do see art as something outside me (hmm sounds
vague..)

The current juried systems , would this be CC or Rhizome or some
radical art group, interest me, more from the point of what kind of art
is supported or not and through these choices understanding which
criteria are underneath the selection. This understanding explains the
political and social climate of different groups and countries.

and Pall, for me what Jim said was not "bleedin' obvious" .

cheers, Jacky

On 2-Jun-07, at 2:46 PM, Jim Andrews wrote:

> perhaps there are types of art where some sort of semi-concensus is
> possible and common, but the more adventurous the types of art under
> consideration, the less that's likely to be true. even if jurors do
> not simply reward their friends and contacts (which is reprehensible),
> the range of types and approaches to art typically under consideration
> in media art competitions is very wide. media/um x art(s) x technical
> level x millieu x subject matter x aesthetic x language x politics x
> experimental level x artist experience level... a forbidding cross
> product of considerations that may leave jury members shaking their
> heads about the differences in opinion they have about the relative
> value of the proposals and the art and the artists.
>
> also, the more original the proposal, the harder it is to convey the
> value of the project when it's not finished to view, as is the case
> with proposals submitted to juries.
>
> it's a crap shoot. it really is. the jury can be structured so that
> the jury ranges fairly widely in their backgrounds over the proposals
> (usually not) and then each juror has a say and they can talk until
> they're blue in the face, but it remains a relatively meaningless crap
> shoot.
>
> that's the scary but fascinating reality of it.
>
> to me, it highlights the existential individuality of art and the
> experience of art, erika and jacky. we are so similar and so
> different.
>
> what you think and feel about art is as important as what i think and
> feel about art. even when an 'expert' has his/her say in the matter,
> it is bound to be very different from the next 'expert'. we all have
> things to teach each other, and we do well to try to listen to one
> another and learn from one another, but what is most powerfully
> meaningful to us, via the art experience, is ours and ours alone,
> however much we may learn from each other, and we treasure our own
> experiences of art and what makes it meaningful to us above what
> anyone else says, and rightly so.
>
> also, artists put their blood sweat and tears into creating a
> situation where we can actually experience afresh. where we are
> challenged to abandon our preconceptions and experience afresh, rather
> than experience an easily categorized representation. The artists and
> audience alike seek out this befuddling multiplicity toward fresh
> experience and apprehension.
>
> art challenges our categories rather than willingly conforming to them.
>
> there's nothing wrong with placing value on individuality. it's ok.
> you can be an individual. individuation. it's ok.
>
> ja
> http://vispo.com
>
>
>> Jacky is making some important points that seem to be ignored in
>> these current posts.
>> As "no man is an island" the same goes for art.
>>
>> As to my previous post on the b b b b b boringness of this topic
>> the posts are always couched in a framework that has romantic
>> tendencies, as well, there seems to be undertones of desperation
>> and personal crisis. Perhaps the crisis is that, while
>> maintaining these notions of art which are arrived at through
>> the values of individuality, objectivity, and ownership, an art
>> has emerged that does not fit into these criteria.
>>
>> To me a continual assertion of individualism denotes a desire for
>> control.
>
>
>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> 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://www.jackysawatzky.net

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: the unrepublic of art


hi all,

I want give a few points for discussion; how one thinks or feels about
art doesn't come out of nowhere, it's part of a larger context,
historical, socially , cultural, economically. How I think about art
comes from growing up in a particular culture, I can dispute, negate
it, but both of these actions are based on something that was already
there. The art people are exposed to is selected and juried as too is
qualities and worth. The rhizome art base being on of them. What I
find very important is to understand what are the criteria of a
selection process and put these to discussion, through art or theory
or...
art is a republic

cheers, Jacky

http://www.jackysawatzky.net

On 1-Jun-07, at 6:23 AM, Pall Thayer wrote:

> Your contribution to the discussion isn't exactly brimming with
> insight either.
>
> Pall
>
> On 1-Jun-07, at 8:48 AM, Erika Lincoln wrote:
>
>> Come on, you guys can do better than this!!!
>> b b b b b b boring
>> +
>> -> post: list@rhizome.org
>> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
>> -> 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
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pall Thayer
> p_thay@alcor.concordia.ca
>
> http://www.this.is/pallit
>
>
>
>
>
>

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Community


ok, I am one of those invisible not responding member. No, I am not
afraid to make a fool out myself. BUT....

For me the community of Rhizome goes beyond what I see on the list. The
list is the visible. I want to acknowledge the invisible ; the
conversations I have with friends about what's 'up' on the list; the
time I refer students to the art-base; or going through rhizome raw
while I drink a morning coffee. I think these examples are important
for a virtual community. They are little or big local nodes on the
rhizomatic web. Community is not only about what is there but also
what is not there. The problem is how can this translate to a list on
the web? Occasionally, like now, some one will make contact, this
contact does not have to be through the written word, maybe it's a link
to a video or a sound file.

I don't respond much because writing is for me a slow process- like a
retired turtle I type away. Once I have thought of a response, the
discussion on the list has taken a different course and, not to forget,
for some of us 'flies on the cyberwall' english might be an
uncertainty. ( it is for me) How can others on the web hear or see the
fly on the wall? I do have to admit I often forget to log-in but that
does not feel like a real solution.

The regular participants are connected to the people I see every
morning in the coffee shop, I drink a cappuccino and read the postings
on the raw list. I sometimes map names of list participants on to faces
in the coffee-shop. It's fun!

Or has all what I have written been said in previous postings? Sorry
for repeating. Have a good day or night!
oh ja, I am Jacky

http://www.jackysawatzky.net
On 11-Oct-06, at 4:16 PM, Eric Dymond wrote:

> Alexis Turner wrote:
>
>> ::1.
>> ::it's always the same old names on this list:
>> ::> by Steven Read, Eric Dymond, Lee Wells, Annie Abrahams, Jason Van
>> Anden,
>> ::> Lauren Cornell, alexis turner, MANIK, Pall Thayer, Rob Myers,
>> T.Whid,
>> ::> beate zurwehme, M. River, Michael Szpakowski, Rob Myers &
>> salvatore
>> ::> iaconesi
>> ::
>> ::there MUST be more people than just this subscribing? where are
>> they? if
>> ::we want to discuss teh community, the _COMMUNITY should be involved,
>> not
>> ::just the _DEFAULT_CONTRIBUTORS. i hardly ever post to this because
>> as
>> ::'just some guy' i expect not to be taken [as] seriously. all the
>> other
>> ::subscribers must also have their reasons for remaining silent too.
>> this
>> ::does not a community make. speak, even if you sound like a fool:
>> learn by
>> ::mistakes instead.
>>
>> Hear, hear! I sound like a fool 95% of the time (the other 5% is, of
>> course,
>> unadulterated genius), but when do I let that stop me?
>> -A.
> Nope, that 5% belongs to Max Herman, you can't have it.
> Eric
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> 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
>

DISCUSSION

miss Quichot- a reply to the debate on bad digital art


The other day I put this old (1998) video piece online. This piece
has never been shown in public; I wanted the work to be accessed from
out of a domestic situation and not in a gallery exhibition. So I
shelved the work. The technical development of the internet opened up
the possibility to achieve what I envisioned a few years ago and here
it is http://www.jackysawatzky.net/quichot
Is it digital art? The concept started in video or...?
An interesting aspect of the internet is that the work can be watched
in a domestic situation, a concept often taken for granted and an
important issue to add to the digital art debate.

Cheers, Jacky Sawatzky

DISCUSSION

Re: on spam and viruses


hi all,

I am following this mi_go event with interest, resulting that conflicting emotion
are going through my body, from curiosity to irritation. I do have a question,
coming from a 'worm' illiterate, and it might be stupid, but is this intentional? Or
is this an experiment gone wrong? Is this person a known participant on the list?

A side thoughts on this is does it matter? from a human point of view, if this is an
experiment gone wrong maybe this person needs some tech help? Or are I am just
asking worm illiterate questions? Is this a worm?? Does soemone know of good
literature on worms and viruses??

And otherwise grounds for a very interesting and important discussion, I think. My
thoughts on this are not clear, and also a bit worried that through this I might
loose important emails. Hmmm, I have to run to work, but condemning someone for
this is an absolute NO for me. Keep the discussion going, I say.

chaio, jacky

http://www.jackysawatzky.net