nick
Since 2008
Works in Ithaca, New York United States of America

Discussions (16) Opportunities (0) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Stop the Victimisation of Ricardo Dominguez


Nope, no discussion of the Dominguez case here. If you want to see an archive of a spirited discussion and defense of bang lab's work, see the April thread on the -empyre- list (some great posts spill over into the beginning of May as well):

https://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2010-April/thread.html

DISCUSSION

Journal of Journal Performance Studies


A recent project of mine, commissioned by Turbulence, called Journal of Journal Performance Studies (http://turbulence.org/Works/JJPS/):

"Journal of Journal Performance Studies (JJPS) is a series of three interrelated works that engage with academic publishing. The project consists of a Firefox extension, an online radio, and a journal. The JJPS Firefox Extension overlays bibliometric data, graphs of journal ownership, and journal cost onto publisher websites. The extension also replaces advertisements on scholarly sites to provide a glimpse into the future of scholarly distribution. JJPS Radio is designed as a fully-automated internet radio station, presenting recitations of articles in our database of hundreds, translations of texts into sound, and news and views important for the study of journal performance. JJPS Radio suggests not only new methods for the dispersion of academic work, but also re-purposes academic texts as its source material. The Journal is an experiment in the propagation of scholarly work. The hope is that the journal will develop into an ongoing project on the limits of contemporary intellectual representation."

You can view a quick video about the project as well.

Any questions or comments are welcome!

DISCUSSION

Journal of Journal Performance Studies


(apologies for any cross-postings)

I wanted to post about a recently-launched project called the Journal of Journal Performance Studies (http://turbulence.org/Works/JJPS/):

"Journal of Journal Performance Studies (JJPS) is a series of three interrelated works that engage with academic publishing. The project consists of a Firefox extension, an online radio, and a journal. The JJPS Firefox Extension overlays bibliometric data, graphs of journal ownership, and journal cost onto publisher websites. The extension also replaces advertisements on scholarly sites to provide a glimpse into the future of scholarly distribution. JJPS Radio is designed as a fully-automated internet radio station, presenting recitations of articles in our database of hundreds, translations of texts into sound, and news and views important for the study of journal performance. JJPS Radio suggests not only new methods for the dispersion of academic work, but also re-purposes academic texts as its source material. The Journal is an experiment in the propagation of scholarly work. The hope is that the journal will develop into an ongoing project on the limits of contemporary intellectual representation."

If you want to see a quick look at the project you can look at the video.

Journal of Journal Performance Studies is a 2009 commission of New Radio and Performing Arts, Inc., (aka Ether-Ore) for its Turbulence web site. It was made possible with funding from the Jerome Foundation.

If you're interested in the project please contact me at editor --at-- journalofjournalperformancestudies ---dot--- org.

DISCUSSION

Art In Your Pocket


My comments have _everything_ to do with the art. Is art immaterial now? Are you saying that these artworks somehow belong to some phenomenal realm that do not have their realization in material? If so, I concede. However, as far as I understand, these works exist in material form; and that material form is the iPhone platform. Therefore the artwork is inevitably tied to the materiality of its realization. Now, I would not continue on my polemic here if there were some understanding in the article about the limited nature of this software; of its embeddedness within a closed system controlled by a corporate entity; and if the author were not so disingenuous in suggesting that the iPhone is somehow a more "open" system than others. If there would have been that level of criticality, then we could talk about the specific configurations of material (the hardware and the written software)---the "art" as you claim I am not writing about. Until we have that sort of discussion---one that, yes, has gone on for years, but, given the preponderance of use of closed systems for art these days (Second Life, Twitter, iPhone, etc.), seems to be more apropos than ever---I see this as nothing more than an advertisement for Apple.

With that said, the artworks under discussion seem to not be using the specific capabilities of the mobile phone platform itself. So we can now have "virtual" dripping of paint? Does the paint drip or splatter when the phone is on the floor? Can we use the phone to tell us when to urinate in Peggy Guggenheim's fireplace? The RjDj piece seems to be more apropos to the mobile phone platform, as I've always considered the platform as the easiest and most direct way to have a mobile microphone, and therefore helping with the creation of works of musique concrete or field recordings.

Nevertheless, I find most of the examples to be derivative of earlier software art and therefore not using what mobile phones are best at, namely communication. Nevertheless, I know the reason why, and it has _precisely_ to do with the limitations that Apple places on the iPhone platform---which are therefore limitations in materiality. The issue here is with how Apple limits background processing on the phone, as well as low-level access to things such as Bluetooth. Thus, when I have considered porting some of my Series 60 work to the iPhone (while I was questioning whether I wanted to do that in the first place), I realized that I couldn't, that I was entirely limited (artificially, mind you) by Apple themselves. This will severely constrain the types of work that you will see on the iPhone as long as Apple holds such an iron fist on the capabilities they make available to the developer. And therefore will constrain the types of applications---artworks---that you might see on the phone. And so we're back at the beginning again, full circle, with the relationship between materiality and the types of artworks that can be made. While material limits often can be enabling for an artist, why should we accept limitations that have less to do with the material itself, and more to do with the processes of value extraction?

DISCUSSION

Art In Your Pocket


So Amazon's decision to force Apple to pull a popular application due to its so-called "violation" of Amazon's API terms of service is okay?

http://www.pcworld.com/article/168019/delicious_library_iphone_app_yanked_from_app_store.html

What I am "hating on" is the seeming effacement of the materiality of the digital: that is, the ways in which the computational devices we use are involved in processes of capital. While we can condemn nearly every device manufacturer in the world because of one or another of their business dealings, we do not want to simply dismiss the digital and computational world altogether---nor do we want to swing to the other end and blindly accept the activities of corporations unquestioned. What we need is judgment and criticality, a lack that I read in the article and that I was responding to---in a polemical fashion, indeed.

More to the point, however, is the ways in which the hype over iPhone applications suggests that Apple is the most appropriate entity for making the software ecosystem necessary for creating great software. Why should we focus our efforts in that direction, rather than concentrating on the development of networks that enable others to write code that is better than Apple's so-called "ease of use"? Why should we not use our positions as artists and educators to encourage our students/viewers/participants to explore these other options, to help lay the groundwork for systems that do not have such a pernicious relationship to capitalism and to authority? Why should we not be working to create the conditions for the "organized networks" that Ned Rossiter writes about? Why can we not use FLOSS as a pedagogical moment to explore these issues?

I am very aware of the problematics of FLOSS culture, being involved in it for over a decade now. However, the seemingly blind acceptance of Apple (and commercial development in general) that I see here and elsewhere, with little consideration of alternatives, forces me to take a stance towards FLOSS that valorizes them, rather than working to remedy FLOSS' own problems.