patrick lichty
Since the beginning
Works in Chicago, Illinois United States of America

PORTFOLIO (1)
BIO
Patrick Lichty is a digital intermedia artist, writer, and independent curator of over 15 years whose work comments upon the impact of technology on society and how it shapes the perception of the world around us. He works in diverse technological media, including activism, printmaking, kinetics, video, generative music, and neon. He is Editor-in Chief of Intelligent Agent, an electronic arts/culture journal, part of the activist group The Yes Men, and operates IALA Gallery in Baton Rogue, Louisiana.
Discussions (223) Opportunities (6) Events (5) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Los Angeles Art


Ok:
Putting a link up and saying "discuss" Like Linda Richman isn't really a discussion.

THAT BEING SAID,
For next year's CAA, I'm doing a panel called "The Culture of Dispersion - Why Contemporary art is Everywhere, Yet Nowhere At All". This has to do with the general ex/implosion of culture in light of the Long Tail/infinite niche-ing of the Net. The LA scene and the Net are two very different things, but I think that the explosive expansion of a genre and its lack of concentration are related.

But is this argument posed by Video Green the same as the last five pages of "Shock of the New", focused through Los Angeles? Isn't the profusion of MFAs the center of a proportionate devaluation of the degree, and creating the rise of the PhD in Art, which is going to become necessary, but I find the proposition of its necessity almost industrial, and in 20 years, we will need postdoc in art to distinguish excellence.

Degree inflation and its resultant effects are unfortunate, and a bit absurd.

DISCUSSION

Conference Report: NET.ART (SECOND EPOCH)


Josephine -
Yes, I may be injecting too many issues here. Might be a good idea for a second thread.
The Hal Foster link is brilliant - encapsulates a lot of what we're getting at.
That's a really key point.

As for epochs, I'm not sure if one can look at it as such I see more of an architectonic of a lot of timelines (see Wattenberg et al's Idealine). Maybe net.art is in a second epoch in regards to surfing clubs, but this is probably the genre in regards to it being a subclass of New Media as such. And, perhaps New Media is of a time as well, as even though I have argued that there are at least four generations of art that could be called "New Media", although except for the last couple years of the 90's on, none of them were defined as such until the community had discussed this and formalized by Lev and others it got the name.

Historiography is a tough nut. It's really useful, but sometimes it's very contentious. I tend to say that its complexity is embedded in the genre's explosion into so many threads.

To tim - I'll search my White Papers to check for my Alpha releases on some of the incrementals.

DISCUSSION

Conference Report: NET.ART (SECOND EPOCH)


Here is a tremendous conversation - generationalism in net. art.
In regards to things like technological art, I posited about 3-4 years ago we were in a "fourth Generation" (the late 90's New Media people being the third, the group Cory Arcangel on being the fourth, and with the surfing club analogy, maybe we are finding an incremental one coming). Maybe this conversation is analogical to a young colleague of mine that often got in my face once said in regards to her being impressed with the comprehensiveness of the last book by Stefan Arisona, "Well, if you're THAT famous, how come THEY haven't heard of you?"

Beyond the personal aspect of the comment and the fact I did a lot of my work in collectives under pseudonym, I think this illustrates a couple key points Josephine is getting at. There is a lot of tech art coming out, it is also integrated with contemporary practice very tightly lately, and there really aren't a lot of good tech art history texts of the 90's, AND it isn't being taught, or in very few places. I am hesitating at this time to think that the current generation has mastered the press release and foregrounds their generation, but I have evidence to suggest that this is a current cultural trend. I don't know there, and in a conversation, I mentioned that there is a convergence of the rise of New Media MFAs around 2000, the agendas of the art academic artist to "make it" in the art world, where the 90's was more focused on festivals than galleries.

Lastly, I went to the Digital Art Histories panel at SVA last week, where there were Ken Knowlton, Margot Lovejoy, Lillian Schwartz, and Kenneth Snelson that had to do with major acquisitions by the Victoria and Albert.

I'll be blunt, that while I was absolutely amazed by their wizardry with dauntingly small resources, a little part of me was saying, "Oh my god - that is so SIGGRAPH, or something I'd see in a 70's sci-fi flick."

Well, yes. This was sci-fi then. And it was the culture then for technology and art, as we have one in the 2000's versus the one in the 90's (although decades are a bad mnemonic). Was it crude or iffy work? Some of it was BY TODAY'S STANDARDS, much of it is still amazing (Snelson's amazing, and Lovejoy is still quite relevant), but it speaks to a different context. I think that today, there is a lack of contextual depth being represented, as I think it is useful to stand on the shoulders of giants, and acknowledge that.

Perhaps this is due to the deluge of work being created, and that in the cultural time compression that digital media creates, the temporal event horizon begins with Arcangel and Paperrad, and it needs to be expanded back at least to the beginning of Rhizome (facetious comment...).

DISCUSSION

Wikipedia Art


Tom Moody Wrote.
My outrage wasn’t mock and Lichty’s wasn’t outrage. He repeatedly cited his own academic credentials to justify the project. Now that it’s failed he claims to be blase about it. Either way, he played the Wikipedia editors for suckers-kind of icky.

As for the Cage, how many days did it take to come up with that? Everyone who undertakes a project like this thinks they’re Cage or Duchamp. What if they’re not?
tom moody // 22 Feb 2009, 6:11 pm

Regarding Tom’s commentary on my Rhizome posting @ Artfag..
Well, if it wasn't mock, then Tom needs a little perspective, a beer, a hug, a kitty, something. At the end of this I do get a little miffed at my character being questioned, but I'm being pretty honest abotu this.

The difference between today and the days of Black Mountain, is that I'm really not sure that Cage strategically planned to be Cage, and Maybe Duchamp did, but not like today. Today, today, people have media strategies and marketing plans as how to be who they are. Everyone has their schtick to one extent or another, especially Tom. If I had MORE of one, I'd probably be more "successful" as a festival/gallery artist. But I'm still a bit driven by my interests too much, and less by a pr/image/marketing plan.

I’m not blase, maybe a little jaded, maybe a touch clinical, as little about WPA was that surprising UNTIL they got into the inner community. Sure, WPA was a very tight little system. Arguing about that is moot.

As for my putting my own credentials behind it, it’s not icky - it’s sticky. That actually had a little risk to it, and almost has to do with things like Second Front, the Mattes, etc. Who should care about virtual performance art? But in all honesty, compared to the tactical media projects I’ve been involved in, art in general is a microcosm. Tempests in teapots, until you become someone like Steve Kurtz… Then they try to throw you away for life.

That’s not blase; that’s just speaking the facts.

The fact that (for some strange reason) we care about art is not blase, either - although the larger society may consider us academic/hermetic in our own right. Again, in many cases, the arguing is people fighting over scraps of credibility when there are so many better things to do. It's almost like a Star Trek Fan club, arguing whether Cage/Duchamp or Kirk/Spock are better - it's just a larger audience with far more real power.

0: I actually was not a progenitor of the project, but I thought it was “interesting” to see what they would do, and formally lent my support. Using my creds was probably necessary; although it probably didn’t help me that much. Took one for the team if it lessened my cred any, but you have to take risks once in a while.

1: Sure, it was strategic. Maybe one could also look at it as a model for critique of the contemporary “strategic” artist. I don’t find this that interesting, because the argument devolves quickly.

2: It did get interesting when I saw the arcane underbelly of Wikipedia, and I will never let my students cite from it again.

3: … (to be continued)

4: As for Tom’s “icky” and other comments during the Surfin Club debacle on Rhizome (another tempest/teapot. This pose of the growly troll is old - Josh Zeidner, Kandinskii, Lismore, Antiorp, Brad Brace, nn, integer, have all institutionalized this position as “anti-strategy” that’s just as much of a pose as a strategy. If it is not a pose, then see my previous comments.

4b: As for my veracity, as I told Joseph McElroy - I’m a pretty straight up person, and rarely pose for the camera. I just have a passion for art, and if I lost that, I’d walk. Many of today’s new media gang are about the PR game, positioning, strategies, and honestly - it works great, but I don't really do it. I do that a little bit if it fits the concept. Beyond that, while nothing’s pure, my veracity is still pretty much there - you see what you get, and it’s out of a spirit of support for a love of this stuff and support of the community. so for those of you who think otherwise, well, comments from people like the ‘nasty’ Tom Moody are often not worth a lot of my time. Although I’d buy him a couple rounds on the spot, were I ever to see him in the flesh.

And if I'm seen as disingenuous in any way at this point, then stay in your wilderness of mirrors, because I can't help you.
Patrick Lichty // 07 Mar 2009, 10:46 am

EVENT

Second Front @ Bridge Thu: 7pm


Dates:
Thu Mar 05, 2009 00:00 - Thu Mar 05, 2009

Al Hansen's Car Bibbe II By Second Front, Directed by Patrick Lichty
This virtual "Happening" is an interpretation of an original, unrealized Al Hansen text presented by Second Front member Bibbe Hansen. Car Bibbe II, unlike the Car Symphony #1, is a cycle of three actions; demolition of a Cadillac Fleetwood, scores of ballet dancers, and a horde of maintenance engineers. The original Hansen text is presented in its entirety, live in the virtual world of Second Life, previously unrealized due to liability issues. Second Front is the pioneering performance art group in the online avatar-based VR world, Second Life. Second Front creates theatres of the absurd that challenge notions of virtual embodiment, online performance and the formation of virtual narrative. www.secondfront.com/blog