Rob Myers
Since 2003
Works in United States of America

PORTFOLIO (5)
BIO
Rob Myers is an artist and hacker based in the UK.

I have been creating images of the contemporary social and cultural environment through programming, design software and visual remixing since the early 1990s. My work is influenced by popular culture and high art in equal measures. My interest in remixing and sampling has led to my involvement in the Free Culture movement. I have been involved in the public consultation regarding the Creative Commons 2.0 and CC-UK licenses. All my visual art is available under a Creative Commons license.

My interest in programming has led to my involvement with the Free Software movement. I developed the Macintosh version of the Gwydion Dylan programming language compiler. All my software is available under the GNU GPL.
Discussions (508) Opportunities (1) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

When you go surfclubbin', don't forget your hat.


Tom - I wasn't claiming that Morales is being ironic, I was claiming that he describes irony. I'm sorry if I what I wrote was unclear.

DISCUSSION

Net Art Versioning


T.Whid: The art world isn't generative.

If the net is generative and net.art is on the net, but the art world isn't generative and net.art is a product of the artworld, there would appear to be a contradiction. ;-)

(I may be mis-using the word "generative" here relative to how Zittrain intends it, I'm using it to mean weak technological determinism.)

Tom certainly describes both earlier and current net art as epiphenomena of the content and structure of the web.

DISCUSSION

When you go surfclubbin', don't forget your hat.


Perhaps you like it but I don't think you can claim it is what Net Artists have always done if you think it is "ironically posting links to existing media with your friends on a group blog."

Net artists have always mimicked and ironised the existing forms of the internet. In the Web 2.0 era, "ironically posting links to existing media with your friends on a group blog." has the same relationship to the source material as hacking up a custom 404 page had in the early net.art era.

It's like artists who take snapshots of tragic young models rather than painting pictures of sad old clowns. We can see that the social content and function of the works is equivalent because of what we understand of the semiotics of each class of images within their indexical environments.

DISCUSSION

When you go surfclubbin', don't forget your hat.


[i...]If you have to ask what is different about the current work or what the 2.0 signifies then you can't at the same time say that "there's nothing new here" or that this is just an extension of what already exists. [/i]

If someone has to ask what is different about something then it is precisely the case that they cannot see what is different about it. They therefore cannot say what is new or discontinuous about it.

[i]...Several times I have suggested reading the Lialina and Ramocki essays but it is obvious from the above quote (from the thread here: http://rhizome.org/discuss/view/37731) that too much reading causes eyestrain.[/i]

Both essays are excellent but I do not believe that they support your case.

The Lialina essay shows that the meaning of the net to its participants is reflected in the aethetics of the materials that circulate within it. What it does not show is that the attitude of net artists to those materials has changed. If the net used to be idealistic and is now blase, and net.art used to be idealistic and is now blase, then the relationship of net.artists to the net is passive and constant. See my next comment to T.Whid.

The Ramocki essay presents Surf Clubs precisely as ironically posting links to existing media with your friends on a group blog. By "irony" I don't mean sarcasm or pretension, I mean altering the meaning while maintaining the form. And semiotics was hardly under-represented in the discourses of early net art.

DISCUSSION

Net Art Versioning


T.Whid -

I do think it's useful to view an artwork as consisting of different technical and semantic layers, and that this is true even for painting and sculpture.

The layers could be: The economic and social production and meaning of raw materials. Their preparation and distribution as artistic materials. The technical manipulation of those materials. The application of style. The iconography of the work. Its critical reception.

This reflects the increasing meaningfulness and distance from physicality of the IP stack. So impressionism and net art are both protocols on different transports. In the IP stack, IP is the choke point, it is what makes the Internet the Internet. What would the choke point for art be?