Hi Eduardo,

Well - you got the take on it.
Waiting patiently for that spam to arrive, asking me if I wanted breast enl=
argements.

>But did you receive an add for breast enlargements as well
This suggests that I potentially might want both at once - if only I lived =
in Holywood.

marc


This is an interesting take on Spam. Taking the idea of a penis enlargem=
ent ad and suberting it with a curatorial theme insinuates a type of phallo=
centrism. Hmm… But did you receive an add for breast enlargements as wel=
l? Most people I know (including myself) have at one point.

Eduardo N.
—– Original Message —–
From: marc.garrett
To: list@rhizome.org
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:53 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Become a Curator - It's Easy!


Become a Curator - It's Easy!
http://www.furtherfield.org/mgarrett/email_art/docs/become_a_curator.htm

Hi Eduardo,

The piece is interesting as you say - but I feel that flippancy of this
piece can only go so far. So the work as you say does not stretch out as far
as it could do…

I feel that there are various choices in moving out of the singular. It is
not enough to be conceptually solid or simply very good at what you do - the
more significant changes occur when one decides to go further than one's own
border definitions, further that those self imposed and restrictive and
mannerist comforts.

It seems that:-
It is no longer enough to be 'AN' artist
It is no longer enough to be 'AN' academic
It is no longer enough to be 'A' critic
It is no longer enough to be 'A' writer
It is no longer enough to be 'A' curator

So, I suppose what 'Become a Curator - It's Easy!' says to me is that
singular models are not inspiring models or examples, and can fall into the
patriarchal pyramid trappings of conventional and traditional post-modern
thrown toppling. Of course many have learnt and have been disappointed by
thrown topplers as they take the seat of the ruler before them.

Also, it is not really just a playful swipe at those who care more about
their bank accounts rather than real change for the many, like the more
centralized minds that impose despotic blueprint shifts into the arena of
the art/net art arena.

It also could be:-
'Become an Artist - It's Easy!'
'Become an Academic - It's Easy!'
'Become a Critic- It's Easy!'
'Become a Writer - It's Easy!'

Myths as you know, come in many shapes and forms. Some become real, much is
invention and also works as camouflage; hiding inner missions contrary to
what it says on the tin. Yet there are shifts happening that are changing
creative exchange, situation and behaviour by real example. This is when
groups of imaginative people become aware of their own powers as social
sculptors. Claiming territories (once official, many created) that were once
traditionally closed - shut. This is what I am learning by experience.

I am not sure how effective art & social change is in America, because it
seems that many American artists are psychologically stumped by the fear of
themselves being seen as political (emotional even) and prefer to hide
behind aesthetic or conceptual limitations alone. Only the few dare to enter
into openly challenging the structures (parents) that feed them, this can
only perpetrate isolation between the arts, citizens, themselves and other
artists. What happens then, is the problem of self-referential - medium
confines. Healthy growth is halted, and artists are applauded like clapping
seals for their skills rather than for the (potential) maturity of being
seen as declaring an intuitive intelligence, reflecting the world, life as
well as art. The work becomes dry, and then becomes a barometer of the rules
that its culture imposes rather than a diverse exploration of lateral
possibilities - centralized.

Too many people trying to be seen as clever, rather than risking, taking
risks. Too many artists hiding their true beliefs and not placing their
heart in their work, this goes for many who work in the arts field. Once one
has made the decision that art is not just for Christmas, it is for life;
then surely the next step would be to honour one's own sense of dignity.

I personally, wish to change the landscape that we are all exploring in. Not
for myself alone but with others who feel similar things, who are not
content with just being a yes man/woman accepting given histories, accepting
given information. This cannot be changed by thought alone, an intuitive
sense of reasoning takes place and certain strategies are put into action
and (hopefully) doing what one actually says does occur. I feel that it is
not a bad thing that institutions are not clever and imaginative enough to
take on net art yet, on net art's own terms. There is a renaissance
happening and the institutions have not found a way to claim it yet. This is
because it is not theirs, for once it is the artists domain, a non
centralized, nomadic and relational creativity that goes beyond just
concepts and conventional remits. At last the artist has found an era when
they potentially do not have to be submissive.

I know, that history is currently being invented by various people who spend
most of their lives travelling around the world publicizing their own
particular story in respect of net art history. And institutions are blindly
paying them to sell a brand of net art and digital art that does not
actually reflect the truth as truly experienced by those who have been doing
it and living it themselves. You know them, the same names - being carted
around talking about the same things. Turning something that could be seen
as truly amazing and organic, into yet another cynical set of myths for
institutions to cling onto for packaging - this is not good enough. This
type of mannerist and emotionally empty activity reconfirms to me, that art
history is merely an illusion, a matter of fate, a matter of who is there at
the time, revisionist interpretations to the highest bidder. I want to
change this, if net art creativity is truly decentralized then the field
offers the potential of a more democratic vista for all to view and
experience. It can bring all concerned closer to such creativity and to
others (this scares them) rather than the usual elitist divisive separatist
agendas.

So, going back to your original wordings 'I am not sure if exposing the
power structure is enough these days' I totally agree. I feel that real
change is only to happen if people become collaborative and take control of
their own destinies together. I do not wish to topple thrones - let those
who need them stay on those ego-centralized podiums, leave them to carry on
fondling their own delusory projections. In time, they will be seen for what
they really are. For I wish to be part of a new history that reclaims what
is real and not just based on backward neo liberalist, gate-keeping habits.
At the moment, here in Europe there is a sea change, and many are part of it
via their own fruition, I am a part of this shift, along many others,
actively changing the landscape via art, collaboration, decentralization, a
new humanist collective movement that wishes for more than what has been.

with respect from

marc


It might be a Hollywood thing. I actually lived in the heart of Hollywood
for over three years. Two blocks away from the Chinese theater. It was
interesting to watch tourism on an everyday basis.

In any case, I was wondering about the piece. I am not sure if exposing the
power structure is enough these days. I mean, my own work is about exposing
or shall we use the word "deconstructing" as well, along the same lines as
yours. But since this has been an art strategy for a while now, it seems to
have been comfortably absorbed by the art institution.

I just read a catalog for an exhibit called Whiteness in the Laguna Museum,
California, in which in a very liberal way, the critical works by many
artists of color has been absorbed under a deconstructive umbrella of
difference. Now, the power structure is saying, "watch me make a space for
your diversity, while keeping my backyard clean." Powerful stuff myth
making is. Just a thought for constant outproduction.

In any case, the piece is interesting.

Peace,

Eduardo N.
—– Original Message —–
From: marc.garrett
To: Eduardo Navas
Cc: list@rhizome.org
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 3:27 AM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Become a Curator - It's Easy!


Hi Eduardo,

Well - you got the take on it.
Waiting patiently for that spam to arrive, asking me if I wanted breast
enlargements.

>But did you receive an add for breast enlargements as well
This suggests that I potentially might want both at once - if only I lived
in Holywood.

marc


This is an interesting take on Spam. Taking the idea of a penis enlargement
ad and suberting it with a curatorial theme insinuates a type of
phallocentrism. Hmm… But did you receive an add for breast enlargements
as well? Most people I know (including myself) have at one point.

Eduardo N.
—– Original Message —–
From: marc.garrett
To: list@rhizome.org
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:53 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Become a Curator - It's Easy!


Become a Curator - It's Easy!
http://www.furtherfield.org/mgarrett/email_art/docs/become_a_curator.htm

Hi Lee,

Thanx -

reading it again, I notice some silly spelling mistakes but I hope the
message is clear…

marc


> Mark
>
> Very Beautifully Stated.
>
> Cheers
> Lee
>
> on 6/28/03 8:37 AM, marc.garrett at marc.garrett@furtherfield.org wrote:
>
> > Hi Eduardo,
> >
> > The piece is interesting as you say - but I feel that flippancy of this
> > piece can only go so far. So the work as you say does not stretch out as
far
> > as it could do…
> >
> > I feel that there are various choices in moving out of the singular. It
is
> > not enough to be conceptually solid or simply very good at what you do -
the
> > more significant changes occur when one decides to go further than one's
own
> > border definitions, further that those self imposed and restrictive and
> > mannerist comforts.
> >
> > It seems that:-
> > It is no longer enough to be 'AN' artist
> > It is no longer enough to be 'AN' academic
> > It is no longer enough to be 'A' critic
> > It is no longer enough to be 'A' writer
> > It is no longer enough to be 'A' curator
> >
> > So, I suppose what 'Become a Curator - It's Easy!' says to me is that
> > singular models are not inspiring models or examples, and can fall into
the
> > patriarchal pyramid trappings of conventional and traditional
post-modern
> > thrown toppling. Of course many have learnt and have been disappointed
by
> > thrown topplers as they take the seat of the ruler before them.
> >
> > Also, it is not really just a playful swipe at those who care more about
> > their bank accounts rather than real change for the many, like the more
> > centralized minds that impose despotic blueprint shifts into the arena
of
> > the art/net art arena.
> >
> > It also could be:-
> > 'Become an Artist - It's Easy!'
> > 'Become an Academic - It's Easy!'
> > 'Become a Critic- It's Easy!'
> > 'Become a Writer - It's Easy!'
> >
> > Myths as you know, come in many shapes and forms. Some become real, much
is
> > invention and also works as camouflage; hiding inner missions contrary
to
> > what it says on the tin. Yet there are shifts happening that are
changing
> > creative exchange, situation and behaviour by real example. This is when
> > groups of imaginative people become aware of their own powers as social
> > sculptors. Claiming territories (once official, many created) that were
once
> > traditionally closed - shut. This is what I am learning by experience.
> >
> > I am not sure how effective art & social change is in America, because
it
> > seems that many American artists are psychologically stumped by the fear
of
> > themselves being seen as political (emotional even) and prefer to hide
> > behind aesthetic or conceptual limitations alone. Only the few dare to
enter
> > into openly challenging the structures (parents) that feed them, this
can
> > only perpetrate isolation between the arts, citizens, themselves and
other
> > artists. What happens then, is the problem of self-referential - medium
> > confines. Healthy growth is halted, and artists are applauded like
clapping
> > seals for their skills rather than for the (potential) maturity of being
> > seen as declaring an intuitive intelligence, reflecting the world, life
as
> > well as art. The work becomes dry, and then becomes a barometer of the
rules
> > that its culture imposes rather than a diverse exploration of lateral
> > possibilities - centralized.
> >
> > Too many people trying to be seen as clever, rather than risking, taking
> > risks. Too many artists hiding their true beliefs and not placing their
> > heart in their work, this goes for many who work in the arts field. Once
one
> > has made the decision that art is not just for Christmas, it is for
life;
> > then surely the next step would be to honour one's own sense of dignity.
> >
> > I personally, wish to change the landscape that we are all exploring in.
Not
> > for myself alone but with others who feel similar things, who are not
> > content with just being a yes man/woman accepting given histories,
accepting
> > given information. This cannot be changed by thought alone, an intuitive
> > sense of reasoning takes place and certain strategies are put into
action
> > and (hopefully) doing what one actually says does occur. I feel that it
is
> > not a bad thing that institutions are not clever and imaginative enough
to
> > take on net art yet, on net art's own terms. There is a renaissance
> > happening and the institutions have not found a way to claim it yet.
This is
> > because it is not theirs, for once it is the artists domain, a non
> > centralized, nomadic and relational creativity that goes beyond just
> > concepts and conventional remits. At last the artist has found an era
when
> > they potentially do not have to be submissive.
> >
> > I know, that history is currently being invented by various people who
spend
> > most of their lives travelling around the world publicizing their own
> > particular story in respect of net art history. And institutions are
blindly
> > paying them to sell a brand of net art and digital art that does not
> > actually reflect the truth as truly experienced by those who have been
doing
> > it and living it themselves. You know them, the same names - being
carted
> > around talking about the same things. Turning something that could be
seen
> > as truly amazing and organic, into yet another cynical set of myths for
> > institutions to cling onto for packaging - this is not good enough. This
> > type of mannerist and emotionally empty activity reconfirms to me, that
art
> > history is merely an illusion, a matter of fate, a matter of who is
there at
> > the time, revisionist interpretations to the highest bidder. I want to
> > change this, if net art creativity is truly decentralized then the field
> > offers the potential of a more democratic vista for all to view and
> > experience. It can bring all concerned closer to such creativity and to
> > others (this scares them) rather than the usual elitist divisive
separatist
> > agendas.
> >
> > So, going back to your original wordings 'I am not sure if exposing the
> > power structure is enough these days' I totally agree. I feel that real
> > change is only to happen if people become collaborative and take control
of
> > their own destinies together. I do not wish to topple thrones - let
those
> > who need them stay on those ego-centralized podiums, leave them to carry
on
> > fondling their own delusory projections. In time, they will be seen for
what
> > they really are. For I wish to be part of a new history that reclaims
what
> > is real and not just based on backward neo liberalist, gate-keeping
habits.
> > At the moment, here in Europe there is a sea change, and many are part
of it
> > via their own fruition, I am a part of this shift, along many others,
> > actively changing the landscape via art, collaboration,
decentralization, a
> > new humanist collective movement that wishes for more than what has
been.
> >
> > with respect from
> >
> > marc
> >
> >
> > It might be a Hollywood thing. I actually lived in the heart of
Hollywood
> > for over three years. Two blocks away from the Chinese theater. It was
> > interesting to watch tourism on an everyday basis.
> >
> > In any case, I was wondering about the piece. I am not sure if exposing
the
> > power structure is enough these days. I mean, my own work is about
exposing
> > or shall we use the word "deconstructing" as well, along the same lines
as
> > yours. But since this has been an art strategy for a while now, it
seems to
> > have been comfortably absorbed by the art institution.
> >
> > I just read a catalog for an exhibit called Whiteness in the Laguna
Museum,
> > California, in which in a very liberal way, the critical works by many
> > artists of color has been absorbed under a deconstructive umbrella of
> > difference. Now, the power structure is saying, "watch me make a space
for
> > your diversity, while keeping my backyard clean." Powerful stuff myth
> > making is. Just a thought for constant outproduction.
> >
> > In any case, the piece is interesting.
> >
> > Peace,
> >
> > Eduardo N.
> > —– Original Message —–
> > From: marc.garrett
> > To: Eduardo Navas
> > Cc: list@rhizome.org
> > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 3:27 AM
> > Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Become a Curator - It's Easy!
> >
> >
> > Hi Eduardo,
> >
> > Well - you got the take on it.
> > Waiting patiently for that spam to arrive, asking me if I wanted breast
> > enlargements.
> >
> >> But did you receive an add for breast enlargements as well
> > This suggests that I potentially might want both at once - if only I
lived
> > in Holywood.
> >
> > marc
> >
> >
> > This is an interesting take on Spam. Taking the idea of a penis
enlargement
> > ad and suberting it with a curatorial theme insinuates a type of
> > phallocentrism. Hmm… But did you receive an add for breast
enlargements
> > as well? Most people I know (including myself) have at one point.
> >
> > Eduardo N.
> > —– Original Message —–
> > From: marc.garrett
> > To: list@rhizome.org
> > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:53 PM
> > Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Become a Curator - It's Easy!
> >
> >
> > Become a Curator - It's Easy!
> > http://www.furtherfield.org/mgarrett/email_art/docs/become_a_curator.htm
> >
> >
> >
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
> >
>