Re: cultural context of the electronic arts

I just caught up with the RHIZOME discussion raised by J M Cheddie on
the problem of "representation" at ISEA - cultural diversity …etc

This issue is fresh in my mind as I have just returned from a trip to
China. And among other things I was reminded of the pernicious and
dangerous nature of the current discourse about the electronic arts and
the internet. […]

The best guess is that there are no more than 100-200,000 internet
addresses in the whole of China (population 1.3 billion), and given the
state of rural development in the country it is hard to imagine that a
majority of the population would have access to the internet in less
than a hundred years.

Add to this the problem that the internet is dominated by english and
the requirements of the multinational corporations - and that the
concept of "free speech" has a totally different social context in china
(where there is a gulf between private and public discourse).

Then add the totally divergent histories of artistic development (all
art schools were closed during the cultural revolution in china- only a
very few have re-opened).

As the electronic arts become ensnared in the internet, we are creating
huge barriers to dialogue- the electronic freedom foundation discourse
about the internet is all about democracy and free access- the truth is
that what is being built is a global suburb (not a village) with armed
guards around the perimeter.

Now the danger is, as pointed out by Lily Diaz, that inclusiveness
becomes a token activity where the ideological ghetto re-inforces it's
ideas by selecting individual representation that only confirms the
mainstream. The internet is not a global "commons" - it is a global club
with controlled access.

[…]

None of this is new of course, since these issues have been at the core
of ongoing discussions in the arts this century (see Third Text for
instance). The struggles against the art academy of the last century,
the Dada artists, Fluxus- all attempt to break the mirror. It is just
worse in the electronic arts because the electronic arts create many new
means of exclusion.

[…]

To be cute, surely the answer is to "think globally, act locally" - and
that the last thing we should try and do is impose on the organisers in
Chicago 1997 or in manchester/Liverpool 1998 any agenda- rather we
should enter into dialogue with them and raise concerns about the
ideological content of ISEA- so that choices are made as consciously as
possible.

[…]

Finally, ISEA itself just has gone through a metamorphosis with the move
of the ISEA secretariat from Holland to Montreal (they will have it for
5 years, then pass the baton to a new host). The new ISEA board does not
quite legally exist yet (ISEA is a wonderfully virtual organisation)-
and it is crucially important that the ISEA Board include a broader
representation- Alain Mongeau and the Montreal team have started this
process by including a Chicago representation and a Manchester/Liverpool
representative to the Board. We need to nominate/propose other Board
members to help make sure that these issues are confronted in the "way
of doing business" in every part of the ISEA network and nodes.

PS these comments are as a private individual- I just joined the new
"virtual" ISEA board this year and look forward to working with ISEA to
help it address the needs and concerns of the electronic arts community-
by all accounts ISEA Chicago and ISEA manchester/Liverpool will be very
different and lively events-