<br />RHIZOME DIGEST: May 21, 2004<br /><br />Content:<br /><br />+announcement+<br />1. kurt bigenho: The Mobile Phone Photo Show (MPPS)<br />2. Rachel Greene: Rhizome.org Announces Winners of 2004 Net Art<br />Commissioning Program<br />3. ryan griffis: Underfire forum<br />4. hannah davenport: Lumen Eclipse - A Multimedia Arts Event<br /><br />+opportunity+<br />5. Rachel Greene: Fwd: NY press screenings of The Yes Men movie tonight and<br />later<br />6. Jennifer Estaris: WTD: video Game Artists in NYC<br /><br />+interview+<br />7. Jemima Rellie: Tate in Space [with Susan Collins]<br /><br />+thread+<br />8. t.whid, Mac McKean, Geert Dekkers, ryan griffis, Marisa S. Olson, Joy<br />Garnett , Rob Myers, Christina McPhee, richard willis, marc, Rachel Greene,<br />patrick lichty, Edward Tang, CK SHINE, Patrick Simons: rhizome needs to drop<br />its membership fee and free its content<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />1.<br /><br />Date: 5.15.04 <br />From: kurt bigenho (kurt@unfinished.com)<br />Subject: The Mobile Phone Photo Show (MPPS)<br /><br />The Mobile Phone Photo Show (MPPS) Invites Participants from Around the<br />World to Send In Photographs Taken With Their Mobile Phones.<br /><br />Rx presents "The Mobile Phone Photo Show" (MPPS), a participatory<br />exhibition of mobile phone photography curated by Kurt Bigenho and Gregory<br />Cowley. Opening May 20 with a reception from 7-10pm, the MPPS installation<br />will capture and process thousands of mobile phone photographs sent in by<br />participants from all over the world, during the course of the exhibition.<br />MPPS runs through June 18, 2004 at 132 Eddy Street, San Francisco. Gallery<br />hours are daily by appointment, as well as nightly Thursday-Saturday.<br /><br />The exhibition features video monitors, projectors, kiosks, a window-display<br />photo booth activated from outside, as well as a 60x20-foot wall which will<br />eventually be covered in printed photos. Participants are required to<br />register. Registration is free to anyone with a photo-capable mobile phone<br />and is available by logging onto the rxgallery.com website and following the<br />MPPS link. <br /><br />The direct link is: www.rxgallery.com/mpps.<br /><br />We currently have registrants from:<br />Poland<br />Venezuela<br />Czech Republic<br />Spain<br />France<br />Switzerland<br />The Netherlands<br />Canada<br />Croatia<br />England<br />Moldava<br />(partial list)<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />2.<br /><br />Date: 5.17.04 <br />From: Rachel Greene (rachel@rhizome.org)<br />Subject: Rhizome.org Announces Winners of 2004 Net Art Commissioning Program<br /><br />Rhizome.org Announces Winners of 2004 Net Art Commissioning Program<br /><br />FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />Monday, May 17, 2004<br />CONTACT<br />Rachel Greene, Rhizome.org<br />Phone: 212.219.1288 X208<br />Email: rachel@rhizome.org<br />NEW YORK, NYâ??Rhizome.org is pleased to announce that seven<br />artists/groups have been awarded commissions to assist them in creating<br />original works of net art through its Commissioning Program. Paul<br />Catanese, Warren Sack, Jason van Anden, Luis Hernandez Galvan and Carlo<br />Zanni will receive awards of $2,500-2,900 each. Commissions of $1,750<br />will be awarded to Kabir Carter and C-Level.<br /><br />A panel of jurorsâ??independent curator Yukiko Shikata, Francis Hwang of<br />Rhizome.org, Natalie Bookchin of The Art Center, and Rachel Greene of<br />Rhizome.org–selected six winners and one Honorable Mention from a pool<br />of about fifty proposals that were received by the March 7, 2004<br />deadline. Members of the Rhizome.org community participated in the<br />evaluation process through secure web-based ballots, selecting a<br />proposal by artist Carlo Zanni to win a commission.<br /><br />Launched in November 2001, the Rhizome Commissioning Program makes<br />financial support available to artists for the creation of innovative<br />new media artwork via panel-awarded commissions. To keep the program<br />relevant and timely, requests for proposals (RFPs) will change from<br />year to year to reflect new developments in technology and the current<br />cultural environment. National Endowment for the Arts, the Greenwall<br />Foundation,the Jerome Foundation, and the Andy Warhol Foundation for<br />the Visual Arts. Additional support has been provided by members of the<br />Rhizome community.<br /><br />This year, the RFP was sent out on January 21, 2004. Artists were<br />invited to submit proposals relating to the theme of Games. The<br />proposal asked artists to â??propose projects that will contribute to the<br />art game genre, or reflect on broad interpretations of â??game.â??<br /><br />â??Since 1996 Rhizome.org has been supporting the new media art community<br />by providing a place where artists and others can exchange information,<br />share opportunities, present new work and engage in critical dialogue,â??<br />said Rachel Greene, Executive Director of Rhizome.org. â??We are thrilled<br />to be able to provide direct financial support to artists. Grants and<br />commissions are particularly important for new media artists because,<br />unlike artists who work with more traditional media such as painting<br />and photography, artists who work with new technologies have a limited<br />ability to sell their work. Giving these artworks an institutional<br />presence is a different but very important form of support for new<br />media artists.â??<br /><br />The chosen projects will be publicly exhibited on the Rhizome.org web<br />site at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://rhizome.org">http://rhizome.org</a> starting in November 2004. They will also be<br />preserved in the Rhizome ArtBase archive, and presented at a public<br />event in New York City.<br /><br />…<br /><br />$2900 Awards:<br />MISPLACED RELIQUARY<br />by Paul Catanese (San Francisco/CA/US)<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.paulcatanese.com/rhizome/index.html">http://www.paulcatanese.com/rhizome/index.html</a><br />A collection of relics and their holy travels will be catalouged and<br />contained within a virtual repository which will take the form of a<br />gameboy advance ROM that can be viewed and "played" online. In<br />addition, instructions will be given for downloading the ROM file<br />itself and installing on gameboy advance hardware. Finally, an artist's<br />edition of 5 game cartridges will be created as well.<br /><br />Paul Catanese is a hybrid media artist and Assistant Professor of New<br />Media at San Francisco State University. He received his MFA from the<br />School of the Art Institute of Chicago, where he lectured for several<br />years. His artwork has been exhibited internationally, notably at the<br />Bangkok Experimental Film Festival, Parisâ?? Villette-Numerique,<br />Germanyâ??s Stuttgarter Filmwinter and the Canadian New Forms<br />FestivalRecently, Paul became and artist-in-residence at the Kala Art<br />Institute in Berkeley, California through their fellowship program and<br />was awarded a net.art commission from Turbulence.org with funds made<br />possible by the National Endowment for the Arts.<br /><br />OVERSATURATION<br />by Luis Hernandez Galvan with support from Gabriel Acevedo (Mexico<br />City/MX)<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://opensorcery.net/gaming">http://opensorcery.net/gaming</a><br />This game is about a small sphere (the player) trying to make its way<br />through a highly saturated, crowded system, and trying to postpone its<br />collapse.<br /><br />Luis Hernandez Galvan is an artist and architect based in Mexico City,<br />Mexico. He was recently an Artist In Residence a the Centro de La<br />Imagen in Mexico. Other works include <a rel="nofollow" href="http://heterarquia.org">http://heterarquia.org</a> and the<br />installation vitrinas/public art. Galvan studied architecture, and has<br />been published in architectural journals and worked with figures and<br />studios inlcuding Jaime Varon and atelier lcm.<br /><br />FARKLEMPT<br />by Jason van Anden(New York/NY/US)<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.smileproject.com/farklempt">http://www.smileproject.com/farklempt</a><br />Managing feelings is essential to getting along in the world. Keeping<br />emotions inside can be just as damaging as just letting them flow.<br />"Farklempt" challenges players to manage their emotional-health and<br />maintain relationships through skillful manipulations.<br /><br />After earning a BFA in Sculpture from Syracuse University and attending<br />Skowhegan School of Painting and Sculpture, Jason Van Anden moved to<br />New York. Surviving New York became his preoccupation as he built a<br />successful career designing software systems for clients as diverse as<br />Citibank and Duggal, eventually incorporating as Quadrant 2, Inc.<br />Recent artwork portrays human behavior in an ongoing series of<br />artificially intelligent, interactive robotic sculptures that express<br />themselves emotionally through body language, sound and facial<br />expressions. This body of work is called The Smile Project<br />(www.smileproject.com).<br /><br />AVERAGE SHOVELER<br />by Carlo Zanni (New York/US and Milano/Italy)<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.zanni.org/rhizome/">http://www.zanni.org/rhizome/</a><br />Average Shoveler takes its aesthetic inspiration from the adventure<br />game â??Leisure Suit Larry.â?? The goal of the game is to shovel the<br />falling snow in front of the userâ??s home. Each flake of snow contains<br />an image taken live from the CNN.com news site, turning the project<br />into a comment on information overload and media colonization.<br /><br />Carlo Zanni (La Spezia, 1975) is an Italian-born artist whose work is<br />focused on the intersection of computation and representation. He<br />paints landscapes and he programs portraits. His work has been shown at<br />the P.S.1 Museum NY, the 1st Tirana Biennial, Bitforms gallery, the 3rd<br />Biennale de Montreal, Canada and at Analix Forever gallery in Geneva<br />among other physical and net places. For more information about Zanni,<br />please visit: <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.zanni.org/">http://www.zanni.org/</a><br />$2,500 Awards:<br />AGONISTICS: A LANGUAGE GAME<br />by Warren Sack<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.hactivist.com/proposals/proposal_rhizome.html">http://www.hactivist.com/proposals/proposal_rhizome.html</a><br />The images and actions used as metaphors by Chantal Mouffe and other<br />theorists of "agonistic democracy" can be instantiated as interactive,<br />graphical objects and dynamics. This "literal" instantiation will then<br />be a computer game that can played by posting messages to a public,<br />online discussion forum.<br /><br />Warren Sack is a software designer and media theorist whose work<br />explores theories and designs for online public space and public<br />discussion. Before joining the faculty at the University of California,<br />Santa Cruz in the Film & Digital Media Department, Warren was an<br />assistant professor at UC Berkeley, a research scientist at the MIT<br />Media Laboratory, and a research collaborator in the Interrogative<br />Design Group at the MIT Center for Advanced Visual Studies. He earned a<br />B.A. from Yale College and an S.M. and Ph.D.from the MIT Media<br />Laboratory. More information about his current work can be found at<br />this website: <a rel="nofollow" href="http://people.ucsc.edu/~wsack">http://people.ucsc.edu/~wsack</a><br />$1,750 Awards:<br />ENDGAMES<br />by C-level (Los Angeles/CA and New York/NY/US)<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.waco.c-level.cc/rhizome/proposal.html">http://www.waco.c-level.cc/rhizome/proposal.html</a><br />C-level will work on the next installment of the Endgames project, a<br />multi-part series in which the artists incorporate elements of<br />subjective documentary and pure fantasy with experimental technologies<br />to create a visceral gaming experience based on psycho-social<br />phenomena. Having addressed the 1993 Waco, Texas government/cult<br />showdown, C-level is currently developing works addressing the MOVE<br />conflict of 1985 and Ted Kaczynski (aka "The Unabomber").<br /><br />C-level is a cooperative public and private lab formed to share<br />physical, social and technological resources. Its members are artists,<br />programmers, writers, designers, agit-propers, filmmakers and<br />reverse-engineers. Part studio, part club, part stage and part screen;<br />C-Level has a space in an isolated basement in Chinatown Los Angeles<br />which plays host to various media events such as screenings,<br />performances, classes, lectures, debates, readings and tournaments.<br /><br />LISTENING (Working Title)<br />by Kabir Carter (New York/NY/US)<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://effects.blogs.com/rhizomeproposal/">http://effects.blogs.com/rhizomeproposal/</a><br />Carter will construct and deploy a non-competitive and non-linear goal<br />oriented interactive text game. Whereas most games involve the<br />deployment of a single subject interacting with a written description<br />of a visual space, Listening will concentrate on the description of<br />acoustic phenomena. Descriptions of sounds will be the vehicle that<br />guides the game player through the environment.<br />Kabir Carter's work focuses on urban environmental sound, acoustic<br />feedback, analog sound synthesis, transmissive acoustics, specialized<br />microphone technologies, and the presentation of live electroacoustic<br />work in public spaces. Kabir lives and works in New York City, has<br />studied electroacoustic composition with David Behrman and Richard<br />Teitelbaum at Bard College, and currently studies privately with<br />composer and performer Joan La Barbara. He was recently selected by<br />Robert Ashley to attend a composers' residency at Atlantic Center for<br />the Arts, and received a Media Alliance Independent Radio and Sound Art<br />Fellowship for his project Shared Frequencies.<br /><br />Honorable Mention:<br />Linkhunters.net<br />by Kerstin Günther<br /> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://tandk.homeip.net/k/linkhuntersNet.html">http://tandk.homeip.net/k/linkhuntersNet.html</a><br /><br />Rachel Greene<br />Executive Director, Rhizome.org<br />New Museum of Contemporary Art<br />583 Broadway, NYC, NY 10012<br /><br />tel. 212.219.1288 X 208<br />fax. 212.431.5328<br />ema. rachel@rhizome.org<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />Rhizome is now offering organizational subscriptions, memberships<br />purchased at the institutional level. These subscriptions allow<br />participants of an institution to access Rhizome's services without<br />having to purchase individual memberships. (Rhizome is also offering<br />subsidized memberships to qualifying institutions in poor or excluded<br />communities.) Please visit <a rel="nofollow" href="http://rhizome.org/info/org.php">http://rhizome.org/info/org.php</a> for more<br />information or contact Rachel Greene at Rachel@Rhizome.org.<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />3.<br /><br />Date: 5.18.04 <br />From: ryan griffis (grifray@yahoo.com)<br />Subject: Underfire forum<br /><br />SYMPOSIUM <br />JORDAN CRANDALL UNDER FIRE<br />A critical forum on the organization and representation of violence<br />Saturday May 29, 2004,  3 - 7 p.m.<br />Location: Witte de With, Rotterdam, and online at www.v2.nl/live<br />  <br />Witte de With organizes in collaboration with V2_Organisation, Institute for<br />the Unstable Media a symposium focusing on the issues debated in the Under<br />Fire forum from January 25 till April 29, 2004.<br /> The main speakers are John Armitage, Asef Bayat, Susan Buck-Morss, Brian<br />Holmes, Gema Martín Muñoz and Loretta Napoleoni.<br />The discussions will be moderated by Jordan Crandall and will be conducted<br />in English. <br /> The debate will be live streamed via www.v2.nl/live. Apart from viewing the<br />live event, you can join the discussions making use of IRC chat. (For<br />detailed directions see www.v2.nl/live).<br />Online moderation by Stephen Kovats, V2_.<br />   <br />PROGRAM <br />3 p.m.                  Welcome by Catherine David and introduction by<br />Jordan Crandall <br />3.30 - 4.30 p.m.    Lectures by Brian Holmes, Asef Bayat, and Susan<br />Buck-Morss  <br />4.30 - 5 p.m.         Discussion and live feedback <br />5 - 5.30 p.m.         Break <br />5.30 - 6.30 p.m.    Lectures by John Armitage, Loretta Napoleoni, and Gema<br />Martín Muñoz  <br />6.30 - 7 p.m.         Discussion and live feedback <br />7 p.m.                  Closing <br />   <br />For reservations phone +31 (0)10 4110144, or e-mail office@wdw.nl .<br />For more information about Under Fire, the speakers and the webarchive see<br />www.wdw.nl. <br />  <br />PUBLICATION <br />The first publication in the Under Fire series - hot off the press -<br />entitled Jordan Crandall. Under Fire. 1. On the organization and<br />representation of violence, will be on sale during the symposium. It<br />contains a compilation of the dialogues that occured online in spring 2004.<br />Price: â?¬ 12.00. <br />  <br />Under Fire is a project by Jordan Crandall organized by Witte de With in<br />collaboration with V2_, Rotterdam.<br />Witte de With, center for contemporary art<br />Witte de Withstraat 50<br />3012 BR Rotterdam <br />tel. (+ 31) 010 4110144 fax. (+ 31) 010 4117924<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.wdw.nl">http://www.wdw.nl</a> <br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />For $65 annually, Rhizome members can put their sites on a Linux<br />server, with a whopping 350MB disk storage space, 1GB data transfer per<br />month, catch-all email forwarding, daily web traffic stats, 1 FTP<br />account, and the capability to host your own domain name (or use<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://rhizome.net/your_account_name">http://rhizome.net/your_account_name</a>). Details at:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://rhizome.org/services/1.php">http://rhizome.org/services/1.php</a><br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />SPECIAL FOR MAY 15 - JUNE 15: All those who sign on to Copper or higher<br />hosting plans during these dates will receive three months of full service<br />for only $1.00! That's (Copper) starting you out with 400MB disk storage<br />space, 2GB of data transfer, 5 POP accounts, and 5 email forwarding<br />accounts.<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />4.<br /><br />Date: 5.19.04<br />From: hannah davenport (hannah@artafternext.org)<br />Subject: Lumen Eclipse - A Multimedia Arts Event<br /><br />After Effects Chicago Presents:<br /> _____________________<br /><br /> LUMEN ECLIPSE<br /><br /> Tuesday, May 25th 2004<br /> ___________________<br /> <br /> A Multimedia Arts Event<br /><br />Chicago, IL- After Effects Chicago presents *Lumen Eclipse*, their 2nd<br />multimedia event of the summer, featuring an evening of digital art,<br />experimental video, and a musical performance accompanied by live video<br />mixing at Wicker Parkââ?¢Ë?s lounge-eatery Rodan (1530 North Milwaukee Ave).<br /><br />The evening will host a unique synergy of events representing the new<br />digital experience in art and music. Opening the event, XChicago will be<br />hosting an Industry Mixer with video artists and professionals, set to the<br />rock/pop samplings of DJ Sanchez Ali. Next is an exploration of the visual<br />and aural arts ââ?¢â?? a screening of The Best of Art After Next TV. The AFX TV<br />line-up includes:<br /><br />* The experimental video art of Walter Wright (inventor of the music video)<br /><br />* The AFX interview w/ controversial punk rock group The Locust<br /><br />* AMODAââ?¢Ë?s (Austin Museum of Digital Art) experimental contemplative audio<br />performance series with Brent Fariss & Bill Thompson<br /><br />*Select features from the Illegal Art Exhibit<br /><br />Following the video feature, The Passengers, will give their live debut<br />performance with a one-hour set, accompanied by digital artist Mason<br />Dixonââ?¢Ë?s live video mixing. There will also be raffle prizes, open to all,<br />from Digital Juice, Magnet Media, and DV magazine that will help to fund<br />future Art After Next and AE Chicago non-profit events. Event begins at 7pm.<br />21+ to enter. No Cover. 773/276-7036<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />5.<br /><br />Date: 5.20.04 <br />From: Rachel Greene (rachel@rhizome.org)<br />Subject: Fwd: NY press screenings of The Yes Men movie tonight and later<br /><br />Begin forwarded message:<br /><br />> From: The Yes Men <administrative@theyesmen.org><br />> Date: May 20, 2004 10:57:42 AM EDT<br />> To: rachel@rhizome.org<br />> Subject: NY press screenings of The Yes Men movie tonight and later<br />><br />> Hello! This afternoon at 4pm (and also on May 26 at 8pm and June 3 at<br />> 6pm),<br />> the movie called The Yes Men (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.theyesmen.org/movie/">http://www.theyesmen.org/movie/</a>) will be<br />> screened by United Artists for the press–including yourself if you can<br />> cite some media affiliation.<br />><br />> To attend, please email <a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:ina@theyesmen.org">mailto:ina@theyesmen.org</a> and tell her:<br />><br />> * a name for yourself<br />> * your media affiliation (magazine, zine, website, etc.)<br />> * your daytime phone number<br />> * whether you are 1 or 2 people<br />><br />> Then, at 4pm, go to 1350 6th Ave. (at 55th Street), 28th floor,<br />> Manhattan.<br />><br />> Additional screenings at the same place and with the same RSVP system<br />> will<br />> be held on May 26 at 8pm and June 3 at 6pm.<br />><br />> See you soon! Or at least, be seen by you soon!<br />><br />> The Yes Men<br />><br />> –<br />> You are receiving this message because you've subscribed to the Yes<br />> Men's<br />> mailing list and told us that you are in the New York area. To edit<br />> your<br />> profile, please visit<br />> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://theyesmen.org/dblist/prof.php?e=rachel@rhizome.org&x=656911902">http://theyesmen.org/dblist/prof.php?e=rachel@rhizome.org&x=656911902</a><br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />6.<br /><br />Date: 5/20/04<br />From: Jennifer Estaris (jfe2101@columbia.edu)<br />Subject: WTD: Video Game Artists in NYC<br /><br />We're looking to hire the following on a project basis: an art director and<br />artists for a game-like demo that we are putting together. 3D models,<br />textures, animations, etc. We especially need artists interested in working<br />on concept art (though we want texture artists, animators, audio ppl, etc.,<br />as well) and prefer NYC-based artists. And you should like robots.<br /><br />The project is part-time for a few months (and could go longer). Previous<br />game experience–working with a real time renderer and modern game<br />engines–is a huge plus, but we're not targeting super high-end rendering.<br />You should be familiar with 3ds max, maya, photoshop, 3d modeling. Email<br />your resume and portfolio link to bernie.yee@mail.com (and mention how you<br />found out about the opening).<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />7.<br /><br />Date: 5.21.04 <br />From: Jemima Rellie (Jemima.Rellie@tate.org)<br />Subject: Tate in Space<br /><br />[note: this is part one of a two part interview - part two will be published<br />in next week's digest]<br /><br />Tate in Space © Susan Collins 2002<br /><br />Tate in Space (www.tate.org.uk/space) was conceived as a site specific<br />artwork for Tate Online. It was commissioned in 2002 as part of Tate<br />Onlineâ??s ongoing net art programme. The site is part fact, part fiction. It<br />is intended as an agent provocateur: a catalyst, structure and location that<br />invites debate and reflection on the nature of art in space, cultural<br />ambition, and an examination of the role of the institution and the<br />individuals within. Tate in Space also works as interactive or immersive<br />fiction, where each visitor is encouraged to engage with their own<br />extra-terrestrial cultural fantasies. Some aspects of the work - such as the<br />satellite sightings data - rely on participants 'wishing' or 'believing' the<br />narrative into existence, assuming a position of co-authorship;<br />collaborating with both the artist and each other in a work of constantly<br />expanding collective fiction. Further information about the work can be<br />found in Paul Bonaventuraâ??s critical essay, Floating Worlds 2002,<br />commissioned to accompany the launch of Tate in Space. Discussion about Tate<br />in Space with Susan Collins & Jemima Rellie 20 February 2004 - Tate Members<br />Room, 6th floor Tate Modern<br /><br />JR - Jemima Rellie<br />SC - Susan Collins<br /><br />JR Why the interest in Space? What is the background? I mean, are you<br />interested in art in space or in space art?<br /><br />SC Iâ??m not so interested in Space Art per se but Iâ??m intrigued by why people<br />were becoming so interested in space. I got interested in the idea when<br />probably a lot of other people did, when the Mars Pathfinder was actually<br />sending direct web cam images back to earth, and you could actually go and<br />follow the Mars Pathfinder through these wonderful grainy webcam images. It<br />was very exciting that you were actually able to see that happen in real<br />time. And then I was also interested in the idea of, well how easy it would<br />be to fictionalise that. At the time I was interested in possibly coming up<br />with a spoof NASA site.<br /><br />JR Was it going to be a website?<br /><br />SC It was going to be a website, â??n a five a dot orgâ?? [NA5A.org], I checked<br />that that was available, and discussed the idea with some net art curators<br />[e2]. I was really interested in creating artist residencies in space, and<br />the concept that they would be actually sending back their work. But at the<br />same time, suddenly - and probably because of the Mars PathFinder - Arts<br />Catalyst and various other Space related Art initiatives were launched and<br />it seemed to be a very zeitgeisty thing. For this particular project, I<br />wasnâ??t really interested in it being yet another Space art project. I wanted<br />it to just come out of the blue. I didnâ??t want it to be seen within the<br />context of a general interest in Space Art as such, I was much more<br />interested inâ?¦<br /><br />JR The fiction of it allâ?¦<br /><br />SC Yes<br /><br />JR Which is really interesting and what separates you in a sense from those<br />artists who are more concerned about the practicalities, the real what<br />happens, the materiality of spaceâ?¦ whereas you are more interested in the<br />construct of â??spaceâ?? and what it says about usâ?¦<br /><br />SC And why we might be interested … in it … and what our motivation is,<br />and what it says about earth, and what it says about the context for us<br />viewing things and our understanding of how we see things. Because it<br />suddenly became so fashionable, I wasnâ??t so interested, so I dropped the<br />idea. But when you gave me the opportunity to come up with an idea for the<br />Tate website, as the kind of artist who has access to web space anyway, for<br />me the question was, well what can I do on the Tate site that I might not be<br />able to do elsewhere. For me it was what is it about this institutional<br />context that I could actually do something with. So I came to where we are<br />now, Tate Modern. I spent the day just thinking about Tate Modern and all<br />the different Tates. It took a while for me to work out what I wanted to do,<br />it wasnâ??t quite there… I got very interested in deconstructing the<br />branding - how the whole thing, the whole organisation works - and then it<br />came togetherâ?¦I think it was about the day before the deadline youâ??d givenâ?¦<br /><br />JR Really!?<br /><br />SC Yes, the day before it all sort of came to me, it was really like<br />marrying these two ideas together [space and the Tate]. I think Iâ??d been<br />thinking about all the different Tates, and about how I could link them, and<br />I was very much wanting to do it within the context of Tate as an<br />institution, I… for me I just didnâ??t see the pointâ?¦ of having a website<br />that was just aâ?¦ websiteâ?¦<br /><br />JR I think thatâ??s very interesting. As you say, the web has really allowed<br />artists to bypass organisations like Tate. Actually, they, you donâ??t need<br />us.<br /><br />SC So I wanted to take advantage of the situationâ?¦.<br /><br />JR As an interventionâ?¦?<br /><br />SC Yes, but also there was a little bit of it that was about how net art is<br />so invisible within terrestrial institutions and how we might have an<br />incredible visibility internationally, with a certain kind of audience<br />reach, if we do things online.<br /><br />JR So when you conceived Tate in Space, was it intended to somehow address<br />that issue?<br /><br />SC No, it was more a case of: I donâ??t want to do some little website that<br />no-oneâ??s going to look at!<br /><br />JR So letâ??s be audacious! Lets stand up there and say that weâ??re equal to<br />Tate Modern!<br /><br />SC Yeahâ?¦so its like Iâ??m not just going to make a little piece of art, Iâ??m<br />gonna give you a whole new Tate. So it was kind of like 'oh well sod it'!<br />And then I just had such fun, thinking it up and playing with all those<br />funding constructs - or constraints - the things that both institutions and<br />artists at the moment have to think about: the search for new audience,<br />innovation, accessibility, that kind of thing.<br /><br />JR And it fits so well with precisely what Tate is about, that it has fooled<br />a lot of people, and I love that. Sandy Nairne - who was instrumental in<br />commissioning itâ?¦ His foreword to the projectâ?¦ it sounds SO real, no wonder<br />people fell for it. It speaks about Tateâ??s â??history of innovationâ?? and<br />â??explorationâ?? and you know we are about supposedly pushing boundaries andâ?¦<br /><br />SC Well there are only two organisations that one could have done it for in<br />the world that it would have been believable. One would be the Guggenheim,<br />because that has satellites, and the other is Tate. And the idea of the<br />satellite obviously has a very nice little sort of double entendre in<br />relation to Tate in Space as wellâ?¦<br /><br />JR But do you think that Tate and the Guggenheim are the same?<br /><br />SC No theyâ??re very different institution, but anywhere else … it just<br />wouldnâ??t have been plausible, and so the only reason that I mention these<br />two [the Guggenheim and Tate] is because these are the two that are really<br />known particularly -<br /><br />JR For being a network and interested in satellite sites and creating new<br />spaces within one brand.<br /><br />SC And I am not sure but I think also for Tate the whole re-branding<br />happened when Tate Modern came onstream? In terms of â??Tateâ?? as opposed to<br />â??the Tateâ??.<br /><br />JR Absolutely.<br /><br />SC Colour coding the institutionsâ?¦and I think that itâ??s largely the branding<br />that made it plausible as well and whilst a project like this could, in some<br />respects have existed as an offline project in an earlier age through<br />leafleting or posters or something like that, certainly that would have not<br />been nearly as plausible or as economically possible - or worked in such a<br />seamlessly integrated way as is possible now with â??Tateâ??… having such<br />clear, graphically scripted parameters as well. So it was a very seamless<br />thing for me to be able to borrow all your [web] templates. I have to<br />sayâ?¦that when I made the proposal, I really enjoyed just writing it as a<br />proposal, for me the proposal was an art work in itself I was having<br />such fun and really, really enjoying the idea of it landing on your deskâ?¦..<br /><br />JR But this fun thing I think is very crucial. A very fundamental element is<br />that it is playful - the whole piece is playful.<br /><br />SC And people pick up on it, their own imagination suddenly runs with this<br />idea of what this new Tate might be. What I thought was fantastic was that<br />the Tate in having come up with a very serious kind of corporate brand, was<br />willing to actually have this piece operate, and one of the things that I<br />asked for, as you know, in the original proposal was that it should be<br />integrated, absolutely within the Tate site and that there would be a link<br />alongside the other Tates from the homepage of the Tate site for the first<br />yearâ?¦and the fact that you were all so willing to actually do that made it<br />possible.<br /><br />JR Well it was essential for the whole piece to work wasnâ??t it?<br /><br />SC Exactly.<br /><br />JR Iâ??m very interested in what you said before: that it wouldnâ??t have been<br />as successful or it wouldnâ??t have worked in the same way pre-internet. And<br />there is a tendency for some net artists to be slightly scornful of this<br />type of work that is more conceptual and yet the piece is so successful<br />because itâ??s online. It's taking full advantage of the medium. Itâ??s about<br />creating a fiction and a group of people combining to contribute to this<br />fiction that has made it work, and the participatory elementsâ?¦ are I think<br />critical.<br /><br />SC Well itâ??s very much about creating a space for people to occupy, so in<br />some respects as the artist I chose to become as invisible as possible<br />within this structure. Although I have a role, which is director of this new<br />Tate. But it was very much about offering this up as a space very much as<br />other kind of public spaces are: for people to come in and make of it what<br />they will, and all I could do is imagine what might happen. So the piece in<br />a way whilst clearly constructed only really begins when its launched.<br />Thatâ??s when you really find out what then may happen.<br /><br />JR Which makes it quite tricky as an art work, I mean, as we discovered. How<br />do you credit everyone involved at all times? And different people talking<br />about the work will focus on certain elements that arenâ??t necessarily the<br />whole piece. Theyâ??re part of the piece and a way into the piece but they<br />donâ??t constitute the whole piece and thatâ??s quite hard to manage. It does it<br />takes on its own life, and in a sense, you have to let it do that.<br /><br />SC Yes, you have to relinquish controlâ?¦ There were all the different<br />sections and it might just be worth mentioning what they were. One element<br />was obviously the history of Space Art, which makes the site quite useful<br />too, so whilst the whole site is a complete blend of fact and fiction, I did<br />do my homeworkâ?¦<br /><br />JR Thoroughly!<br /><br />SC And so the history of space art is written by Eduardo Kac, is a proper<br />history, and then there are links to key sites so if anyone is genuinely<br />interested in finding out more about Space Art they have somewhere to go<br />with it. So itâ??s actually serving an educational purpose as well. It was<br />important to make it inclusive, so whilst it wasnâ??t a real Tate in the sense<br />that there aren't opportunities for artists to exhibit in it - although many<br />did try - I created an online discussion group, so if people did cold call<br />me, which did happen quite a lot or theyâ??d send me their CVâ??s and things<br />like that, I could say that whilst there werenâ??t opportunities for them<br />within the parameters of the Tate in Space website itself that it would be<br />fantastic if they could contribute to the discussion. Everybody without<br />exception said 'yes please' and jumped onto the discussion list. So actually<br />thereâ??s this discussion list full of all the people, pretty much that<br />are interested in Space Art in the world…<br /><br />[note: this is part one of a two part interview - part two will be published<br />in next week's digest]<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />8.<br /><br />Date: 5.18.04 - 5.24.04<br />From: t.whid (twhid@twhid.com), Mac McKean (mac@heaventree.com), Geert<br />Dekkers (geert@nznl.com), ryan griffis (grifray@yahoo.com), Marisa S. Olson<br />(marisa@sfcamerawork.org), Joy Garnett (joyeria@walrus.com), Rob Myers<br />(robmyers@mac.com), Christina McPhee (christina112@earthlink.net), richard<br />willis (richard@dubyasoft.co.uk), marc (marc.garrett@furtherfield.org),<br />Rachel Greene (rachel@rhizome.org), patrick lichty (voyd@voyd.com), Edward<br />Tang (edtang@antiexperience.com), CK SHINE (shine-a-man@excite.com),Patrick<br />Simons (patricksimons@gloriousninth.com)<br />Subject: rhizome needs to drop its membership fee and free its content<br /><br />t.whid (twhid@twhid.com) posted:<br /><br />Rhizome needs to drop its membership fee and free its content<br /><br />During the debate regarding Rhizome's membership fee I was very vocal in my<br />support of the idea. The argument went like this: an obligatory membership<br />fee for Rhizome is better than no Rhizome at all. I was sure that if the fee<br />wasn't implemented then Rhizome as we know it would cease to exist. There<br />would be no more lists, no more ArtBase, and no more web site.<br /><br />But what I failed to understand is that the fee basically caused Rhizome to<br />cease to exist. As the founders and current directors of Rhizome know well,<br />to exist on the network you need to be linked. I am hyper-referenced<br />therefor I am. Rhizome's membership fee effectively shuts down links to<br />articles and artwork on Rhizome's web site.<br /><br />I know, it's free on friday. But if I want to link to a Rhizome post or<br />artwork, am I to attach a disclaimer? "This link only functions on Fridays."<br /><br />I know, first time's free. But what if I have visitors to my site who follow<br />the links to Rhizome regularly? They get shut out.<br /><br />Why should Rhizome care? Since I can't trust links will resolve to the<br />article or the artwork they point too, I simply don't link to Rhizome. I<br />didn't mean this to happen, it just started happening. I can't help but<br />think that other people must feel the same way.<br /><br />These days newer on-line publishing technologies like weblogs, (RSS, RDF,<br />Atom) feeds, and link aggregators (like del.icio.us) are connecting people<br />to information in very exciting ways but I have a feeling that Rhizome is<br />being left out and left behind. How many blogs link to Rhizome articles and<br />artworks? Probably not many, blog authors<br />know the value of freely linking across the web; Rhizome stops them at the<br />door.<br /><br />Being locked up behind the membership fee leads to a degradation in the<br />content on Rhizome. We could argue whether it's happening or not – I'm not<br />sure it's happening myself – but I'm sure it's going to happen and I'll<br />tell you why. Folks don't want to post to closed forums. If they want their<br />articles read or their artwork looked at they want to be linked far and<br />wide. Sure they might drop a post on Rhizome (if they're a member) and a few<br />other places. If the other places are free, guess where the links will go?<br />Not to Rhizome. So at best you'll get duplicate content on Rhizome which is<br />harder to find. Since not as many people are finding Rhizome, membership<br />might start to drop. Since membership is dropping even fewer articles are<br />posted; a very bad downward cycle could start.<br /><br />Rhizome needs to drop the fee, find new ways to connect with new audiences<br />– an XML feed of the Rhiz list posts would be a good start – and then work<br />on ways to get these new audiences to donate voluntarily.<br /><br />Perhaps it was an emergency at the time the fee curtain came down. I hope<br />it's over and Rhizome finds a way to free their content.<br /><br />I really want to link Rhizome.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Mac McKean (mac@heaventree.com) replied:<br /><br />I agree. Very few content sites survive for long by charging for their<br />content and those sites are all financial sites like WSJ and TheStreet.com,<br />not art sites. Rhizome could keep the membership fee–only members can<br />upload artworks and view Opportunities. And it could ask for donations,<br />via PayPal, etc.<br /><br />However, all content should be free. And linked, blogged, RSS-fed, spread<br />far and wide. This will probably result in an increase in members, I<br />suspect, not a decrease, as the site goes from being a club of faithful to a<br />public resource.<br /><br />Perhaps there could be a Rhizome store if more money is needed. Sell netart<br />trinkets, t-shirts, whatever. But the content = free…<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Geert Dekkers (geert@nznl.com) replied:<br /><br />And it is possible to maintain a front store of accessible articles, and<br />have archives accessible for members only, much as news sites do. So that<br />there is some incentive for non-artists to become a member.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />ryan griffis (grifray@yahoo.com) replied:<br /><br />i have to say that i'm on the same page as t.whid here. while i understand<br />the need to raise funds for programming, charging for web access doesn't<br />make the most sense to me. as t.whid suggests, we risk becoming the porn<br />site that charges while everyone's looking for abundantly free nudes. i<br />don't have any firm suggestions really, and have to say that i've been paid<br />to write some of Rhizome's content (a negligible amount by most standards,<br />some of which goes back to RZ, but paid nonetheless) that i might not have<br />done otherwise. My experience with non-profit art institutions isn't utopian<br />by any means, and the inherent precariousness is understood, but one would<br />hope that the membership program would continue voluntarily at the same<br />level, as RZ is not so much of a service provider as a set of activities<br />that members support out of a need to create an arena for certain forms of<br />art and dialogue that is missing from somewhere else.<br />and as Mac wrote, expansion of content by opening up distribution would<br />probably result in more members. The control of access to certain content<br />(opportunities, voting on things like commissions) is a good suggestion for<br />member incentives. even posting could be for members only - at least that<br />wouldn't limit reader/viewership, but would encourage those who want to<br />reach RZ's audience to join. i've seen net art news linked to quite a bit,<br />probably because it can be syndicated.hopefully more people will weigh in…<br />ryan<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Marisa S. Olson (marisa@sfcamerawork.org) replied:<br /><br />here here. let's find a way. working for a small nonprofit, i certainly know<br />about budgetary limitations. has moving in with the NM changed anything?<br />free on fridays does not mean much to the scholars and artists relying on<br />rhizome's archives… except that it turns them away….<br /><br />it's also slightly unrhizomatic…….<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Joy Garnett (joyeria@walrus.com) replied:<br /><br />> i've seen net art news linked to quite a bit,<br />> probably because it can be syndicated.<br />I have to agree with you and twhid – this really does seem the case. viva<br />la RSS, etc. so what are the obstacles and how can they be circumvented?(ok:<br />does th revenue generated by membership fees make it all worth it ?<br />something tells me not. but I am just making an assumption.)<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Rob Myers (robmyers@mac.com) replied:<br /><br />1. It keeps trolls and spammers at bay.<br />2. It provides a revenue stream. Servers don't pay for themselves.<br /><br />How is it proposed that a costless Rhizome would keep or replace these<br />advantages?<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Christina McPhee (christina112@earthlink.net) replied:<br /><br />Content should be free, yes. And also, perhaps not to have<br />utopianexpectations of Rhizome…it does quite well what it does do..keeping<br />up todate on announcements mainly, and engaging interesting, live topics as<br />theyemerge, like the "molotov cocktail" theme that came out of Joy<br />Garnett'sconfrontation with the copyright mavens.<br /><br />A both/and situation: surely Rhizome has to function somehow within<br />acountry that has virtually zero arts funding.<br /><br />I like mac's thoughts about a modulated solution…members exclusives<br />blahblah. <br /><br />Rachel et al at Rhizome, what are the advantages of the new<br />museumaffiliation in your view(s)?<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />richard willis (richard@dubyasoft.co.uk) replied:<br /><br />Rob Myers <robmyers@mac.com> wrote:<br />> Paid membership has two advantages:<br />> <br />> 1. It keeps trolls and spammers at bay.<br />> 2. It provides a revenue stream. Servers don't pay for themselves.<br />> <br />> How is it proposed that a costless Rhizome would keep or replace these<br />> advantages?<br />> <br />> - Rob.<br /><br />yep, that's the first reply to this thread i've read that makes any sense.<br />andthe shortest too .<br /><br />y'all could have earned $5 each in the time you've taken to bandy this<br />ballback and forth. more probably.<br /><br />can we get back to the net.art now people?<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />marc (marc.garrett@furtherfield.org) replied:<br /><br />Hi Richard,<br /><br />With respect - the comments before actually were about net art, about part<br />of its potential 'existing' future - how it will be seen by other people<br />other than Rhizome's current members, and contributors. It is a very<br />important issue for many net artists around the world - and yes, it does get<br />tedious…but not because the all the 'many' people who are trying to be<br />heard keep discussing it, but because nothing is ever done about it…by<br />those who can do something about it.<br /><br />T.Whid is right in bringing it up - he's not being a whinger. In fact, he's<br />definately one of the most dedicated Rhizome users here - so let his voice<br />and other voices be heard, it's important.<br /><br />marc<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />richard willis replied:<br /><br />hey m.<br /><br />well, only indirectly m.<br /><br />to maintain equilibrium, servers are supported by the served. thus has<br />itbeen, in one form or another, since ancient times.<br /><br />you'll pay a few quid to visit the cinema or a gallery. why should this be<br />anydifferent?<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />t. whid replied:<br /><br />I outlined pretty clearly (IMHO) why it's different. Rhizome will rot behind<br />this fee if it continues to stand. I want Rhizome to flourish.<br /><br />The content needs to be free for it to be an equal node on the web,<br />otherwise, it will start to be ignored. I'm afraid it's happening already.<br />Being a RSS/blog addict, the only presence I see Rhizome having in that area<br />is net art news. People don't link to Rhizome articles because they can't.<br />This can't be helpful to Rhizome.<br /><br />I think the increased audience which would come with opening it up may be<br />able to cover the obligatory memberships with donations. Maybe there are<br />'premium' features for folks who donate (you can post to the list and<br />events). I'm not unsympathetic to the funding question, but keeping the<br />content behind this fee needs to stop. Other ways to fund Rhiz need<br />to be identified.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Joy Garnett replied:<br /><br />This is surely the case. For the record: the interesting discussion threads<br />on RAW were not what exploded the distorted molotov sit-in; it was the<br />effect of RSS. Net.art News and Liza's culturekitchen for a start, both of<br />which linked to Michael's call for solidarity page. Then etoy, neural,<br />reblog, Modern Art Notes, boingboing, Stay Free! and greg.org all picked it<br />up. In effect, there were several blog 'nodes' or loci from which the news<br />spread or radiated among different communities. All of this resulted from<br />the usual RSS/XML/aggregator functions, which spread the info much faster<br />and more widely than any subscriber-based discussion could. Which makes me<br />think that perhaps Raw or Rare should be syndicated – didn't that<br />possibiltiy come up way back when fees were being discussed? It's an idea…<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />patrick lichty (voyd@voyd.com) replied:<br /><br />This is a really interesting subject.It's a tough proposition; Rhizome wants<br />to stay alive (financially), but to restrict information contradicts the<br />very concept that it was namedfor, and also the original nature of the<br />community. <br /><br />I realize that $5 is miniscule, but something has had a significantimpact on<br />the community.<br /><br />However, in this light, several other communities have come to fill thevoid.<br /><br />Therefore, I offer some ideas:<br />Maybe Rhizome's function has changed, and should not consider itself<br />as'grass-roots' any longer (i.e. more institutional), if even up a notch.IF<br />it dies, then this could be portrayed more clearly to the community.<br /><br />If funding is a problem, perhaps Rhizome could relocate to a countrywhere<br />funding is more prevalent (Australia, the Netherlands).<br /><br />Perhaps Rhizome could have a 'tiered' access plan, where a<br />significantportion of the content is open, but contacts, opportunities, and<br />otherparts could be pay to play.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Edward Tang (edtang@antiexperience.com) replied:<br /><br />Patrick lichty wrote:<br /><br />> Perhaps Rhizome could have a 'tiered' access plan, where a<br />> significant portion of the content is open, but contacts,<br />> opportunities, and other parts could be pay to play.<br /><br />Does rhizome.org get considerably more traffic on Fridays?<br /><br />Reading this thread earlier today I was wondering why this sort of idea<br />hadn't been mentioned or implemented - although I'm sure this isn't the<br />first time this discussion has occured. Perhaps an approach when recent<br />portions of the content (the net art news, artbase, calendar, etc.) are open<br />to the public but to access the site fully and to contribute and participate<br />the fee can be instituted? I don't see how spammers/hucksters would ruin the<br />signal/noise ratio in that case.<br /><br />I echo the initial poster's frustations about not being able to link to<br />rhizome pages to the outside world - rhizome feels strangely walled off.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Christina McPhee replied:<br /><br />Patrick, right on.<br />> I realize that $5 is miniscule, but something has had a significant<br />> impact on the community.<br />> <br />> However, in this light, several other communities have come to fill the<br />> void.<br />> <br />> Therefore, I offer some ideas:<br />> Maybe Rhizome's function has changed, and should not consider itself as<br />> 'grass-roots' any longer (i.e. more institutional), if even up a notch.<br /><br />Yes, this is a de facto situation. Its affiliation with the museum makes<br />itinstitutional—how could it be grass roots??<br /><br />Rhizome leadership might decide that it is a necessity to sustain<br />theinstitution of "Rhizome" as a "grass roots" brand name media services<br />nonprofit company. Stay solvent through a multivalent funding<br />strategyincluding memberships, volunteer work, private, corporate and<br />grantdonations. Rhizome recognizes itself as "Rhizome â?¢ ". Rhizome becomes<br />NPR.Rem Koolhaas has played with this idea in "Mutuations" – the Harvard<br />GSD "Project on the City". Shop Rhizome. Photoshop Rhizome.<br /><<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.thearchitectureroom.com/Koolhaas.html">http://www.thearchitectureroom.com/Koolhaas.html</a>><br /><br />A tiered hierarchical fee structure promotes a condition in which the<br />imageof 'Rhizome" becomes a more important value to sustain than the<br />actualrhizomatic function.<br /><br />> IF it dies, then this could be portrayed more clearly to the community.<br />Exactly.<br /><br />> Perhaps Rhizome could have a 'tiered' access plan, where a significant<br />> portion of the content is open, but contacts, opportunities, and other<br />> parts could be pay to play.<br /> <br />The kind of 'soft' modulation that is commonplace in American nonprofit arts<br />institutions. <br /><br />I kind of wish Rhizome would not go this way as I love the free style<br />approach, and like joy's idea of syndication…but, I donâ??t see how any<br />changes can be made deliberately and carefully until Rhizome's leadership<br />takes a hard look at what it really wants.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Lee Wells added:<br /><br />Personally I think the info should be free. Go to Google and type any one of<br />our names in and some sort of Rhizome link will come up. Click the link<br />andyou cannot get to it. Sometimes I cant because I donâ??t know what my<br />passwordis.<br /><br />I believe it should be on the artist t-shirt subscription model, very<br />similar to the beer of the month club. My peppermint shirt is getting a<br />bitbeat up.<br /><br />You get something that you will use physically.<br /><br />Another Idea is a Rhizome / New Museum group show. Those that donâ??t pay do<br />not play. Do the show at the NM and you will be turning folks away.A bit of<br />a vanity show but just might work.<br /><br />The idea of community needs to be re-evaluated.<br />Who does what. <br />I am surprised that there isn't a rhizome store. Where all artwork is<br />donated and all proceeds go to funding the mission.<br />Register domains as well/<br /><br />Bla Bla Bla what do I really care I am just going to pay my $20 a year and<br />shut up. I'm not even a computer artist I am just a painter.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Lee Wells replied:<br /><br />Since Rhizome is no longer "Grass-roots" maybe its time for the New Museum<br />to start handing over some more space and MONEY.<br /><br />At least in the store.<br />Push the artwork coming out of Rhizome. The DVDs - cds - video art - tshirts<br />- stickers - hats - rhizome homeies - anything. Look at the crap that sells<br />to the average tourist in SoHo. Its all about cool t-shirts and hats on<br />Broadway. Totally cheap and easy to produce.<br /><br />A Tiered system could also work as well.<br />The more money you put in the more perks you get.<br />$1000 gets you dinner with Mark and Rachel.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Dyske Suematsu (dyske@dyske.com) added:<br /><br />The difficulty of this issue, especially for Rachel, is that many long-time<br />members feel they own shares of the organization. To some degree, this is<br />rightfully so, because they have contributed to what makes Rhizome valuable.<br />However, you do not see this kind of passionate opinions about how to run<br />particular organizations when speaking of institutions like Whitney, DIA, or<br />Guggenheim. To some degree, they could easily tell you, "How we run our<br />organization is none of your business!"<br /><br />Now, this gets further complicated when you pay member subscriptions,<br />because all members then become sponsors. Sponsors are legitimate share<br />owners, and they are entitled to their opinions, and the directors of the<br />organization cannot simply ignore them.<br /><br />The difficulty of running any organization is that you need a good balance<br />between democracy and leadership. If you listen too much to what everyone<br />says, everything gets diluted and nothing gets done. If you lead too<br />dogmatically, like Bush does, you could cause a lot of trouble. Either way,<br />it is not good for the organization.<br /><br />In the end, it all comes down to how Rachel wants to run it. We cannot<br />formulate a constructive criticism if we do not have the whole picture. For<br />instance, from outside, I feel that free membership would be more beneficial<br />than their ability to give out commissions, but I do not have all the<br />information necessary to determine if this is truly the case. Given the<br />fixed amount of resources, how it should be allocated is a call that we<br />cannot make intelligently unless we know the whole picture.<br /><br />My bottom line is that we could only make suggestions, not tell them what<br />they should do. I think there is a certain danger in feeling like we all own<br />Rhizome. A large organization without a strong leadership could quickly fall<br />apart. And we don't want that to happen either.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Rachel Greene (rachel@rhizome.org) replied:<br /><br />Hi all:<br />I have read every post in this thread and will continue to do so. Thank<br />you Tim for initiating this discussion and for your constructive<br />critcism. I really appreciate all of the contributions (even the Free<br />Rhizome ones) and think many of the suggestions are good and<br />potentially viable.<br /><br />I stand behind our foray into membership, but want to reassure everyone<br />that we are 1. Aware of the impact of Google, RSS and Blogs on how<br />people search, read, and interact online (and consequently, the<br />perception of Rhizome), and 2. We are working on projects that will<br />relieve the burden on individuals and make our content more accessible.<br />For example, through the Organizational Subscriptions program (<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://rhizome.org/info/org.php">http://rhizome.org/info/org.php</a> ) this year we will give away scores<br />and scores of Rhizome memberships to people who come to us via centers<br />or schools in poor and excluded communities (such as in Sub-Saharan<br />Africa and South Asia). I am developing more public programs that will<br />bring ArtBase works and Rhizome more generally into art spaces (not<br />just online).<br /><br />To answer people who inquired about Free Fridays and all that… I<br />don't have Friday statistics available (and Francis is out of town),<br />but we are finding that membership and web traffic are on the increase<br />while subscriptions to email lists (except for the free, highly<br />editorial list Net Art News which has an explosive growth rate) grow<br />much more slowly. This suggests to me that more and more people are<br />using our web site and (obviously) signing up for membership. It may be<br />that the Raw, Rare, and Digest lists feel closed and small, but that in<br />fact people are reading Rhizome content a lot via the web site instead<br />of interacting over email. We found some general statistics that across<br />the Internet, email lists are withering because of spam and the<br />popularity of blogs. So one could argue that our spam-proof,<br />members-only lists are reasonable for our times.<br /><br />I also wanted to mention that we do not receive any financial support<br />from the New Museum, though they do give us office space. Rhizome<br />raises its own monies, as always. It also seems relevant to note that<br />we received twice as much money this year from our dear Rhizome members<br />than from American Government Agencies. But back to the New Museum –<br />we do receive other kinds of important support from them – they<br />believe in Rhizome's mission and staff. Their entire staff is really<br />supportive and interested in Rhizome, and we will be collaborating in<br />the future.<br /><br />I hope this can be an ongoing conversation. I am in the difficult<br />position of representing an institution so I can't always move that<br />quickly, but I know more than anyone that the voices on RAW are<br />important and crucial to what I do and what Rhizome is.<br />Thanks, Rachel<br /><br />p.s. I will be following this thread closely, but I wanted to add that<br />if anyone wants to chat in real time, on Thursday afternoons EST,<br />Rhizome staff is going to hold informal office hours on AIM or ICHAT.<br />Feel free to ping me at RachelFayeGreene or Francis at francisrhizome.<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Christina McPhee replied:<br /><br />Rachel,<br />Thanks for the very informative and exciting response. Could you put this<br />up on rare and digest too? It would be great if you and Francis could take<br />time to post often regarding goals and strategies like the ones you describe<br />here, like giving away memberships , and public programs for artbase…etc.<br />Maybe a once a month post on the state of rhizome?<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Rachel Greene added:<br /><br />To anyone who wants to check out the Rhizome.org 2003 audit:<br /> <br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://rhizome.org/financials/">http://rhizome.org/financials/</a><br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />t.whid replied:<br /><br />Hi Tim,<br /><br />I just read the thread or I would have chimed in about this sooner. Correct<br />me if I'm wrong, but you can link straight to any single article at rhizome<br />and surfers can access the article you linked any day of the week without<br />having to be rhizome members. Before Mark left, I talked to him and francis<br />about this, because it was a concern of mine.<br /><br />>From my site, I link to several articles I wrote at rhizome (they're really<br />just long posts I made to raw). It seemed ridiculous that once rhizome started<br />charging for membership I would no longer be able to link my own articles. I<br />would have stopped contributing to rhizome long ago had this been the case.<br />Mark agreed that it was not right. So they set up the protocol to work this way<br />–<br /><br />If I'm writing a friend, and I include the URL to a rhizome post in the<br />email, unless my friend is a member, they can't view the post simply by<br />clicking on the link in their email client. Furthermore, yhey can't<br />manually type in the URL and get it either. (both situations are<br />regrettable, but a necessary evil to the membership model). BUT if I link a<br />rhizome URL (artbase piece, post at raw, whatever) from an online web page,<br />non-rhizome members can still access the rhizome URL I linked. In this<br />respect, rhizome is unlike the New York Times and most other<br />password-protected content sites. Once the non-rhizome-member visits the<br />rhizome URL I linked, she still can't wander around the rest of rhizome for<br />free from there, but she can at least read the single post to which I<br />linked. I assume this is true for a dynamically-generated link from a<br />google search-results page as well.<br /><br />That's how critics of rhizome's $5 policy have been able to make "mirrors"<br />of the entire rhizome artbase. They simply link directly to each piece of<br />content in the artbase, and the way rhizome has set up their protocol, since<br />the call is coming from another online web page, Francis allows the content<br />to pass through, even if the visitor doesn't have the rhizome login cookie.<br /><br />Francis would know more about the technical details.<br /><br />I'm not sure how the above "backdoor" protocol works with RSS feeds and<br />content aggregators.<br /><br />I'm not disagreeing with your suggestion to drop the membership fee. But<br />the argument that one can't link non-members directly to specific rhizome<br />content except on Fridays is not valid. One can (unless I'm missing<br />something).<br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />CK SHINE (shine-a-man@excite.com) added:<br /><br />this is an interesting issue to consider. paid members can post.unpaid<br />members can consume but not post. $5.00 is a small price to pay. less than<br />the cost of almost anything worth having. $5.00 mandatory fee does not mean<br />there is no grassroots. $5.00 mandatory fee means that the paying members<br />agree that at least some aspect of the endeavor is worth supporting.<br /><br />how many participants are listed in the community directory? rough estimate:<br />3000(?) x $5.00/year each = $15,000/year to provide network infrastructure<br />and content organization/distribution? a small price to pay.<br /><br />before i discovered rhizome.org, i knew nothing of Joy Garnett's paintings.<br />now i do. i may not buy her work but she is known to one more person who may<br />reference her work in a conversation, article or catalog, etc. i'll bet Joy<br />Garnett would be happy to fork over $5.00 to expand her reputation to a<br />community of 3000. let's say that maybe only 5% of the community has shown<br />some interest in the aesthetic values of her work -excellent!<br /><br />for $5.00 or, the price of a tasty sandwich, a mid-day matinee, or one and a<br />half hour's post-tax wage as a museum guide, one can be informed of Joy's<br />artwork/ideas or engage in a stimulating conversation, workshop concepts,<br />market themselves/their works and be informed of income opportunities in<br />fields they are truly interested in. for 365 days.<br /><br />geez, i don't know about you all but 5 bucks is a meager requirement to<br />maintain and even expand the capabilities our network and all it has to<br />offer. <br /><br />+ + +<br /><br />Patrick Simons (patricksimons@gloriousninth.com) added:<br /><br />Hi Rachael, Francis…..<br /><br />Have you/we/they ever looked at the numbers(in membership terms) needed for<br />rhizome to become a completely self funding organisation?<br /><br />I suppose I am asking what amount of money would be needed to be raised for<br />rhizome to do what it does so well, and how many members paying $5 would<br />be needed to cover that?<br /><br />Seems to me that once a critical mass is reached, all sorts of useful<br />discussions could be had about self organising organisations and structures,<br />as well as free memberships for those unable to pay etc.<br /><br />Obviously an autonomous rhizome (what the.. would that be like!) is not<br />feasible at the moment, but would it be something to work towards?<br /><br />The difficulty I have with the current calls for rhizome to become a more<br />accessible or fluid institution (oh yes it is) by removing the membership<br />fee, is that it forces us all into the hands of external funding bodies,<br />over whom we have even less control.<br /><br />Perhaps it is the curse of the middle stage organisation, caught between two<br />tensions, <br />firstly that it becomes the focus of our anxieties about its lack of<br />fluidity and openess, its inability to "interface" with the other smaller or<br />informal orgs that we work with,<br />secondly that it wants to modernise its structures but within the existing<br />paradigm, that is as a formally incorporated not for profit organisation in<br />order to best represent internetart practice in art institutional terms.<br /><br />I undestand the push for removing the $5 but I dont think it would solve the<br />underlying questions, if the choice is an org which is dependent on<br />unaccountable trust funds or membership based, the latter is so much more<br />what this whole community is about.<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />Rhizome.org is a 501©(3) nonprofit organization and an affiliate of<br />the New Museum of Contemporary Art.<br /><br />Rhizome Digest is supported by grants from The Charles Engelhard<br />Foundation, The Rockefeller Foundation, The Andy Warhol Foundation for<br />the Visual Arts, and with public funds from the New York State Council<br />on the Arts, a state agency.<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />Rhizome Digest is filtered by Kevin McGarry (kevin@rhizome.org). ISSN:<br />1525-9110. Volume 9, number 21. Article submissions to list@rhizome.org<br />are encouraged. Submissions should relate to the theme of new media art<br />and be less than 1500 words. For information on advertising in Rhizome<br />Digest, please contact info@rhizome.org.<br /><br />To unsubscribe from this list, visit <a rel="nofollow" href="http://rhizome.org/subscribe">http://rhizome.org/subscribe</a>.<br />Subscribers to Rhizome Digest are subject to the terms set out in the<br />Member Agreement available online at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://rhizome.org/info/29.php">http://rhizome.org/info/29.php</a>.<br /><br />Please invite your friends to visit Rhizome.org on Fridays, when the<br />site is open to members and non-members alike.<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />
