<br />RHIZOME DIGEST: February 27, 2004<br /><br />Content:<br /><br />+announcement+<br />1. Jordan Crandall: underfire<br />2. Mark Amerika: The Politics of Information<br />3. Sebastian: copy adorno, go to jail? textz.com doesn't think so<br /><br />+comment+<br />4. Joy Garnett: I am a pirate ?!<br />5. Dyske Suematsu: The Myth of Meritocracy in Fine Arts<br /><br />+feature+ <br />6. Charlotte Frost: Review of Internet Art by Julian Stallabrass<br />7. Ian Clothier: Bloom: mutation, toxicity and the sublime<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />1.<br /><br />Date: 2.22.04 <br />From: Jordan Crandall (crandall@blast.org)<br />Subject: underfire<br /><br />*Respondent (week of February 22): MANUEL DELANDA*<br /><br />UNDER FIRE: an online forum on violence and representation<br />organized by Jordan Crandall with co-editors: Asef Bayat, Susan<br />Buck-Morss, Hamid Dabashi, Brian Holmes, and Gema Martin Munoz<br /><br />please join us for a series of discussions regarding the organization<br />and representation of contemporary armed conflict.<br /><br />To subscribe to the mailinglist, please send an email to<br />underfire-request@list.v2.nl with the following word in the SUBJECT<br />line: subscribe<br /><br />list archive: <a rel="nofollow" href="http://list.v2.nl/pipermail/underfire">http://list.v2.nl/pipermail/underfire</a><br /><br />Under Fire explores the organization and representation of contemporary<br />armed conflict. On the organizational front, it looks at the forms of<br />militarized agencies that are emerging today, including Western defense<br />industries and decentralized terrorist organizations. It explores the<br />forces that contribute to their emergence, whether operating at the<br />level of economy, technology, politics, or ideology. On the<br />representational front, it looks at the ways that armed violence<br />materializes as act and image, searching for new insight into its<br />mechanisms and effects. In so doing, it engages issues of economy,<br />embodiment, symbolic meaning, and affect.<br /><br />The project delves into the economic underpinnings of contemporary armed<br />conflict. It looks at the legacy of the "military-industrial complex,"<br />the rise of the privatized military industry, and the repercussions of<br />the commercialization of violence. However it does not simply<br />prioritize economy. It looks to contemporary conflicts as driven by<br />combinations of territorial, market, and ideological imperatives, and<br />new attempts at the reconciliation of identity and universality. It<br />looks to emergent processes of organization that operate on multiple<br />levels of temporality and implicit form. Through this approach, the<br />project aims to articulate emergent systems of decentralized control and<br />new global dynamics of power. Building on historical conceptions of<br />hegemony, it attempts to understand the nature of emergent power and the<br />forms of resistance to it, situating cycles of violence within the<br />modalities of a global system.<br /><br />The project emphasizes the role that representations play as registers<br />of symbolic meaning and as agents of affective change. It engages<br />images from commercial and independent news media, as well as<br />representations from artistic, literary, and popular entertainment<br />sources, both in the West and the Middle East. These images are regarded<br />in terms of attention strategy and perception management, but they are<br />also regarded in terms of cultural imaginaries of conflict, where they<br />can operate as "fictionalized components of reality." They are studied<br />in terms of the deeper truths they may offer about collective<br />identifications and aggressions, and their roles in the formation of a<br />new body politic.<br /><br />The project consists of as a series of organized discussions that will<br />occur online and in Rotterdam, throughout the year 2004. These<br />discussions will involve participation from individuals working in<br />politics, theory, criticism, the arts, and journalism from both the West<br />and the Middle East. Rather than relying on discourses based upon<br />Western conceptions of modernity, the project is dedicated to opening up<br />new historical perspectives, exploring the potential of Islamist<br />discourse as a source of critical and political debate. It will thus<br />include participation from progressive thinkers in the Islamic world.<br />While most of these discussions will be conducted in English, sections<br />will be translated into Arabic.<br /><br />A series of publications will be released during the course of the year.<br />Each of these publications will be organized around a key interpretive<br />concept that emerges in the proceedings.<br /><br />Through this approach, Under Fire aims to help open up a discursive<br />terrain that can offer new insights into symptomatic violence, and<br />alternatives to its perpetuation.<br /><br />For more information contact Witte de With at info@wdw.nl. Witte de<br />With, center for contemporary art, Witte de Withstraat 50, 3012 BR,<br />Rotterdam <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.wdw.nl">http://www.wdw.nl</a> info@wdw.nl<br /><br />special events:<br />January 24: Presentation of the project by Jordan Crandall in Witte de<br />With, Rotterdam, at 5.30 p.m. Exhibition open daily from 11 a.m. till 6<br />p.m. January 27: Lecture by Jordan Crandall in the context of the<br />International Film Festival Rotterdam. Location: Off_Corso, Rotterdam, 3<br />p.m. (For information see <a rel="nofollow" href="http://filmfestivalrotterdam.com">http://filmfestivalrotterdam.com</a>) May 28-30:<br />Conference at Witte de With, Rotterdam with editors Asef Bayat, Susan<br />Buck-Morss, Jordan Crandall, Hamid Dabashi, Brian Holmes, and Gema<br />Martin Munoz.<br /><br />Asef Bayat is the Academic Director of the International Institute for<br />the Study of Islam in the Modern World (ISIM) and the ISIM Chair at the<br />University of Leiden. He has taught sociology and Middle East studies<br />at the American University in Cairo an has held visiting positions at<br />the University of California, Berkeley, Columbia University and the<br />University of Oxford. He is currently program director of an ISIM<br />research program on socio-religious movements and social change in<br />contemporary Muslim societies.<br /><br />Susan Buck-Morss is Professor of Political Philosophy and Social Theory<br />in the Department of Government at Cornell University, where she is also<br />Professor of Visual Culture in the Department of Art History. Her books<br />include The Origin of Negative Dialectics: Theodor W. Adorno, Walter<br />Benjamin and the Frankfurt Institute (1979); The Dialectics of Seeing:<br />Walter Benjamin and the Arcades Project (1991); Dreamworld and<br />Catastrophe: the Passing of Mass Utopia in East and West (2002); and<br />Thinking Past Terror: Islam and Critical Theory on the Left (2003).<br /><br />Jordan Crandall is a visual artist and media theorist. He is Assistant<br />Professor in the Visual Arts Department at University of California, San<br />Diego. He is the author of Drive: Technology, Mobility, and Desire<br />(2002); co-editor of Interaction: Artistic Practice in the Network<br />(1999); and founding editor of a forthcoming journal of philosophy, art,<br />cultural studies, and science studies.<br /><br />Hamid Dabashi is the Hagop Kevorkian Professor of Iranian Studies and<br />the director of Graduate Studies at the Center for Comparative<br />Literature and Society at Columbia University. His research interests<br />include the comparative study of cultures, Islamic intellectual history,<br />and the social and intellectual history of Iran, both modern and<br />medieval. His publications include Authority in Islam: From the Rise of<br />Muhammad to the Establishment of the Umayyads (1989), Theology of<br />Discontent: The Ideological Foundation of the Islamic Revolution in Iran<br />(1993), Truth and Narrative: The Untimely Thoughts of Ayn Al-Qudat<br />Al-Hamadhani (1999), Staging a Revolution: The Art of Persuasion in the<br />Islamic Republic of Iran (with Peter Chelkowski, 1999), and Close Up:<br />Iranian Cinema, Past, Present, Future (2001).<br /><br />Brian Holmes is an art critic, activist and translator, living in Paris,<br />interested primarily in the intersections of artistic and political<br />practice. He holds a doctorate in Romance Languages and Literatures from<br />the University of California at Berkeley, was the English editor of<br />publications for Documenta X, Kassel, Germany, 1997, was a member of the<br />graphic arts group Ne pas plier from 1999 to 2001, and has recently<br />worked with the French conceptual art group Bureau d'études. He is a<br />frequent contributor to the international listserve Nettime, a member of<br />the editorial committee of the political-economy journal Multitudes<br />(Paris) and of the art magazines Springerin (Vienna) and Brumaria<br />(Barcelona), a regular contributor to the magazine Parachute (Montreal),<br />and a founder, with Bureau d'Etudes, of the new journal Autonomie<br />Artistique (Paris). He is the author of a collection of essays,<br />Hieroglyphs of the Future: Art and Politics in a Networked Era (Zagreb:<br />Arkzin, 2003) and has just finished a special issue of Multitudes on<br />"Art contemporain : la recherche du dehors."<br /><br />Gema Martin Munoz is Professor of Sociology of the Arab and Islamic<br />world at Madrid Autonoma University. Her research interests include the<br />sociopolitical situations in Middle East countries; Islamist movements<br />and Muslims in Europe. She is editor of Islam, Modernism and the West:<br />Cultural and Political Relations at the End of the Millennium (1999) and<br />author of Arab State. Crisis of legitimacy and islamist reactions (2000)<br />and Iraq, a failure of the West (2003).<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />2.<br /><br />Date: 2.23.04 <br />From: Mark (Mark.Amerika@Colorado.Edu)<br />Subject: The Politics of Information<br /><br />IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br /><br />ALT-X PRESS LAUNCHES NEW CRITICAL EBOOK SERIES WITH "THE POLITICS OF<br />INFORMATION: THE ELECTRONIC MEDIATION OF SOCIAL CHANGE"<br /><br />BOULDER, Colorado, February 23, 2004 –The Alt-X Online Network, a space<br />"where the digerati meet the literati" and celebrating its 10 year<br />anniversary, announces the release of a new Alt-X Press ebook entitled<br />"The Politics of Information: The Electronic Mediation of Social Change"<br />edited by Marc Bousquet and Katherine Wills. "The Politics of<br />Information" title officially launches our new Alt-X Press critical<br />ebook series:<br /><br />The Politics of Information: The Electronic Mediation of Social Change<br />Edited by Marc Bousquet and Katherine Wills<br /><br />Contributors include Charles Bernstein, Bennett Voyles, DeeDee Halleck,<br />Fran Ilich, Bruce Simon, Mark Amerika, Katherine Wills, Geert Lovink,<br />Ricardo Dominguez, David Golumbia, Tiziana Terranova, Nick<br />Dyer-Witheford, John Monberg, Matt Kirschenbaum, Donna Haraway, Lisa<br />Nakamura, Mark Poster, Kembrew McLeod, Caren Irr, Tara McPherson,<br />Anne-Marie Schleiner, Paul Collins, Harvey Molloy, Marc Bousquet, Ken<br />Saltman, Timothy W. Luke, Stephanie Tripp, Katie King, Laura L.<br />Sullivan, Susan Schreibman, Chris Carter, Gregory Ulmer, and Victor<br />Vitanza.<br /><br />"The Politics of Information" is an essay collection in five parts<br />covering a broad panoply of discourses, practices, and institutional<br />change that can be garnered under the rubric of "materialist<br />informatics." The editors, Marc Bousquet and Katherine Wills, have<br />brought together a strong and authoritative collection of essays in the<br />context of this synthesizing, yet at the same time diversifying concept.<br />Recalling that Donna Haraway's cyborg was never meant to be a wired,<br />blissed-out bunny, Bousquet and Wills recover the political dimension in<br />socialist-feminist thought. "The Politics of Information" brings class<br />back into cultural studies, considers the Web as crucial to the<br />expanding "informatics of domination," and recovers the cyborg as a key<br />figure for an entire world of labor and lifeways. The authors in this<br />wide-ranging collection, most of them pioneers in the development of<br />Internet content, address the concerns not only of designers and users,<br />but of everyone in the service and homework economy: janitors,<br />perma-temps, motherboard assemblers, and all who provide the feminized<br />labors of reproduction that include child care, health care, and a<br />deeply instrumentalized education.<br /><br />Unconstrained by the hidden assumptions of print publication, where<br />discursive weight is too often held in check by the literal weight of a<br />fixed edition, this critical e-book is unapologetic in its length, its<br />scope, and its degree of engagement. Essays appear in combination with<br />interviews; critical discourse alternates with story-telling; conceptual<br />writing plays off first person reports from the field. Through<br />massiveness and a direct encounter with materials in multiple media,<br />this volume is literally unbound in energy and offers both incisive<br />insights into the technocapitalist condition even as it achieves a Web<br />credibility unusual in scholarly writing. The ebook's orientation is<br />given by Bousquet's five section introductions, and the publication's<br />technical bookmark feature allows readers to navigate through this<br />enormous body of text with the simple click of a mouse.<br /><br />"A wonderful addition to the ALT-X catalogue. Indeed, it is a worthy<br />volume to be considered as the first critical book in the ALT-X.ebr<br />ebook series. If there is such a thing as the 'right' volume for such an<br />honour, it should be a book that addresses the informatic turn in<br />culture." - Darren Tofts, author of "Memory Trade: A Prehistory of<br />Cyberculture" and editor of "Prefiguring Cyberculture: An Intellectual<br />History" (MIT Press, 2003)<br /><br />"The thought of what America would be like, if academic cultural<br />criticism found its activist edge and a worldwide distribution, disturbs<br />my sleep." - Joseph Tabbi, series editor, Alt-X/ebr critical e-books;<br />author of "Cognitive Fictions" (Minnesota, 2002)<br /><br />You can download "The Politics of Information" ebook as well as other<br />Alt-X ebooks for free at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.altx.com/ebooks/">http://www.altx.com/ebooks/</a><br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />3.<br /><br />Date: 2.24.04 <br />From: Sebastian (sebastian@rolux.org)<br />Subject: copy adorno, go to jail? textz.com doesn't think so<br /><br />Copy Adorno, Go To Jail? Textz.com Doesn't Think So<br /><br />The Hamburg Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Culture,<br />presided by Jan Philipp Reemtsma, has just advanced science and culture<br />to a whole new level: Sebastian Luetgert, the founder of textz.com, is<br />facing a warrant of arrest and may go to jail if he fails to pay more<br />than 2,300 euros in damages for the alleged copying of two essays by<br />Theodor W. Adorno that the foundation claims as their "intellectual<br />property". Reemtsma was kindly asked to settle, but refused.<br /><br />The case dates back to August 2002, when the foundation filed for a<br />preliminary injunction against Luetgert at the Hamburg State Court,<br />referring to the alleged distibution of two works by Theodor W. Adorno,<br />"Jargon der Eigentlichkeit" and "Fascism and Anti-Semitic Propaganda".<br />Since not a single e-mail was sent to notify textz.com of the matter,<br />and since written notification failed to reach the defendant, textz.com<br />only learned about the issue after a few days. The works in question<br />were immediately removed from the site to avoid any further legal<br />hassles.<br /><br />In December 2003, Luetgert found himself confronted with a warrant of<br />arrest, obtained against him by the Hamburg Foundation, citing unpaid<br />claims related to the unauthorized copying of said works. In January<br />2004, Luetgert addressed the issue in a letter to Reemtsma and asked for<br />a scholarship so he could pay this debt and avoid jail time. Reemtsma<br />did not reply, but handed the letter over to his foundation's lawyers -<br />Senfft, Kersten, Voss-Andreae & Schwenn - who insist on the payment of<br />2,331.32 Euros for alleged damages and legal fees.<br /><br />Textz.com believes that an "intellectual proprietor" of Theodor W.<br />Adorno and Walter Benjamin who claims to advance science and culture by<br />sending people to jail for taking Adorno and Benjamin serious is<br />seriously wrong on a whole number of points. The Hamburg Foundation<br />undererstimates the resistance of their possessions against their legal<br />protection just as much as their lawyers underestimate the ability of<br />the Internet to route around damage. In the end, they may even be wrong<br />in thinking that they will ever get their property back.<br /><br />Today, in an open letter (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/open_letter.txt">http://textz.com/adorno/open_letter.txt</a>),<br />Reemtsma has been notified that his foundation's "intellectual property"<br />has been returned to the public domain. This first-of-its-kind protest<br />signals a refusal to let copyright holders and lawyers censor the very<br />works they pretend to protect and control what the public can archive or<br />read. There is a universal right to copy that will never cease to apply,<br />and there is copyright legislation that will. The spectre haunting the<br />scientific and cultural industries is a new commons materializing before<br />their very own eyes. We're just at the beginning.<br /><br />Textz.com<br />February 24, 2004<br /><br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com">http://textz.com</a><br /><a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:textz@textz.org">mailto:textz@textz.org</a><br /><br />———————————————————————-<br /><br />How you can support textz.com:<br /><br />- Spread the word. Tell your friends, tell a journalist, write about it,<br />put it on a website, post it to a mailing list, etc. Textz.com is also<br />available for interviews, just mail to press@textz.org.<br /><br />- Sign our petition at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/petition.html">http://textz.com/adorno/petition.html</a>.<br /><br />- Write a letter to Jan Philipp Reemtsma, Hamburg Foundation for the<br />Advancement of Science and Culture, Mittelweg 36, 20148 Hamburg,<br />Germany. If you like, send a copy of your letter to textz@textz.org.<br /><br />- Donate to textz.com via <a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/donate.html">http://textz.com/adorno/donate.html</a>.<br /><br />- Buy a copy of Robert Luxemburg's "The Conceptual Crisis of Private<br />Property as a Crisis in Practice" (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/crisis">http://textz.com/crisis</a>). All<br />proceedings will go to textz.com's fund for legal expenses.<br /><br />- Put our "Free Adorno" banner (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/banner.gif">http://textz.com/adorno/banner.gif</a>) on<br />your website, and/or link to <a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno">http://textz.com/adorno</a>.<br /><br />- Meet textz.com at Neuro Festival, February 26-29, Munich, Germany<br />(check <a rel="nofollow" href="http://neuro.kein.org">http://neuro.kein.org</a> for details) and join our discussion about<br />further strategies in this case.<br /><br />- Select all, copy, paste, save, upload, share. Reappropriate. (And<br />remember: there is no need to break what you can circumvent. Don't<br />innovate, imitate.)<br /><br />———————————————————————-<br /><br />Related links:<br /><br />Documentation of our correnspondence:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/documentation.de.txt">http://textz.com/adorno/documentation.de.txt</a><br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/documentation.en-babelfish.txt">http://textz.com/adorno/documentation.en-babelfish.txt</a><br /><br />Press coverage:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/press.txt">http://textz.com/adorno/press.txt</a><br /><br />Open Letter to Jan Philipp Reemtsma:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/open_letter.txt">http://textz.com/adorno/open_letter.txt</a><br /><br />The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/adorno/work_of_art.txt">http://textz.com/adorno/work_of_art.txt</a><br /><br />Franz Kafka on "intellectual property":<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/kafka">http://textz.com/kafka</a><br /><br />Textz.com mission statement, early 2001:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/concept">http://textz.com/concept</a><br /><br />What others say about textz.com:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/press">http://textz.com/press</a><br /><br />The textz that textz.com is all about:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/cache">http://textz.com/cache</a><br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/textz">http://textz.com/textz</a><br /><br />Some state-of-the-art copyright circumvention technologies:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/trash">http://textz.com/trash</a><br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/crisis">http://textz.com/crisis</a><br /><br />Some more stuff we have not yet been sued for:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/search">http://textz.com/search</a><br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/news">http://textz.com/news</a><br /><br />Drop us a line, send us a text, or subscribe to our newsletter:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/contact">http://textz.com/contact</a><br /><br />Finally, while freeing Adorno, please free the Grey Album too:<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://textz.com/greyalbum/greyalbum.html">http://textz.com/greyalbum/greyalbum.html</a><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 Jessica Ivins at Jessica@Rhizome.org.<br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />4.<br /><br />Date: 2.26.04<br />From: Joy Garnett (joyeria@walrus.com)<br />Subject: I am a pirate ?!<br /><br />friends,<br /><br />the most interesting thing just happened: I'm being sued for copyright<br />infringement (does it mean I'm finally a grown-up?). the joke is I was<br />served the letter the day after I met with an arts funding rep who<br />encouraged me to list "sampling" on my grant application as part of my<br />painting practice. It made the whole thing seem almost funny.<br /><br />the plaintiff is a world-famous photojournalist who takes pics in<br />war-torn regions; the pirated image is a detail of a photograph taken in<br />1978. Months back while trolling the Web for news images and such, I<br />found the cropped detail w/ no credit line, probably on some<br />anti-NAFTA/anarchist solidarity website, printed it out and stuck it in<br />a folder to paint later. I had no idea it was a detail of a pic by a<br />Magnum photographer or that it was from their most seminal series and<br />book. The joke is definitely on me.<br /><br />To my mind of course my derivative artwork has very little to do with<br />the original photo. First of all it's a painting; it also happens to be<br />6-feet tall and rather decontextualized from whatever its original<br />context was. And it's wildly cropped and brushy and all that painterly<br />stuff. But apparently the use of a different medium doesn't make it any<br />more justifyable to "derive" under the present copyright law.<br /><br />how did the plaintif find out about it? I was ratted out by a supposed<br />friend, also a photojournalist, who recognized the image–they stick<br />together. also: the painting was in my solo show that just came down<br />last week; the image was used for my announcement card and is on the<br />gallery's and my websites. The show was reviewed in the New Yorker and<br />the derivative artwork in question was praised. Basically I'm screwed in<br />terms of wanting to fight it–the plaintif is wholly within their<br />rights.<br /><br />Here's the thing: for all that my dander is up, the plaintiff is being<br />pretty cool considering their permissions-centered world-view: they are<br />basically asking only that I supply a credit line, and that I ask for<br />permission in writing to exhibit/reproduce in the future. They don't<br />want $$ for this particular infringement. basically they chose to<br />license the image to me for my exhibition after the fact. It seems<br />reasonable and rather decent.<br /><br />However being sued does bring up the whole issue for me in a weird way.<br />I mean, my work is ABOUT the fact that images are uncontrollable<br />entities. It's about what happens when you remove context and framing<br />devices. my work is derivative by definition, and thoroughly reflective<br />of this age of sampling and remixing. This will no doubt happen to me<br />again. And although the permissions people–photojournalists, the<br />recording industry, etc. –are fighting a losing battle, you can bet<br />they are going to fight til the death. I may be getting off easy this<br />time, but it seems that when your aquaintances lie and then turn you in<br />for copyright infringement, the climate of creativity–not to mention<br />general decency–is in serious danger.<br /><br />I see an art lawyer later today.<br /><br />all the best,<br />Joy<br /><br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.firstpulseprojects.net">http://www.firstpulseprojects.net</a><br /><br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />5.<br /><br />Date: 2.25.04 <br />From: Dyske Suematsu (dyske@dyske.com)<br />Subject: The Myth of Meritocracy in Fine Arts<br /><br />The Myth of Meritocracy in Fine Arts<br /><br />By Dyske Suematsu <br /><br />The art world has a gentleman's agreement about preserving the façade of<br />meritocracy. They feel that it is necessary to be respectable. It is<br />understandable since they are often criticized for not being more<br />meritocratic. The general public and many artists themselves see<br />meritocracy as an ideal system of rewarding artists. I argue that<br />meritocracy is impossible in fine arts, and there is no reason,<br />therefore, to pretend to honor meritocracy. If the artist is famous, and<br />if his artwork commands a hefty price, there is no reason to question<br />him further; he is a good artist.<br /><br />In a field like fine arts whose primary concern is subjectivity, what<br />does meritocracy mean? Merriam-Webster defines it, "a system in which<br />the talented are chosen and moved ahead on the basis of their<br />achievement." That is, a meritocracy assumes that achievement and reward<br />are two separate issues. In sports, science, and business, for instance,<br />meritocracy is relatively easy to define: winning competitions,<br />discoveries, inventions, profits, and so on. Meritocracy is a system of<br />rewarding based on measurable merit. Unless the achievement is<br />measurable to some degree, rewarding based on merit is impossible.<br /><br />Andy Warhol once said that a measure of good art is its price. In<br />response, some would argue that an artwork could have a high price tag<br />but be devoid of any artistic merit. Such presumed discrepancies are<br />what often bring up the question of meritocracy. That is, we assume that<br />a price of an artwork should reflect its merit.<br /><br />What Warhol means is that the price of an artwork is its merit, that is,<br />the two are one and the same thing. What this essentially says is that<br />it is not possible to have a meritocracy in fine arts, and that there<br />are therefore no other ways to gauge a value of an artwork than its<br />price.<br /><br />We normally interpret such a view about fine arts as an expression of<br />cynicism, but I argue that there is nothing cynical about this. To<br />believe in meritocracy in fine arts would be to believe in the existence<br />of a standard by which all art can be measured. Just as it is pointless<br />to criticize people for their lack of meritocracy in choosing their<br />lovers, merit has no place in fine arts. A price of an artwork does not<br />point to anything but to itself.<br /><br />This is not to say that an artwork could not have personal merit<br />independent of price, but we need to remind ourselves that meritocracy<br />is a social concept that comes into play only when two or more people<br />are involved in determining value of something. Since the only thing<br />about art we can agree on is the fact that we all disagree, we have no<br />choice but to accept the impossibility of establishing a meritocracy,<br />which leads us to a conclusion that, in fine arts, you do whatever it<br />takes to raise the price of your artwork. Again, this sounds like a<br />cynical statement, but it is not.<br /><br />Here, a story Tim Rollins told us when I was in college comes to my<br />mind. For one show, he and his team of kids made a series of small<br />artworks which ended up selling like hotcakes. They were excited by this<br />good news and decided to make a lot more of them. This time, only a few<br />(or none at all) were sold. Rollins said his team had learned a valuable<br />lesson: When you become too opportunistic, people can sense it.<br /><br />Many good things in life have this quality. Spiritualists who seek<br />enlightenment, at one point or another, face a maddening dilemma: The<br />more you crave for enlightenment, the further away from it you get.<br />Often the best way to achieve your goal is to keep it only in the back<br />of your mind. I argue that the same applies to fine arts. Your goal as a<br />fine artist is to achieve the highest price possible as Warhol<br />suggested, but if you let this be your preoccupation, you get further<br />away from it. A cynical attitude towards making money seldom pays off<br />like you think it would.<br /><br />Then what does it mean to be sincere? It is no accident that those who<br />are successful in fine arts are often skillful salesmen. They seem to<br />have an intuitive understanding of how to influence people and how to be<br />recognized. This type of talent is often looked down on. Many would<br />argue that salesmanship is independent of artistic talent, but I<br />disagree. Great artists are often the keenest observers and interpreters<br />of our society and culture. Their artworks fascinate us because they<br />reflect their keen observations. If they possess a talent for observing<br />and understanding aspects of our culture that most of us cannot see, it<br />would only make sense that they would be good at influencing and getting<br />recognized by that very culture. Their talent for salesmanship is not a<br />separate talent from their artistic talent. They are one and the same<br />thing. They are as sincere and passionate about their salesmanship as<br />they are about their art, and that is why they tend to succeed in<br />influencing others.<br /><br />Why does salesmanship get such a bad rap in the first place? We often<br />hear comments like this: Artist X is successful not because he is a good<br />artist, but because he is a good salesman. From the perspective of<br />salesmanship being just another expression of artistic talent, such a<br />statement is a contradiction. Since much of modern advertising is banal<br />and vulgar, we tend to forget the significance of advertising and<br />salesmanship. Our cultures evolve because we let others know who we are,<br />what we do, how we feel, and how we think. At the level of individuals,<br />advertising ourselves seems like a selfish act, but without our urge to<br />be known, understood, and recognized, our culture would not evolve.<br />Advertising is an integral part of being a productive member of a<br />society.<br /><br />If salesmanship is an expression of artistic talent, it would be<br />interesting to analyze how some of the successful artists achieved their<br />recognition. Below, I am going to give some case studies.<br /><br />In "Time Out Guide to the Saatchi Gallery", there are a few articles<br />that describe how so-called "YBAs", Young British Artists, lead by<br />Damien Hirst, achieved their international fame. Their beginning is the<br />most interesting part. Counter to the romantic and idealistic notion<br />commonly held by young artists, Damien Hirst appears to have understood<br />that success cannot be achieved alone or based solely on presumed<br />artistic merits. He enlisted his friends from college, like Sarah Lucas<br />and Gary Hume, to work as a team. He organized a group show called<br />"Freeze" for which he sent taxis to fetch important figures of the<br />British art world. Even his relationship with Saatchi is a<br />collaboration.<br /><br />I speculate that Saatchi, in order to establish himself as an<br />influential figure in the art world, needed more than just money.<br />Initially he collected New York artists like Donald Judd, Andy Warhol,<br />and Brice Marden. In 1985 when he first opened his gallery, these names<br />were already well-established. For him to earn respect as a collector,<br />he needed to discover artists of his own. Saatchi, being an advertising<br />guru with a deep pocket, found the perfect product in Hirst. Their<br />partnership had all the signs of success. For those in the advertising<br />business, Saatchi's hit show, "Sensation", felt oddly familiar and was<br />easy to relate to. Their success reflects their uncanny understanding of<br />how our culture works.<br /><br />Working as a team to self-promote, like the way Hirst and his friends<br />did, is a common pattern we find in the history of modern art. If you<br />are not familiar with how self-promotion works in the art world, you<br />might find it odd that many famous artists knew each other even before<br />they were famous. If artists were to be famous for presumed artistic<br />merits alone, what are the chances that two genius artists happen to<br />know each other years before they became famous? The reality is the<br />other way around: They became famous because they worked together to be<br />so.<br /><br />When you read the collection of writings by the 60's conceptual artists<br />in "Conceptual Art" published by Phaidon, you notice that many of them<br />often wrote about each other before they were successful. This strategy<br />must have worked quite well. If you write how great you are yourself, no<br />one would listen to you. To get around this problem, you write about<br />each other. For the same amount of effort, the latter is far more<br />effective.<br /><br />We can find many such groups who made self-promotion a team effort in<br />the recent history of art. For instance, the Black Mountain school which<br />included John Cage, Merce Cunningham, and Robert Rauschenberg. The New<br />York school of Abstract Expressionists which included Jackson Pollock,<br />Willem de Kooning, and Mark Rothko.<br /><br />The group strategy makes sense in many ways. You can tap into each<br />other's resource (studio space, equipment, social connections, etc..).<br />You can share skills and knowledge. Each person can specialize in<br />certain aspects of promotion (writing, socializing, designing, getting<br />publicity, etc..) What you say about each other would have more<br />credibility to outsiders than if you had to talk about yourself. It is<br />easier to organize an event or a show if it is done as a group. If one<br />of them becomes successful, he could direct some of the attention to the<br />rest of the team by frequently talking about them, by trying to<br />introduce them to powerful people, by including them in a group show,<br />and so on. If you work as a team, even if success is a matter of pure<br />luck, the chance of one of the members becoming successful is much<br />greater than you yourself becoming successful. By working as a team, the<br />overall impact would be greater than the sum total of individual<br />contributions, which is a phenomenon called synergy.<br /><br />The concept of synergy is a common sense in the business world. The only<br />reason why it is not in fine arts is because art is presumably about<br />individual expression. It does not occur to many artists to work as a<br />team, unless the point of it is an artistic collaboration. A nameless<br />team can be formed only for the purpose of self-promotion. It is not<br />such a foreign concept, if you think about the fact that, in<br />conventional business, we form teams to make money, but each of us<br />pursue different ideas of happiness in our private lives.<br /><br />The fact that working as a team is more effective than working<br />independently comes as no surprise. We could argue that human beings as<br />well as most living creatures on earth are designed to work in teams.<br />Teamwork is something fine artists are not particularly known for<br />because they tend to focus on the notion of individual. The ability to<br />organize, lead, and work in a team is one of the most mysterious,<br />profound, and creative aspects of human social life, yet many fine<br />artists rarely experience being leaders or organizers of groups, and<br />choose instead to work in solitude. It is somewhat ironic that artists<br />who have little or no experience with organizing are often the most<br />vocal critics of the major organizations of our society. This is all the<br />more reason why artists like Damien Hirst who know how to work in teams<br />deserve credit.<br /><br />Some might feel that there is something almost underhanded about working<br />in teams to self-promote, but the word "underhanded" would imply that<br />there is a way to measure something to be fair and unfair in fine arts.<br />Again, this argument implies a meritocracy as an ideal system. Fairness<br />too comes into play only if something is measurable like in the<br />Olympics. Furthermore, if you apply Game Theory to fine arts, it is<br />possible that each artist's selfish desire to become famous is what<br />drives the art world to evolve. I would say, in fine arts, anything<br />goes.<br /><br />>From this conclusion, I feel that it is time for us to go beyond the<br />romantic notion of meritocracy, and sincerely recognize the significance<br />of the salesmanship of artists. At least in Western art, talent for<br />self-promotion is an inextricable part of what art is. Here are some<br />ways in which sincere recognition of salesmanship can manifest in<br />practice.<br /><br />Galleries and museums put up façade of meritocracy, when what goes on<br />behind the scenes has nothing to do with it. They are supposed to choose<br />artists based on their artistic merit, not based on their friendship<br />with famous artists, nor based on the power of their dealers. I feel<br />that it would be healthier, if a museum exhibition, for instance, would<br />be organized based on current market price, rather than pretending to<br />know the merits of the artworks they present. In the end, they will<br />achieve the same result, but the upfront premise would be more honest.<br /><br />For galleries, it is rare that they would select their artists<br />anonymously from a pile of slides based on presumed artistic merits. So,<br />why not make the information public about the connections through which<br />their artists came to be known to them? Perhaps even present a flow<br />chart of connections.<br /><br />Here is another justification for recognizing artist's salesmanship. We<br />tend to assume that an artist becomes famous because he was influential,<br />but the opposite can also be true. Marcel Duchamp became an influential<br />artist when he brought a urinal into a gallery, but at that point, he<br />was already a successful artist. If he was only an unknown, struggling<br />artist, the chances are the art world would have completely ignored his<br />urinal. Or, it is possible that he would not have had any gallery to<br />take his urinal to. That is, he became influential because he was<br />famous. Fame is not necessarily a reward for being influential. Often it<br />is the other way around. Fame can be an artistic tool, just as money can<br />be. In this sense, as an artist, there is a point in trying to be famous<br />for the sake of being famous, so that you can use it artistically. This<br />should not sound so unusual for those artists who have day jobs where<br />their only aim is to make money, so that they can spend it on making<br />their art. In other words, salesmanship is a craft like any other. Being<br />able to effectively self-promote is no different from being able to<br />paint well. It is a skill that can be used artistically, and is almost a<br />necessity for an artist in today's world.<br /><br />In "Illusions of Immortality", David Giles says, "[P. T.] Barnum's real<br />'show' was not the exhibition but the performance of the publicity." The<br />same can be said of the modern fine artists; their real "art" is not the<br />objects they make, but how they become famous.<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 />6.<br /><br />Date: 2.23.04<br />From: Charlotte Frost (charlotte@digitalcritic.org)<br />Subject: Review of Internet Art by Julian Stallabrass<br /><br />Net Art is Rarely Black and White<br /><br />Book Review of:<br /><br />Internet Art: The Online Clash of Culture and Commerce Julian<br />Stallabrass (Tate Publishing, London, 2003)<br /><br />By Charlotte Frost<br />For Julian Stallabrass, the gap between culture and commerce is nowhere<br />narrower than on the Internet. His latest book, Internet Art: The Online<br />Clash of Culture and Commerce (Tate Publishing, London, 2003) notes that<br />although net art and commercial web exploits have vast distinctions,<br />their co-inhabitation of an essentially commercially driven space unites<br />them, and further than this, net art often treats its cyber-neighbour as<br />a somewhat ironic muse.<br /><br />Initially Stallabrass appears to posit culture and commerce on opposing<br />sides. The book title, chapter headings and subdivisions, and even the<br />black and pink colour scheme of the cover appear to have been chosen to<br />show how the brash world of commerce clashes with the more activist<br />elements of net art. Reading texts on the net can illustrate this<br />divide,<br /><br />"…delicate works that should act as lessons in the postmodern virtues of<br />the borderless, the liminal, the self-referential are contending with<br />powerful commercial hierarchies." (p.59)<br /><br />As Stallabrass clearly explains within the covers of this book however,<br />sometimes the bringing together of apparently disparate elements can<br />create something different and innovative ­ not just a new colour<br />combination ­ and sometimes, clashing is good!<br /><br />For entities to oppose each other, they must first be brought together,<br />and by looking at works which have both shaped the terrain of net art<br />and simultaneously shaped a relationship with commerce, for example<br />Rachel Baker 's alternate Tesco reward card scheme with its exploitation<br />of customer exploits, or works which show systems we have bought into<br />like Tomoko Takahashi's Word Perhect or events such as the Etoy battle<br />where the artists appeared to almost swap roles with their oppressors,<br />Stallabrass is able to describe a rather more blurred boundary between<br />culture and commerce.<br /><br />Culture and commerce have never been distinct from each other before,<br />and net art is no exception, so perhaps Stallabrass is suggesting that<br />it isn't the relationship with commerce that makes net art unique, but<br />actually, it is what makes it a legitimate member of the art<br />establishment, whether netties like it or not.<br /><br />The thematic arrangement of the book also shows that Stallabrass sees<br />net art as more than the fusion of two apparently opposing elements. The<br />sections map out the obvious, but fundamental factors in any discussion<br />of net art and there are certainly more than two areas of inquiry: the<br />idiosyncrasies of the Internet; the forms of art in such a vast<br />category; the imposition of time and collapsing of space; interactivity;<br />advanced business capacity on the net; the potency of online politics<br />and the complications of collection both for institutions and artists<br />making a living. Finally he looks at the increased levels of critique<br />and conversation surrounding all these areas ­ which of course is<br />expanded further by the presence of this book, and further again by my<br />critique of it…<br /><br />If commerce and culture are this harmonious, Stallabrass must seek a<br />clash elsewhere ­ with the less easily definable or dividable elements<br />of net art. He finds that perhaps there are other factors which make it<br />reactionary, such as net art's relationship with the predominant<br />discourse of the history of art? Stallabrass notes that with<br />peer-to-peer systems, artists and activists can damage big business, but<br />by affecting commercialism, they affect the commercial side of art and<br />'the zealously guarded value of the art object' (p.104), making<br />commercialism merely a catalyst for bigger clashes.<br /><br />It is this relationship with art history, rather than commercialism,<br />that really highlights net art's distinct persona for Stallabrass. By<br />looking at artists who have discussed the apparently anti-art historical<br />tendency of net art, such as Vuk Cosic who prepared his website with<br />non-existent monographs of net artists or Alexei Shulgin who made<br />tongue-in-cheek nettime predictions of the impending arrival of net art<br />legends back in 1997, Stallabrass shows that net art is just as likely<br />to engage in debates about art-world validation systems as it is with<br />commerce. So whilst net art is deeply commercial at times, it is also<br />deeply anti-art at times, and here is the real clash ­ perhaps one on a<br />level of red and pink!<br /><br />The featured artists are the familiar crew: RT Mark, I/O/D, Alexei<br />Shulgin, Vuk Cosic, Maciej Wisniewski, Heath Bunting, Rachel Baker,<br />Jodi, Thomson and Craighead, Olia Lialina, Mark Napier, Anna Best, Etoy<br />and Mongrel, amongst others, but rather than engaging in<br />self-historicisation, you could be forgiven for thinking that this time,<br />they have got an art historian to do it for them, but you soon discover<br />otherwise. Stallabrass states that:<br /><br />"Those who engage in this mourning idealise the early period of net.art<br />production, and by marking it off as a discrete movement, attempt to<br />maintain their places within its frozen pantheon." (p.128)<br /><br />He clearly hasn't written this book as an insider but like his target<br />reader, he wants to get a handle on an elusive area of the arts, and for<br />a senior lecturer on Contemporary art at the Courtauld Institute,<br />Internet art must present a particularly relevant challenge. He could<br />also be trying to show that net art doesn't clash with the well-trod<br />trajectory of art historian. His impartiality is refreshing as he<br />himself notes that mainstream art world discourse is '…often secretive<br />and disingenuous…' (p.110). Of course he has to look at these artists<br />because many of them are the very artists who shaped the terrain of net<br />art, and although a follow-up to this book might have the luxury of<br />including more disparate work, an initial delve must sacrifice<br />inclusivity for clarity and individuality for collectivity if he is<br />going to show any dominant trends in such a disparate area.<br /><br />Stallabrass' definition of net art is therefore less about divisions,<br />and more about combinations.<br /><br />"Freed of their material weight, works of art become tokens in a<br />cultural game, a shuffling of novel combinations of symbols. Putting art<br />on the Web does not in itself cause this phenomenon ­ which is as<br />evident in museum shops' postcard displays as online ­ but makes plainer<br />art's wider condition." (p.129)<br /><br />Internet art and commerce are just two sides of exactly the same coin,<br />but having appeared, to begin with, to suggest that on the one side you<br />have art and the other commerce, Stallabrass suggests that on the one<br />side you have art and on the other, the critique of art or as he puts<br />it: "Perhaps the distinguishing feature of online culture is precisely<br />that it is impossible to say where art starts and finishes?" (p.141).<br /><br />But even the critique isn't without paradox. In fact, whilst Stallabrass<br />felt a book was nonetheless important, he knows it too can clash with<br />net ideals,<br /><br />"To write about art on the Internet is to try to fix in words a highly<br />unstable and protean phenomenon. This art is bound inextricably to the<br />development of the Internet itself, riding the torrent of furious<br />technological progress…" (p.12)<br /><br />And at the same time he believes that list-serves don't always<br />enlighten,<br /><br />"Despite the valuable role that it has played in the exchange of<br />information and the development of interest groups, much BBS discussion<br />can be banal and incoherent." (p.111-112)<br /><br />So Stallabrass has written a book that will be more available to readers<br />who are less familiar with list-serve-life, as well as one that<br />complements a strong net-knowledge.<br /><br />Although it is a book, and not online, there is something itself very<br />'open source' about the way Stallabrass provides his take on net art, as<br />though he is providing some tools to understand the field, but leaving<br />it up to the reader to write their own programme. This book is a<br />valuable resource and I imagine it will become a staple on new media<br />reading lists, as well as becoming a book which will provide a template<br />for future endeavours by other writers. It is also full of such concise<br />explanations that it is the perfect essay writer's companion for quote<br />picking!<br /><br />In the end you discover that Stallabrass doesn't't think black and pink<br />clash at all. Although they make a statement, they work very well<br />together as their fusion doesn't create a singular burst from jarring<br />sides, but rather a continued sparring with continued effect; they<br />highlight each other, and in doing so, make deeper contrasts and facets<br />clearer.<br /><br />Whilst you might have been told not to judge a book by its cover, in<br />this case, I think you can!<br /><br />Charlotte Frost<br /> <br />+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<br /><br />7.<br /><br />Date: 2.26.04<br />From: Ian Clothier (i.clothier@witt.ac.nz)<br />Subject: Bloom: mutation, toxicity and the sublime<br /><br />Bloom: mutation, toxicity and the sublime<br />A review by Ian M Clothier<br /><br />When I run over the frightful catalogue of my sins, I cannot believe<br />that I am the same creature whose thoughts were once filled with sublime<br />and transcendent visions of the beauty and majesty of goodness -<br />Frankenstein's monster [1].<br />Sins of the grotesque:<br /><br />Where once dark angst pervaded the frames that conveyed monstrous<br />abnormality, thanks to software and Patricia Piccinini (In bocca al<br />lupo, 2003) the vast, ghastly enterprise of biomorphic modulation can be<br />seen in the clear twilight of digital media. Her luridly bulbous<br />animations, replete with suggested orifices and given character by<br />flaws, were suspended and more horrific for their lack of anatomical<br />specificity. It is as if indeed a mad scientist had bred not pigs with<br />human ears, but generic organs made of the every humanimal. Organs<br />coated with the imperfections of human skin - moles and veins, nipples<br />and warts - twisted and gyrated until one hapless pustule detached from<br />its foothold and disappeared. It was undeniably grotesque yet the<br />question could be asked of it: what exactly is there to be afraid of?<br /><br />What was perhaps surprising about Bloom: mutation, toxicity and the<br />sublime [2] was not the round condemnation of things genetically<br />modified but rather the ambivalence of the artists on the subject of<br />conceptual relationship to notions of the sublime (surely a well visited<br />notion in Western art history) and the articulation of its related<br />concepts.<br /><br />A video piece by Motohiko Odani (Rompers, 2003) featured frogs with<br />human ears, neighbours on the genetic tree to the rats with human ears<br />that have actually been nurtured in the science laboratory. The frogs,<br />bees, birds, worms and squirrels of Odani's bestiary frolicked around an<br />Alice in Wonderland type character, who had a tongue to catch flies, and<br />some false brow work to underline the fantasy. Condemnation in this<br />colorific paradise seemed out of order.<br />Sins of the toxic:<br /><br />This is not to say that the tragic side of the toxic was overlooked. Jun<br />Nguyen-Hatsushiba (Memorial project Minimata: neither either nor neither<br />­ a love story 2003) makes video and performance based work around the<br />dumping of mercury in Minimata Bay Japan, a tragedy of real human<br />proportion (initially denied by authorities). In dream like video<br />sequences a performance began to unravel and a state of suspended grace<br />was evoked, where the eerie depths of the bay projected as a toxic<br />sublime. The participants in the performance shared oxygen, risking<br />tragedy while reflecting it.<br /><br />Danger signs would also be entirely appropriate to Denise Kum's<br />installation Flocculate flow (2003). In lurid whirls of coloured grease,<br />Kum used soap and petroleum based products to create the scenario of a<br />toxic waste dump, complete with modified industrial palette footbridge.<br />This was sculpture dematerialized into gloop, coloristic sensibility<br />gone emphatically and post-Pollock berserk. Kum spun on a coin that<br />shimmered playful seductive colour on one side and industrial slag heap<br />on the other. Ambivalence.<br /><br />Susan Norrie's Undertow (2002) invited a contemplative and even solemn<br />reflective state, providing equal measures of horror, spectacle,<br />tragedy, monstrosity and positivity. The installation took place in the<br />semi-light of the sources, the projections generating a physical,<br />digital twilight. In this light the tragedy of toxic spillage is<br />countered by an enduring sense of the positive: toxicity and nature,<br />united by awe. The work consisted of a multiplicity of moving image<br />sources - four data projectors (three encased in Star Wars reminiscent<br />giraffe legged boxes), a video monitor and digital hand-held device (the<br />latter two separately encased in the wall). One projector threw fourteen<br />foot high images of the sea, a lake on fire, and a dust storm over<br />Melbourne. A second projected a persistent shot of mud pools, while a<br />third showed a meteorological service film about weather balloons and<br />the fourth displayed images of oil slick being cleaned from birds that<br />were then put back in cardboard boxes. The TV monitor played home video<br />of cherry blossom watching in Japan, occurring early due to global<br />warming according to one website [3]. The hand-held device, the site<br />stated, shows a scene from the Orson Wells' film The Trial - Anthony<br />Perkins character K (the guilty party) watching Naydra Shore carrying a<br />large suitcase over nondescript badlands.<br /><br />Putting these images together in backwards respective order, we have<br />flight and guilt, global warming framed by home video, environmental<br />devastation, attempts to define and control weather, the persistent<br />energy of nature, and the power, spectacle and strength of nature.<br />Structurally, the images of this artwork together create an articulation<br />of superpositions [4] rather than a singular expression of environmental<br />negativity. Resilience to singular reduction is what makes the piece so<br />successful: within the articulated superpositions there is sufficent<br />room for many readings. Norrie has undoubtedly created a major new media<br />artwork, inexplicably pulling together a space of contemplation using<br />images that range from the banal to the awe inspiring.<br />Sins of the genetically modified:<br /><br />Christine Borland (The Aether sea, 1999) took real, actual human DNA and<br />altered it, giving it the character of jellyfish that glow in the dark.<br />Across the walls of a darkened space swam moving images of said<br />jellyfish, ambling through the depths. In the centre of the room, a<br />gently tipping tray held a sheet of genetically modified human DNA and<br />rocked back and forth to a tide made by a chemist's machine. The<br />interspecies cross-fertilisation of genetic material is of course highly<br />contentious, and the medical use of this fluorescent dye as a marker for<br />rogue cancerous cells can be offered as excusing its use here and in<br />medical quarters. Maybe. Contention and counter argument twist around<br />this work, strangely reflecting the structure of the gene. All the<br />while, the jellyfish swam oblivious to the angst they generated - twin<br />projections enhancing a sensation of freely floating sublime.<br /><br />Eduardo Kac went one step further and created a transgenic artwork [5]<br />that invited the viewer to take part in genetic modification, live via<br />the Internet. In Genesis (1999-2003), Kac took a line from the biblical<br />Book of Genesis, translated it into Morse Code, and then into strings of<br />the ACTG base pairs that create DNA chains. This synthetic gene was then<br />incorporated into bacteria.<br /><br />Images of the bacteria moving around were projected in a dark, tight,<br />and nearly claustrophobic installation area. In fluorescent green text<br />on three remaining walls were the originating Genesis sentence "Let man<br />have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,<br />and over every living thing that moves upon the earth," its Morse Code<br />translation, and the DNA sequence. Viewers could log onto a website, and<br />turn an ultraviolet light above the bacteria on and off, altering not<br />only the physical structure of the bacteria, but also its genetic<br />makeup. Which is to say, metaphorically at least, that the originating<br />sentence had been altered, itself genetically modified. The website<br />experience was counterpoised to the experience of the installed<br />component, creating a distinct sense of dislocation when interacting<br />with the website. The consequences of user acts were blind, though it<br />must be said that a spatially dislocated online experience is not<br />inappropriate to the Internet.<br /><br />In a way similar to Susan Norrie's Undertow, the various parts of<br />Genesis together create a sense of articulated superposition. In<br />addition to the use of the web as the basis for interactive structure,<br />there is the intersection of the Internet and electricity (turning the<br />UV light on and off using 'Bluetooth' type technology); a further<br />intersection/superposition with the sphere of the biological; yet<br />another superposition of biology and genetic structure; which in turn is<br />overlaid with the codification of language (English/Morse Code/DNA<br />phrasing); and finally an association with culture and religion -<br />Western culture and the Book of Genesis. This articulation of<br />superpositions lies at the heart of Kac's Genesis. The conception is<br />majestic and the work provides one benchmark of new media practice, of<br />dynamic systems integration that replicates systems processes rather<br />than mimics visual reality. Western culture's myth of creation is here<br />presented without illusory perspective.<br /><br />Grotesque, toxic and genetically modified: an excellent catalogue of<br />sins, twined with the sublime.<br /><br />Notes<br /><br />[1]. From Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, page 91 (Wordsworth edition<br />1994).<br /><br />[2]. Curated by Gregory Burke, director of the Govett-Brewtser Art<br />Gallery. Image courtesy of the Govett-Brewster and Ó.<br /><br />[3]. Deferred detonations: thrilling pessimism by Robert Cook<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.realtimearts.net/">http://www.realtimearts.net/</a> rt55/cook.html<br /><br />[4]. The phrase 'articulation of superpositions' is sourced in the<br />writing of Deleuze and Guattari, cited in Manuel De Landa's A thousand<br />years of nonlinear history, page 64 (Zone Books 1997).<br /><br />[5]. Further information about this work can be obtained from Kac's<br />website <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ekac.org/transgenicindex.html">http://www.ekac.org/transgenicindex.html</a><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 Feisal Ahmad (feisal@rhizome.org). ISSN:<br />1525-9110. Volume 9, number 9. 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 />
