Just checking out the results page at the Survey. I'm very pleased with the
execution of the collaboration, in which Joseph of Electric Hands. Inc.
formatted various G2K Network topics for a new Survey. Joseph designed the
entry forms and the software for archiving the answers.

So as a formal piece, in my opinion it is a success. It would be interesting
to see whether a Museum or collector would just buy and maintain the url–is
that the plan, buy and maintain, or collective bargaining, or c zanni's deal?
I'm seeing a few options.

I still focus on forming a creative team, and then worrying about costs
later. Perhaps if someone in costs was on the team–well frankly I think
that's what we all have now.

However, if we are in situation where production costs are marginally zero,
independence will remain the norm for most net artists.

I have used numerous rationale for G2K-type ideas or art, and one from way
back was called "From Concept to Technology," a minor slapdash essay about
recovering or reorienting existing technology. Hence geocities and no
streaming. My overall argument was we should stay aware of the instances
where the concept takes over the technology, was my point. So in a general
sense it relates to technological production and the art of its age.

Yet production without economic effect is not always desirable. (I prefer to
divide economics into cognitive and political, since both are basically
economic.) What if you invent cheap wind power, which is beautiful, but
never sell it? Similarly for cognitive production. What if the bad money
has driven out the good? What if something needs to go on, a change of any
kind?

I'd argue that if you intend one or more people to look at your art, use your
product, you are asking to be part of their cognitive budget. It's a
request, an exchange, something goes on.

This is not just the realm of blabbery utopian hyper-correction, i.e.
standard academic objections to G2K are not sufficient objections. What if
you want–like Prema Murthy's new piece affirms–your art to reflect the
condition of producers as such, and not just the artist?

Incidentally, I think Murthy's new work is outstanding. Does it solve the
problem of bad working conditions all over the earth? No, but it relates to
it in a challenging way.
Ideally her work is part of what solutions are about.

So when artists ask for political economy, it's dissent, and when they ask
for cognitive economy, it's still a request for time/value/money what have
you.

As regards the Survey, thanks to everyone who has answered, more will roll in
as the year progresses. I do read the results, and am going to do so now.

Yet it illustrates a problem with files and so forth–everytime someone loads
the survey, the unpaid collaborator who made the thumbnails downloads a Meg
and a half, so I would ask Joseph, can you host the thumbnails (not the
larger images, they can stay with FB).

I think most artists just want their art to help people. If you can
reconcile selling with that goal, then you do it, otherwise you're one of
those artists who want the cash (new monograph, "Reaganomics' Effect on
Artist Incomes: Down or Up?").


Max Herman
www.electrichands.com/genius2000

++