Hi Nick & all,
This is a very interesting discussion...
I just wanted to jump in here and explore it from a different angle.
Relating to your comments saying below....
>I don't think this motivation (and goal) is "elitist", in fact it's
>intentionally (and carefully) open and inclusive. Within the context
>of GLI.TC/H, "glitch art" often refers to a community made up of many
>communities, the art worlds mentioned being one of them, but also
>academia (similar but different from these art worlds), also "creatives"
>(in the commercial/design sense), also non-art world (fringe) computer
>art scenes, also non-professional (amateur/folk) "participatory"
>communities (which often convene on social-media: facebook, vimeo,
>flickr) ---- and I don't mean to create distinct categories here,
>rather propose overlapping/fluid groups.
A little while back when we were involved with a project called
Node.London in 2006 (the 1st one) (http://www.nodelondon.org/), for
Networked, Open, Distributed, Events in London, a Season of Media Arts;
we experienced an important lesson with many others - the difficulties
between engineers, artists and activists. The activities of NODE.London
aimed to develop an infrastructure and to take a decentralised approach
to curating a media arts festival according to the ethos and methods of
open cultural production, on the understanding that these had always
been a source of inspiration to media arts practitioners. I can see
similar fragments emerge on this list as the discussion develops. "The
cultures are in many ways antagonistic to each other, easily drawn apart
and scattered by diverse forces. Engineers, artists and activists
operate in different models of the world, take different approaches to
life and have different modes of survival available to them. These
differences impact their free time, values and priorities, which in turn
give rise to some tensions in how they view each other."
http://www.furtherfield.org/reviews/nodelondon-getting-organised-openly
But, this is not to say it's a negative thing, because I feel that
interesting works or situations, arrive out of people exploring their
differences, in whatever context. Yet, at the same time, whether
something is political, artistic or engineered in a certain way - is
important (as well as other perspectives) to if we are going through the
process of discussion, such enquiries can help define or redefine the
thing(s) we observe and discuss at various levels - function, meaning,
subtext, context, it all opens up the inner workings beyond a prescribed
'interface' and the various designated protocols.
One thing I notice with the gl1tch phenomena- is that it seems to share
properties of, or is dynamically close to an artifact; a mass-produced,
usually inexpensive (digital) object reflecting contemporary society or
popular culture. What I mean here, is that its behaviour and function
works within frameworks of social platforms already existing,
appropriating popular avenues of networked, creative and cultural
distrubtion. It exists between geek world and the everyday world. What
it reflects of the contemporary world is not necessarily subject
matters, or issues of the day, but rather the mediums of the everyday
digital networks that most people use on the Internet.
> This moment(um) becomes an array of impetuses, and this to me is
>incredibly exciting. Glitch art (again, as [a] communie[s]) is
>concerned with + has been exploring varies themes: failure,
>interference/noise, digital punk, digital psychedelia, [retro]
>nostalgia, entropy, [human/computer] memory, human+computer interface,
>hacking/cracking + Intellectual Property, Digital Rights, [planned]
>obsolescence and/or [anti]upgrade and various other nuances of our
>digital ecology.
Well, I would say the spirit of punk or cyber punk exists within this as
you say 'array of impetuses', but not as a means of changing culture in
the physical sense. This reminds me for some reason of a piece of text
Arthur & Marilouise Kroker wrote in their (now) classic publication
'Hacking The Future'. "In technology as in life, every opening is also a
closing..." Yes, it fucks things up, it pulls apart the efficiency of
contained and (sometimes bland) environments on the net successfully.
But, perhaps there are particular questions that are in need of being
explored in respect of values and social contexts, which are not
necessarily being asked or critiqued in established art arenas. What are
the human related intentions behind the actions of the main players of
the Glitch art movement? What doors or questions, are being opened and
closed as the 'moment>um' expands into multi-crevasses, and cultural
dynamics of the day, whether virtual or physical?
There is something which also needs consideration here, such as the
'feral' nature of Glitch. There could be an argument that, if there is
too much logic injected into this nuance of nuances, it can become tame.
Less of a wave of noises and electric stutters/strutting an existential
digital and nonchalant weave, but an efficient and cynical process of
self-conscious, processed murmers of art related justification. Is it a
case of wanting one's cake and eating it? This is the crux, the
difficult terrain of becoming 'official' - seen and respected by others.
I think the renegade 'spirit' or element this work offers, is it's real
essence and most positive ingredient. And, even though having it
discussed here, is excellent - it does bring it closer to an accepted
form of creative 'grownup-ness'. Thus its feral nature, its most
attractrive quality could be sacrificed, closing one door, in order to
open another...
Wishing all well.
marc
www.furtherfield.org
>
> First, I want to say thnx to Patrick + all for getting this started,
it's great to see online critical glitch and/or gl1tch and/or glitch.art
and/or GLI.TC/H convos formulating so quickly after all the IRL events
of the last couple months (by which I mean not only GLI.TC/H but also
Glitch vs Scratch, the FLIP Screening, Algorithmic Unconsciousness,
Destructional Video at Leeds, d1sc0nN3ct in Egypt [going on now] and all
etc.evts I'm forgetting), all of which are testament to an exciting
moment>um (I mean moment>um here, I think, in the same way jonCates did
when he referenced the international glitchscene)
>
> In re:to Andreas, I appreciate that you've introduced politics to the
conversation but take issue with your framing. I think there is a very
real/fluid/ongoing glitch && politix thread[s], which we made an effort
to present at GLI.TC/H in the form of a panel + open discussion.
Additionally, the political potential of glitch art is (has been) a
major thread in my own personal work. For me, it is by combining glitch
w/ art that this potential manifests (not a "deadly grip", but rather
alimentation). A similar alimentation which is a core motivation behind
our organizing of GLI.TC/H. I don't think this motivation (and goal) is
"elitist", in fact it's intentionally (and carefully) open and
inclusive. Within the context of GLI.TC/H, "glitch art" often refers to
a community made up of many communities, the art worlds mentioned being
one of them, but also academia (similar but different from these art
worlds), also "creatives" (in the commercial/design sense), also non-art
world (fringe) computer art scenes, also non-professional (amateur/folk)
"participatory" communities (which often convene on social-media:
facebook, vimeo, flickr) ---- and I don't mean to create distinct
categories here, rather propose overlapping/fluid groups.
>
> I agree with Rosa, I don't think that the binaries are particularly
useful (though it was a good starting point for some conversations 7 or
8 years ago). Additionally, I think the "fetish" perspective is a rash
over simplification of thousands of works/experiments/endeavors/thoughts
being produced by hundreds of artists/thinkers/enthusiasts. I think a
more useful perspective might be the glitch moment(um), by which I mean,
as Rosa Menkman defines it, "the moment which is experienced as the
uncanny, threatening loss of control, throwing the spectator into the
void (of meaning)", the moment which becomes a catalyst, a potential for
(contemporary) glitch.errs to exploit, often in the interest of,
"modulate[ing] or productively damage[ing] the norms of techno-culture."
>
> This moment(um) becomes an array of impetuses, and this to me is
incredibly exciting. Glitch art (again, as [a] communie[s]) is concerned
with + has been exploring varies themes: failure, interference/noise,
digital punk, digital psychedelia, [retro] nostalgia, entropy,
[human/computer] memory, human+computer interface, hacking/cracking +
Intellectual Property, Digital Rights, [planned] obsolescence and/or
[anti]upgrade and various other nuances of our digital ecology.
>
> I think this could be a fruitful lens. Rather than debating whether
the glitch is a glitch if we call it a glitch, I'd be interested in
discussing/dissecting with yawl the avalanche of activity that has
sprung up over the last year (couple years) around this idea and, as
Curt suggested, what it's doing to us.
>
> -Nick-
> http://nickbriz.com
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:37 AM, IR3ABF <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Andreas Maria Jacobs, i respectfully disagree w/what i read to
be yr anti-art position in its most generalized application when you
write w/sweeping confidence that "the art world's - deadly grip" is sum
how a totalized effect/affect which will steal away possibility +
"eradicate every possible trace of authenticity, replacing it with its
commodified merchandazible fetish derivate." mayhaps you are opposed to
Institutional Art or the institutions of art. or mayhaps the oppressive
socio-economics of consolidated wealth/power that give rise to
exclusionary elitisms... but if so, then these are specifics, not
generalities, related to the unruly category of what constitutes 'art'
or even "Art". && even if these would be the cases (that those are yr
oppositions in specific) then those fears/concerns are warranted in our
current context but not sum how predetermined. even the way 'we' (an
inclusive term which may not be well-placed here) dfn 'art' +/or "Art"
is technosocial + culturally contextualized. the dfns change + art
modified over/through times
>
> @Jon Cates,
>
> Well, with all respect, I am somehow missing a clear standpoint
in *your* movement in how you posit yourselves in conflicting societal
environments,
>
> I am not discussing the specifics of glitch art 'as is', but
about the specifics - are there any distinguishable specifics at all or
are these just pronounced without being established? - of glitch art's
relation with the established and functioning *art* world in a broader
sense, i.e. not necessarily correlated or connected with glitch art.
>
> Has art/Art (including glitch art) in *that* art world any
*meaning* besides its commodifiable fetish as art and if so how then to
seperate art for the art markets - expressable in wealth accumulation
for a small exclusive group, from art related with non-commodifiable
non-fetish meaning and inexpressable in wealth, exclusivety etc etc,
using alternative value/meaning measuring systems
>
> Without properly formulating an answer or pointing to a direction
in a problematic field of mutual societal and economical contradictions,
I see a naive and glitchy international partying bunch of youngsters
unaware or unwilling to be aware of the dark and gloomy sides of
existing art hierarchies and I feel offended being confronted by such
ignorance if this naivety is also publicly stated
>
>> also Andreas Maria Jacobs, im confused/troubled by the positions
you seem to representing in yr -empyre- email. are you the same artist
who makes "prints on paper. Signed & numbered, editions of 3" of
domesticated + aestheticized Glitch Art which is exhibited in galleries
(i.e. @ GLI.TC/H2010 in Chicago) + sold (or @ least intended to be sold)
on art markets? this is what you represent about yrself vry clearly on
yr website:http://nictoglobe.com/new/room/New%20Room/2006/
>
> Yes, indeed I do make prints on paper - althought not
domesticated or aestheticized - at least when I can afford the material
costs which are currently by far too expensive to even think about,
considering the physical dimensions I like my works to be. But in case
there is interest I am more than willing to produce them in any amount
or size you want. You can find the specifics at the same website
>
> Andreas Maria Jacobs
>
> "Antartica: empty colorful people making empty colorful products"
>
> http://nictoglobe.com (Art Magzaine, Amsterdam 1986)
> http://burgerwaanzin.nl (La Resocialista Internacional)
>
> Sent from my eXtended BodY
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> [email protected]
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> [email protected]
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
[email protected]
http://www.subtle.net/empyre
