> Which leaves me to believe > that your question is a personal one; how far along the sliding scale do you > want or can you take glitch art? And when you finally make it to the public > space, will the work, although it originated from glitch, still identify as > a work of glitch? Very good summary! My worry is that in order to a) make my work more accessible b) reach a wider audience and c) not get rejected for so many public art projects I have to - and I take no joy in saying this - make my work dumber.
A commenter on my blog suggested that if I keep doing this people will eventually learn how to "read" glitch art. I can't remember which essay I read it in, but someone argued that glitch will always be slightly on the outside of art. For me it feels like their's two options: Make my work dumber or endure a long hard battle to make the public glitch artworks more accepted On 6 March 2012 16:27, Rosa Menkman <rosa_menk...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Dear Antonio and others, > > I think you ask a very simple question that opens up a box full of very > complex problems. To not get stranded, I think its important to stress you > are not talking about technological glitches (the scary, unwanted break from > a technological flow), but glitch (as) art, which is derived from > technologically-based glitch but since then has evolved into a more > conceptually based art form and discourse. > > > I would say glitch art is often employed to break the conventions that > govern the publics expectations of a technology; it relays the publics > perspective on a certain technology and shows what else is possible. In this > sense, glitch art can also be described as a political or 'educating' act. > > But this is not always the case; glitch art is nothing new, it has many > histories and genealogies. A lot of forms of glitch have become esthetic > styles; Glitch art has grown, maybe paradoxically into a popular discourse, > with its own dialectics and conventions. As a style you can find it on MTV > (not only in Kanye!), or knitted into your H&M clothes imported straight > from the Bangladeshi labour factories. > > In the past I have tried to described a view of these glitch genealogies, > some examples: from compression artifact to filter; from cd crack affect to > sound effect; from circuitbend to simulation; from broken, voided technology > to commoditized form. > > Thus glitch art can be defined following its roots in technological, but > also in conceptual, political or esthetical grounds. These are by no means > closed-off categories, and as much as they spill over into each other, they > also leak into ... some kind of glitch nihilism. > > > > About public art. Public art is made for a public, so its meant to attract, > at least to a certain extent. This means that there has to be a tradeoff > between this glitchy-mess (the scary, uncanny, unwanted technology) and its > attract-ability (both physically and mentally). Which leaves me to believe > that your question is a personal one; how far along the sliding scale do you > want or can you take glitch art? And when you finally make it to the public > space, will the work, although it originated from glitch, still identify as > a work of glitch? When do you as an artist or as a public find it more > interesting to call the work something else? > > The trade off is between how big of a public you want (or in the case of > your denied proposal) can attract and how far, or why, you, as a glitch > artist, are willing to slide down the slippery scale. > > > In my opinion, glitch esthetics has already permeated popular culture and is > therefor not rare in the public (art) sphere. I am not a purist by any means > but my preference in glitch art lies in work that educates, that opens > perspectives or technologies and that surprises me. > > The growing perversion of transgression through glitch in technology, the > mystification of the glitch and the glitch esthetics as an "ultimate" > accessory of the public sphere has for many reasons not my preference. > However, I see them as the other side of the coin and a definite part of > (glitch)society - its part of a "modern collective identity" that I want > part-take in, to be able to consciously reflect upon. However at this time, > it was also one of the reasons for me to decline my invitation to the > bus-stops project. > > > Warmly, > > Rosa > > > > > ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ ⃝ > > > -- .- -.-- / - .... . / -... --- - ... / .-.. --- --- -.- / --- ...- . .-. / > ..- ... > > ЯOSΛ MEИKMΛN▓██▓▒▒▒▒ ▒▒ ▒▒ ░ ░ ░ > > http://rosa-menkman.blogspot.com > > The Glitch moment/um > > GLI.TC/H ▓██▓▒▒▒▒ ▒▒ ▒▒ ░ ░ ░ > > > > > >> From: inter...@noemata.net >> Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 14:26:46 +0100 >> To: netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org > >> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Can glitch art go public? >> >> I think Bob has a point. It's when technology works we shold >> understand it, but when it doesn't work then we don't need to >> understand and can ignore it. That it doesn't work is rather the same >> as saying that we don't understand it, and that it works is the same >> as saying we understand it. Actually, whether something works or >> doesn't work is all fine, the problem is when it changes, that >> something that worked before stops to work, or something that was >> broken suddenly starts to work, boy, that's when we need >> understanding! When it comes to glitch the thing seems to be that it >> works when it doesn't work - but doesn't that also mean that it >> doesn't work when it works? If you make a working thing out of glitch, >> I don't know if it still is glitch - maybe it's pseudo-glitch? What is >> true glitch then? Like here, a faulty argument for instance, something >> that upsets the correct flow of logic or information - 'correct' >> meaning expected maybe. Currently we don't understand quantum >> mechanics properly, it doesn't mean it's a glitch, it's rather our >> understanding that must be considered a glitch - glitch understanding >> breaks reality - but is reality really broken? >> >> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Pall Thayer <pallt...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Bob, >> > >> > As James points out, all's fine as long as technology works the way >> > it's supposed to. Then you don't need to understand how it works. >> > Glitch art breaks technology. >> > >> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:01 AM, <ja...@jwm-art.net> wrote: >> >> Haha but you might want to engage when for whatever reason your water >> >> supply ceases! We had a power cut yesterday and were reminded just how >> >> much >> >> we do that requires electric that we take for granted. Without the >> >> computer >> >> the obvious thing to do was to read a book but that's a little difficult >> >> in >> >> the dark! >> >> James >> >> >> >> Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: bob catchpole <bobcatchp...@yahoo.co.uk> >> >> Sender: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org >> >> Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 08:27:03 >> >> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed >> >> creativity<netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org> >> >> Reply-To: bob catchpole <bobcatchp...@yahoo.co.uk>, >> >> NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity >> >> <netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org> >> >> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Can glitch art go public? >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > ***************************** >> > Pall Thayer >> > artist >> > http://pallthayer.dyndns.org >> > ***************************** >> > _______________________________________________ >> > NetBehaviour mailing list >> > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour -- ============================ anto...@hellocatfood.com http://www.hellocatfood.com ============================ _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
