we did some exquisite corpse exercises at drawing class. with folded paper and people drawing on a different fold, only seeing a thin slice of the edge of the previous person's work.
here's a few paper remixes of Michael's paintings - slices & weaves (I'm mostly doing exercises by hand, off the computer these days) https://www.flickr.com/photos/aliak_com/16821399545 https://www.flickr.com/photos/aliak_com/16821405935 https://www.flickr.com/photos/aliak_com/16201492383 On 15 March 2015 at 22:23, jk <j...@xxn.org.uk> wrote: > hi list > re. exquisite corpse/Burroughs > heres an example of DIWO + software process (7 writers, a bunch of python > scripts aed on cut-ups) > orchestrated by Brendan Howell in a London iteration of > a collective novel writing project strung out over 8hr/day for 5 days > producing a 'positive' book text of approx. 1/7th > text production, and a 6/7ths data dump from which some of the launch > event (sound, text) was produced..... > http://www.exquisite-code.com/ > http://exquisite-code.com/?action=page&url=london > > jonathan > > One need only look back at the history of the 20th century avant-garde: > from the Surrealists to Fluxus to Chance to see the broad range of ways in > which collaborative processes can be structured or not. There are no > absolutes: rules or no rules, it depends on the context, the medium, the > participants, a host of things, there are so many different ways to > activate socially engaged DIWO systems of networked art-making. The > Surrealists exquisite corpse is a case in point: > > *Exquisite corpse*, also known as *exquisite cadaver* (from the original > French term *cadavre exquis*) or *rotating corpse*, is a method by which > a collection of words or images is collectively assembled. Each > collaborator adds to a composition in sequence, either by following a rule > (e.g. "The *adjective <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjective>* *noun > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noun>* *adverb > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverb>* *verb > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verb>* the *adjective* *noun*", as in "The > green duck sweetly sang the dreadful dirge") or by being allowed to see > only the end of what the previous person contributed. - Wikipedia > > The DIWO concept has rich precedence, including the cutup technique > practiced by William Burroughs and Bryon Gysin; the scripted events > composed by Fluxus artists Yoko Ono, Dick Higgins, Lamont Young; the chance > operations of John Cage, etc. There are a myriad of approaches to draw from > and no single one is right or wrong it just depends on the needs of the > community and the context. > > I am curious to know how previous DIWO actions manifested on this list > and what made them successful? > > From: dave miller <dave.miller...@gmail.com> > Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity < > netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org> > Date: Sunday, March 15, 2015 at 5:19 PM > To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity < > netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org> > Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] DIWO Process > > I agree with these things, and I like the way last time we "ruined" each > other's work. I found it quite shocking actually, when I spent ages > carefully making a drawing then someone deliberately hacked it up. It took > the preciousness out my work, which at the time was upsetting, but soon > after I realised the new collaborative piece was often far more interesting > and took on a new life. Richer in that others were part of it, and a > privilege that they'd taken and used it. The shared energy and excitement > creates much more than me sitting alone in a corner on a private creation. > > dave > > On 15 March 2015 at 09:12, isabel brison <ijayes...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 15 March 2015 at 18:21, Randall Packer <rpac...@zakros.com> wrote: >> >>> @Michael >>>>> "It also characterises much of my experience of lists >>> from about 2000 onwards... And to my dismay it doesn't seem to be >>> happening here to anything like the extent I'd thought it might. And I >>> wonder why." >>> >>> So my conclusion here is that perhaps we need to propose new and >>> evolving DIWO strategies if we really want to "do it with others" via email >>> lists in the age of overload. >>> >>> >> I'd say hustling for paid work may be the issue here more than >> information overload, as that overload was already happening at the time of >> the last DIWO on this list and that didn't seem to affect participation >> (though I must admit to having passively spectated through that one but I >> was fairly new on the list and still trying to get a feel for the >> conversation). >> >> That said, I'd still argue for no rules. Rules may be necessary in >> large funded projects, as funding drives the need for results in our >> productivity-obssessed age, but rules tend to bring hierarchical structure >> with them. That goes against the best aspects of participatory work: >> inclusiveness, the freedom to play when and if you want to, and the >> openness and unpredictability of it all. Necessarily that means projects >> may fail to deliver results, spin out of control or take unexpected turns, >> but surely that's part of the fun of it? >> >> Also I think more than ever it's important to have spaces where we feel >> free to remix, appropriate and play with other people's work. When artists >> are being prosecuted left, right and center for things like doing a >> painting based on someone else's photograph, just keeping that space open >> is a political statement. And Netbehaviour has been doing a great job of >> that :-) >> >> -- >> http://isabelbrison.com >> >> http://tellthemachines.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > listNetBehaviour@netbehaviour.orghttp://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > > > -- > Dr Jonathan Kemphttp://xxn.org.uk > http://crystalworld.org.uk/http://www.freshsent.info/crystal > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
