It’s interesting to me that artists working with immaterial / non-existent artworks in the past are so overwhelmingly male, but I don’t know yet what it means… http://www.modernedition.com/art-articles/absence-in-art/the-invisible-artwork.html <http://www.modernedition.com/art-articles/absence-in-art/the-invisible-artwork.html> Something perhaps about the other side of the body art coin perhaps?
> On 15. Oct 2017, at 17:15, ruth catlow <ruth.cat...@furtherfield.org> wrote: > > I'd be up for thinking this one through. > Let's do it. > > On 13/10/17 20:34, Edward Picot wrote: >> Oops! Apologies for posting this twice. I thought the first one hadn't >> worked. >> >> On 13/10/17 19:10, Edward Picot wrote: >>> Can't we do something with this? Couldn't we create a conceptual work of >>> art that didn't actually exist at all - we could use some ideas from Curt >>> Cloninger's 'Essay About Nothing' to represent it - and market shares in it >>> via the Blockchain? Proceeds to Furtherfield, unless the value went above a >>> trillion dollars, in which case I want a cut. >>> >>> Edward >>> >>> On 11/10/17 18:56, Rob Myers wrote: >>>> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, at 12:58 AM, ruth catlow wrote: >>>>> Perfectly put Helen! >>>>> Art reframed as a new asset class for fractional ownership ain't my idea >>>>> of utopia. >>>> >>>> """Marly studied the quotations. Pollock was down again. This, she >>>> supposed, was the aspect of art that she had the most difficulty >>>> understanding. Picard, if that was the man's name, was speaking with a >>>> broker in New York, arranging the purchase of a certain number of "points" >>>> of the work of a particular artist. A "point" might be defined in any >>>> number of ways, depending on the medium involved, but it was almost >>>> certain that Picard would never see the works he was purchasing. If the >>>> artist enjoyed sufficient status, the originals were very likely crated >>>> away in some vault, where no one saw them at all. Days or years later, >>>> Picard might pick up that same phone and order the broker to sell. """ >>>> >>>> - William Gibson, "Count Zero", 1986. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>>> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org <mailto:NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org> >>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>>> <http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org <mailto:NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org> >>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>> <http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org <mailto:NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org> >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> <http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour> > -- > Co-founder Co-director > Furtherfield > > www.furtherfield.org <http://www.furtherfield.org/> > > +44 (0) 77370 02879 > > Bitcoin Address 197BBaXa6M9PtHhhNTQkuHh1pVJA8RrJ2i > > Furtherfield is the UK's leading organisation for art shows, labs, & debates > around critical questions in art and technology, since 1997 > > Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee > registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205. > Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade, Tally > Ho Corner, London N12 0EH. > _______________________________________________ > 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
