Re: [NetBehaviour] Finsbury Park attacks..
Hi Michael, I hadn't heard of the organisation SUTR, but I've now joined... Thanks for your bit in making this country decent - your work in Harlow sounds really important. Thanks Furtherfield for enduring and caring and being a focus for so much good work and many good people. In sorrow, Ann On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Michael Szpakowski wrote: > There clearly has been a rise in Islamophobia recently , fuelled in no > small measure by the government's attempt to scapegoat all Muslims with the > despicable Prevent strategy. We also saw the beginning of an attempt by May > to ratchet this up with her 'Enough is enough' speech towards the end of > the election campaign. > I wanted to say, though, that it's important not to sink into despair. > I've been very active around Stand up to Racism over the last year and > I've experience some interesting and often counter intuitive things. > When Arek Jozwik was killed in Harlow last year the vigil we organised a > couple of nights after was attended by significant numbers of the white > working class poor who live in the area. These will statistically have been > 'leave' voters... > We've campaigned pretty much every week since then, largely around > opposition to racism ,in the town centre on Saturday mornings. It was > certainly not always easy going but there was always a minority of people > willing to engage. ( especially the young, in a prefiguring of the huge pro > Corbyn upswell) > We also held a 60 strong rally against racism in early March -again very > much dominated by the under twenties. > What changed the atmosphere completely was the Labour manifesto - all of a > sudden people had hope, focussed on improving the lives of all not > 'competing for resources' ( a myth of course - stop spending millions on > Trident, on wars of intervention and tax the rich and resources would be no > problem, but a potent myth especially in the absence of hope that things > might change). Even after the two horrendous attacks in Manchester then > London this enthusiasm and this change of atmosphere was maintained -we > heard very little overt racism and experienced next to no hostility. > This has continued since the election with the humiliation of both May and > UKIP - what was interesting last week though was that although the racists > were in a small minority they were coming out with all sorts of filth > around Grenfell ( but once again large numbers of people were signing the > May must go, people not profit, working class lives matter ,petition ). > In short I'd put forward three propositions. > (1) Racism and Islamophobia are clearly a major problem and one > encouraged by this weak and nasty government > (2) We are not, though, powerless bystanders -whether it's directly > combatting the racists through SUTR or offering hope through agitating for > this government to go and for us to have the very real chance of one > committed to a real improvement in the lives of ordinary people there is > lots of very concrete, very practical work to do. > (3) Although there will be some ways in which artists can bring their > specific talents to bear in this ( I have got very good for example at > making large banners each week: > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako/35212704985/ > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako/34239170983/ > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako/34159735663/ > https://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako/34929717326/ > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako/34062471264/ > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako/34223234740/ > ) > > we should participate along with as many and diverse people as we can in > organising, protesting, demonstrating... This is not a time for any sort of > guild mentality but for getting stuck in. > > I particular urge anyone in the UK not a member of Stand Up To Racism to > join today. > > http://www.standuptoracism.org.uk/ > > > best wishes to all > Michael > > > ___ > 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
Re: [NetBehaviour] New World Disorder
In answer to the discussions on violence, it depends what we mean. We do not need guns to effect change. I'd say that *non-violent* resistance has got people a long way... Nowadays especially, when the revolutions are led by media stories and good coverage is the way to hearts and minds, there is a lot to be said for staging clever non-violent interventions - and I mean staging them. Though none of that is new either, the Suffragettes, Gandhi, etc. did it. I just had the antecedence of that legendary photo of Rosa Parks on the bus explained to me. No surprises that such a dignified woman was picked for the exercise. But I didn't know that the guy behind her was part of the media entourage there to cover the event. When they couldn't get the picture they needed with some white guy behind her, they put one of the team there. Cultural change may be slower than revolution but it embeds new ways of being rather than merely agitating and brutalising people. And smart resistance using the technologies of the time is a cornerstone of culture change. As this list knows... being smart and resisting. My tuppence ha'penny, Ann On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 7:20 AM, AGF poemproducer wrote: > i’d say slavery would have not been ended without violent uproar by slaves > > i’d say french revolution made a few points > > i am no expert > > but all i see is super gangsters with guns winning > how would they go away by themselves without a big shoot out > > very curious > > > > On 31 May 2017, at 20:30, aharon wrote: > > Yes.. hard to imagine without violence and indeed, perhaps, even the > wonderings that attempt to rid of viovence - fail in the face of > brutalisation. > > I have to say.. sorry but perhaps a question needs to be asked, with a > general You in mind: > have you been to places and in contact with people who went through the > serious blood shedding - and actually got their way? > > its an honest question. am curious because it seems to me, perhaps > wrongly, that when ever violence is being used - from implied through to > verbal and onto the body - everyone lose. > Suddenly what was hoped for initially is being eclipsed by the urgency to > deal with the effects from violence. Hope is eclipsed and, many times, i > think, gets lost by the very acts of violence.. > > hence.. here in brasilia.. with the recent violence.. it seems to me, that > the very deliverers of violence, the waiters of violence, (aka soldiers) > had to be questioned through imagination, through energetic means rather > than either power nor violence.. A wry smile from a soldier being asked > who's violence is he waiting to deliver from, the woman who can not afford > health care, or a president that needs power? A look of a click from a > soldier that just realisied he can be, at times, un-guided.. I hope I > didn't use violence then.. Just for that spark of imagination being able to > be questioned.. > I think it was done without neither power nor violence.. However, always > ready to learn.. > > If am wrong - what am i missing? (will be glad to hear and maybe even > manage to learn! :) ) > > Have much fun! > > aharon > xx > > May 30 2017 7:39 AM, "AGF poemproducer" <%22agf%20poemproducer%22%20%3c...@poemproducer.com%3E>> wrote: > > > hard to imagine there is a way fwd without serious blood shed > ;( > you forgot to say, they have the biggest guns > and are advise by google > > > > On 29 May 2017, at 19:13, Randall Packer wrote: > > TRUMP’s New World Disorder is revolution of the highest magnitude, played > out on the world stage, a geo-mashup and disruption of convention, > democracy, and humanity. > http://www.randallpacker.com/new-world-disorder/ > Randall > ___ > 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 > ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Exhibition: Networking the Unseen @Furtherfield 18 June - 14 August 2016
Very unseen then... On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:39 PM, dave miller wrote: > seems to be a problem with the link? > http://www.furtherfield.org/programmes/programmes/networking-unseen > > On 5 May 2016 at 10:55, furtherfield wrote: > >> Networking the Unseen >> >> Private view: Friday 17 June 2016, 6-9pm (register) >> From 18 June - 14 August 2016 >> Open 11am-5pm, Saturday-Sunday or by appointment >> http://www.furtherfield.org/programmes/programmes/networking-unseen >> >> Five culturally and geographically disparate Australian artists – Gretta >> Louw, Jenny Fraser, Lily Hibberd, Brook Andrew, and Curtis Taylor – and >> artists, including Neil Jupurrurla Cook, Isaiah Jungarrayi Lewis, and >> Sharon Nampijinpa Anderson from the Warnayaka Art Centre in Central >> Australia, present work situated at the intersection between avant garde >> digital, media, and installation art, the sociological study of digital and >> networked culture, and activism. >> >> Networking the Unseen is the first exhibition of its kind to focus on the >> intersection of indigenous cultures and zeitgeist digital practices in >> contemporary art. While digital networks manifest physically as tonnes of >> cabling, and electrical or electronic devices, the social and cultural >> impacts of the networks remain somehow invisible, eroding clearly felt >> boundaries of geography, place, culture and language. >> >> Together with artist and curator Gretta Louw, Furtherfield presents an >> exhibition and event series that brings together concepts and experiences >> of remoteness and marginalised cultures, with art-making in contemporary >> society. It proposes a radical rethinking of widely accepted stereotypes >> concerning the impact of networks on contemporary global cultures, digital >> art, the avant garde, and indigenous art-making. It tackles subjects >> ranging from digital colonialism and cultural marginalisation (or, >> conversely, diversity/empowerment) within an increasingly connected, online >> world to universal concerns around cultural change as a result of >> technological migration. The exhibition extends our focus to the >> extremities of the global digital network. It subtly proposes ways to claim >> power back from centralising forces of control to use these tools for >> positive change; for intercultural exchange and empowerment for >> marginalised communities. >> >> Tags: activism art, exhibition, digital print, installation, >> collaboration, digital art, digital colonialism, digitalisation, >> multi-disciplinary networks, social and cultural geography… >> >> ___ >> 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
Re: [NetBehaviour] Interspersed amongst the decaying landscapes of Albion
Hi Mark, Your question inspired me to share a moment that's stayed with me through a lifetime. Long long ago, in the days of the O level in British education, the Liverpool poets ( http://www.literature-study-online.com/essays/liverpool-poets.html) were quite the thing and their poems were often set for study on the English literature syllabus, then assessed by an unseen exam. At some point, one Sunday newspaper decided to pit the three poets against their own poems by setting them that year's English literature paper. They were hopeless. They had no idea what the themes were or how to conduct an appropriately pitched analysis. They were also very amusing about it. Though not, if I recall rightly, in verse. Best wishes Ann On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Mark Hancock wrote: > Hi Johannes, > > >>a kind of romanticism that evokes/links decaying landscapes and empires > and the sublime (aesthetics) > > Excellent! You make it sound like a bad thing though? > > I like that the work has evoked some discussion, especially as it has > moved beyond my own thought processes while creating the work. The work was > born, after all, from an instinctive creative process, rather than one that > attempted to prove any given ideology or philosophical perspective. But > perhaps I’m being disingenuous here, maybe I was hoping that it would, > while not explicitly stating that during the process of creation? > > Can the person making the work, be in the best place to analyse the work? > I know this is a well-worn path, but I’d be interested in what people have > to say on this. I’ve been looking at subjects for a short documentary I’d > like to make this year, I wonder if this is it? > > Cheers > > Mark > > > > > On 14 Mar 2016, at 20:13, Johannes Birringer < > johannes.birrin...@brunel.ac.uk> wrote: > > > > dear all > > > > it is interesting to me to read the responses, or the conversation > between Mark and Alan, > > but I find Mark's (and to some extent yours, Alan, as well) commentary > too close to > > a kind of romanticism that evokes/links decaying landscapes and empires > and the sublime (aesthetics). > > > > And John did respond to my query, thank you, regarding "posturing of > power, and the decay implicit in > > myths of cultural heritage.. and 'preservation'", and I thought his > discussion of > > the depletion of energy/force (for building archive and hoarding in the > museums of the former west) > > and depletion of social order (a kind of chaos theory of the end of > political, including the poor cousins of landscape art and border art?), > also in > > the US empire (Amurika? whose albion is that?), was very > thought-provoking. > > > > It did make me think, and wonder also, given Alan's silence, whether I > offended sensibilities here evoking > > a materialist dialectics that would see iconoclasm/destruction in > another light. It was so easy > > to condemn ISIS and be morally abhorred; and when you ask why is there > no abhorrence > > and condemnation and protest against the state governments that took the > war to Syria and destroyed > > Syria (after destroying Iraq), well, are we powerless to stop war, stop > the refugee crisis? > > > > nothing unknowable here, Mark, I guess. > > > > > > respectfully, > > Johannes Birringer > > > > > > From: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org [ > netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org] on behalf of Mark Hancock [ > mark.r.hanc...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 12:29 AM > > To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity > > Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Interspersed amongst the decaying landscapes > of Albion > > > > Hi, > > > > Yes! It probably is me collapsing, bits falling away and into the ocean > (of the sublime?). > > > > I’d be interested to find out more of your feelings of insignificance, > because I imagine that comes from knowing that there is so much more to > know in the world. Perhaps the decaying landscape is our own uncertainty in > the face of so much unknowable? > > > > M > > > >> On 13 Mar 2016, at 20:12, Alan Sondheim wrote: > >> > >> > >> Hi Mark, > >> > >> Wouldn't it be true to say that you're collapsing, not the landscape? > And whether that content is somehow manifest to us as viewers? I feel the > same sort of vertigo, but I associate it with the Kantian sublime (which > for all I know relates to Peirce's continuum via Zalamea), and a resulting, > for me, sense of insignificance - literally in the presennce of being (and > Being) _awe-struck._ ... > >> > >> - Alan > >> > >> On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Mark Hancock wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, thank you for taking the time to view the video! > >>> > >>> > >>> In a very general, not too researched way, I was reading about Deep > Time in (I think, I?m still on holiday away from my bookshelves) Collapse > journal, Volume 2. That, coupled with a comic from Image, called Injection, > which touches on aspects of British folklore and AI, got me
[NetBehaviour] Reminder: CfP: Aarhus Workshop on 'Making “World Machines”: Discourse, Design and Global Technologies for Greater-than-self Issues'
*Making “World Machines”: Discourse, Design and Global Technologies for Greater-than-self Issues - workshop in Aarhus, 17th August 2015* Call for Participation Workshop website: http://designforsharing.com/events-and-links/workshop-on-making-world-machines/ Tired of seeing sharing and caring monetized into apps and services? Tired of the limited visions for participation in much citizen science? Tired of feeling that technology can only worsen the problem, not offer creative solutions to resource management as well as citizen involvement for the benefit of the collective? Then come and experiment for the day at a workshop on ‘*Making “World Machines”: Discourse, Design and Global Technologies for Greater-than-self Issues’* at the Aarhus *Critical Alternatives* conference, August 2015. This one-day workshop introduces the concept of *world machines*—a new archetype for socio-technical systems, drawing together new computational powers with a social agenda of cross-world collaboration in resistance to dominant market rhetoric. Specifically, we consider opportunities to connect, sense and infer and apply these to crowd-sourcing public engagement with shared world issues. *World machines* give people access to the means to sample, test and report on their circumstances and what they find (or can sense with tools), as well as to locate each other, analyze the meanings of the data and link up for action upon what is found. They offer potential to scale and map the local and global, with shared tools and outcomes. They rely on a range of motivations for use, but no intrusive incentives, such as many sharing economy initiatives use (eg Airbnb, Uber or Taskrabbit, which monetize help-giving) and they may also specifically embed a rhetoric of shared or greater-than-self issues. We will use the idea of *world* *machines* to take a critical approach and examine ‘what is wrong with current social reality, identify the actors to change it, and provide both clear norms for criticism and achievable practical goals for social transformation’ (as Horkheimer defined Critical Theory) in the context of developing and deploying networked technology. The day will combine theoretical aspects of *world machines*, such as considering what a political entity of this kind might seek to do, and practical exercises that focus on design and use, followed by a review of learning from our work, with a view to exploring viability and examining what a related research agenda might involve. Relevant workshop topics We would like to hear from those who are already constructing and maintaining *world machines* as well as those interested in their potential. Any empirical or discursive contribution, dealing with social, environmental, economic, cultural, spiritual, managerial or political aspects, will be relevant. People with backgrounds in HCI and Design may be joined by artists, technologists, political scientists and cultural theorists. Organisers’ interests include the work of Richard Buckminster Fuller, Brian Holmes, Jane Bennett, Félix Guattari and Maria Puig de la Bellacasa among others, and we would welcome further perspectives and reference points. In particular, we will be looking at ecological approaches in the broadest sense of design for linking up systems and inspiring awareness of our relations in the world. What to do now? Prospective participants should submit a position paper of up to 3 pages (using the SigCHI format here: http://www.sigchi.org/publications/chipubform/sigchi-paper-format-2016/view), which focuses on theoretical or practical aspects (or both) and demonstrates a willingness to engage with both political discussion and hands-on making. Please send your papers to [designshare...@gmail.com]. Important dates - Position papers due: May 20th - Results made known: May 31st - Camera ready papers for website: July 1st - Workshop: August 18th 2015, Aarhus Organisers *Ann Light, University of Sussex* *Jeffrey Bardzell, Indiana University* *Shaowen Bardzell, Indiana University* *Geoff Cox, Aarhus University* *Jonas Fritsch, IT University Copenhagen* *Lone Koefoed Hansen, Aarhus University* Please contact us at [designshare...@gmail.com] if you have any questions about the workshop and/or to send your submissions. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] worries about blacklists
I'm seeing something else that's detrimental for the independent-minded artist in the last couple of years. Alternative patterns of engagement (and not just art pop-stars) have thrived in the smaller arts organisation/centre, where there has been a socially engaged agenda - whether digital art, or other kinds. But I'm seeing that eroded through the latest cuts and not only because core funding has gone, but because the community groups and public sector orgs that - however instrumentally - benefited from the 'art' can no longer afford to employ its practitioners. With 'austerity', the more benign forms of support are withering, throwing people harder into the 'fame or die' binary choice. What is perhaps heartening is that other forms of making - less critical in their content, but not necessarily in their structure of engagement - are appearing through the DIY movements. My solace as someone interested in maintaining alternative spaces, radical thought and creative practice, is that young people are not all turning to commercial models of exchange. The commercial art market is highly visible and rapacious, but, in other pockets, energies are going somewhere where no commercial models exist at all. Ann (Not an artist. Someone who hangs around with artists?) From: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org [mailto:netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org] On Behalf Of Simon Biggs Sent: 07 February 2012 16:47 To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] worries about blacklists Art has always had a difficult relationship with power. Its potential for corruption is nothing new (whether in religion or ideologies of various kinds - including capitalism). However, it is has become much harder to avoid the crap. There was a time (in the 70's and 80's) when artist run centres and experimental creative practices could be undertaken beneath the radar of the art world mainstream (and out of sight of most of society). What has happened since then is the mainstreaming of this activity, especially in the UK where such artists have become household names and celebrities appearing on TV talk shows and such-like. The present generation of younger artists have taken this as a model for how the contemporary artist should engage the public and now aspire to being more like pop musicians. This is a pervasive pornification of art, as with the rest of our society, and its inescapability is that is especially depressing. best Simon On 7 Feb 2012, at 16:08, isabel brison wrote: I agree with your portrait of the artworld, but hasn't it always been a bit dodgy, ever since the days when art was almost exclusively religious propaganda? Not sure if the best way to deal with this is to drop the term "art" completely, or to just carry on doing it and perhaps ignore the artworld. After all, it's just an oversized commercial circuit. On 7 February 2012 15:18, Simon Biggs wrote: I can understand why some people don't want to call themselves artists, even when they are. Mike Kelly, a very successful artist, was quoted as saying that if he'd known art was going to become as corporatised as it has he would never have chosen to be an artist (this quote has been viral on Twitter since his recent death). I wonder what he would have chosen to be - or would he have made up something new? This is what we need... People consider what I do as art and assume I'm an artist. However, like Kelly and James, I became disillusioned with art and the art world a long time ago - not because I've been given a hard time (quite the contrary) but because I am disgusted at what seems to motivate many artists and the people who engage (and run) art professionally. It's become a laundry for dodgy money. Many artists, curators and cultural commentators are happy to join the circus. It is sad. Due to this I now think of what I do as the "practice once known as art". A programme I run, which is nominally in an art college (although for administrative reasons it is located in an architecture department) intentionally does not have the word art in its title (MSc by Research in Interdisciplinary Creative Practices). This allows us to work in ways that a course in our art department, with the expectation of producing artists to work in the art world, would struggle to consider, bound by a pre-determined framework of creative practice and engagement that is "art" as we now know it. Again, it's sad (hope my colleagues in art aren't reading this) to see students being primed as potential cannon-fodder for the art world. best Simon On 7 Feb 2012, at 14:29, isabel brison wrote: Hello, Just wondering why you choose not to call yourself an artist. Because the random stuff you post looks suspiciously like art to me... Isabel On 6 February 2012 15:04, James Morris wrote: Hi, I recently noticed that facebook warns people about links to my website being malicious and surbl.org
Re: [NetBehaviour] Shoot_them_in_front_of_their_families
Where is the 'like a comment' button for email correspondence? (Oh, and greatly appreciate the sentiments of the original, Dave.) On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Rob Myers wrote: > On 05/12/11 17:20, dave miller wrote: > > > > "A touch of irony in a PC world gone mad" they protested. > > Argumentum ad Clarksonum? > > - Rob. > ___ > 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] glorious
What a glorious lunchtime for me on the list, catching up with 'Park House' http://www.vimeo.com/17226732 and 'Friday morning at the surgery' http://edwardpicot.com/fridaymorning If you haven't followed these links, I can only suggest that you do. So much of life seems to be there in different ways on each. What a fabulous list. Thank you Simon, Edward ... and Michael. And Ruth and Marc. Happy BHWE. Ann -Original Message- From: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org [mailto:netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org] On Behalf Of Michael Szpakowski Sent: 29 May 2011 11:27 To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] a film called The Ship Hi Simon I like this, in parts. It has moments of intense beauty and it bursts with ideas, some of which seem to me to work more successfully than others. I've been looking at some of your other work - in particular 'Park House' http://www.vimeo.com/17226732 and 'Big Moth' http://www.vimeo.com/17198361 which seem to me to be quite incontrovertibly triumphant. I think what underpins this success for me is that these pieces are both looser & wilder in their construction and more intense in their content. In 'The Ship' the quasi-narrative form means less poetry per minute plus all the traps of unevenness (and to some extent cliche) that using performers brings. Frankly, I'm not sure how much is gained by the "narrative" thread - it is still fairly opaque and I wouldn't have guessed, without your gloss on the vimeo page, that it is "A film about an artist with a dilemma. A poetic take on split personality and narrative breakdown." What seems to me makes for more powerful and unified work in the other two is that the glue is your beautiful writing and (not to be underestimated) extraordinarily charismatic speaking voice, combined with a superb visual sense... they are *precisely* audio visual lyric poems... I can see that this could feel unsustainable over a greater length, like that of 'The Ship' - the lyric approach could begin to feel overcooked over more than about three minutes (although this never stopped Brakhage). I wonder whether the longer work needs more "scaffolding" - longer rehearsal periods, more precise scripting, even , dare I say, storyboarding ( although I can see the huge amount of work that went into it as it stands). warmest wishes michael --- On Thu, 5/26/11, Simon Mclennan wrote: > From: Simon Mclennan > Subject: [NetBehaviour] a film called The Ship > To: "NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity" > Date: Thursday, May 26, 2011, 5:42 PM > A film I made - I would be interested > in feedback from anyone on net > behaviour. Its about 6 minutes long and follows a sort of > narrative. > > http://www.vimeo.com/17199370 > > Incidentally this film was accidentally stolen by thieves > from my > flat twice during editing- two separate times on two > separate > computers- now there's a chance for you. > The first part is shot at Furtherfield Gallery, kindly lent > to me for > a couple of hours by Mark and Ruth some time ago. > > thanks, > > Simon > > ___ > 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
Re: [NetBehaviour] Men and Fighting, yet again...
Thank you Karens. You have found an elegant response... -Original Message- From: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org [mailto:netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org] On Behalf Of karen blissett Sent: 17 May 2011 22:01 To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity Subject: [NetBehaviour] Men and Fighting, yet again... ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] The Violence of the Scene
Interesting... I found it more juxtapositional than linear. Which worked for me. I was also caught by the idea of a game. But all my thoughts down that line were very dark. Leaving aside puzzles such as how many limousines you can hit with paint, I was left wondering what the game would be... "KETTLE! is seven hours of hell... negotiate with an alien force half man half horse... make sense of directions to keep you standing still... search the scene for resources to fight sub-zero temperatures... hang from a bridge over icy water in your attempt to escape... you won't even stop for a comfort break." Still angry about the erosion of civil liberties, I guess. Ann -Original Message- From: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org [mailto:netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org] On Behalf Of dave miller Sent: 10 January 2011 09:19 To: manik; NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] The Violence of the Scene Hi Manik Thanks for your advice - usual story - you're right I do tend to follow the same traditional story structure - start middle end - it's predictable and worth exploring new structures, though I wont be the first to try this. Doesn't keep your mind awake after consuming - that's something for me to think about thanks again dave On 9 January 2011 12:50, manik wrote: > ...ONLY ONE THING'S IMPORTANT-BEGINNING/THE END...YOU SHOW US IN YOUR COMIC > HOW THINGS DEVELOP AND THE END/IT'S ACTUALLY PATTERN OF ALL END OF THIS SORT > OF NARRATIVE/...IT'S USUAL STORY AND THERE'S NOTHING TO KEEP OUR MIND AWAKE > AFTER CONSUMING...IT COULD BE /FOR EXAMPLE...I JUST SEE THAT PICTURE ON MY > MIND- ONE PERSON GIVE BANANA TO OTHER AND SAY:,,THANKS IN > ADVICE!,,...MR.MILLER...I LIKE SOME OF YOUR DRAWN STORIES AND I HOPE YOU > WILL DO LIKE MANIK SAID IT'S RIGHT TO DO...THAT'S OUR > ADVICE...MANIK...JANUARY...2011... > - Original Message - > From: "dave miller" > To: "NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity" > > Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 9:37 PM > Subject: [NetBehaviour] The Violence of the Scene > > > http://davemiller.org/drawings/riots/violence_of_the_scene.png > > This drawing is based on and inspired by some recent news articles, > and is mostly factual, though some bits I've made up. It's not really > finished yet, but would really appreciate feedback, and suggestions on > what I could do with it - any ideas on where I could show it/ send it? > Is the format any good, or better as a book, or a screen based thing. > I also wondered if this could make a decent computer game? > > many thanks, dave > ___ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > __ NOD32 4979 (20100328) Information __ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.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 list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] From today...
I am struck by the description of the loose movement you propose, Mark, and point at a new project that now has some of the great and good worldwide signed up to it, though for a different area. They are working on 'The Rules', to create some ethical guidelines in the field of technology development. I link it here because notions such as the 'ad hoc committee' and their version control system might or might not inspire further thought on the structure for the writing of the many-festo. https://edocs.uis.edu/kmill2/www/TheRules/ -Original Message- From: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org [mailto:netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org] On Behalf Of marc garrett Sent: 16 October 2010 13:00 To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] From today... Hi all, I have been reading, catching up on the discussions about 'authenticity of art in a neoliberalist world'. One thing that kept coming back to me when reading all of the great concepts, cross-thinking and shared explorations around the subject, was - how the hell does this all translate into an everyday practice? It seems to me that as an overall, blanket of rules or ethical implementation on arts culture as whole it really would not work; because people need their own space to experiment and discover their own creative noise or voices. To suggest everyone becomes the same or reads from the same song sheet, would be a mono-cultural and self-defeating experience; very likely stunting individual agency on art-making and its local, contextual terms. So, there needs to be a contemporary body of people or movement engaged in dealing with these actual questions, specifically. A group who is willing to organize a shared (agreed) 'manyfesto' for a collective practice; for producing alternative art contexts challenging through its practice the destructive nature of neoliberalism and its ideals, and influences on our cultures world wide. So far, there have been small groups and individuals who have done this, but as an art movement specifically re-evaluating and challenging art culture and the neoliberalist agenda as its main focus; through ethical reasonings in order to redefine the mannerisms of art behaviour, with guidelines for others to discuss, debate, use themselves, as a shared create commons, is another thing. The reason I propose 'manyfesto', instead of manifesto is because, we need to be 'consciously' aware in our shared decisions in challenging some of the older more singular modernist (even post-modernist) languages bit by bit. If we take the 'i' out of manifesto, it feels actually less 'masculine' originally (from Italian, from manifestare to manifest). "...maybe we should jointly define the goals ... write some sort of many-festo as marc garrett would call it" collaboratively user designed, Armin Medosch. http://www.thenextlayer.org/node/18#comment-7 Obviously goals would be agreed by consensus, but a manyfesto would be worked out in order to bring into fruition a focus and direction (even rules, yes rules) making it easier for individuals and groups to define their own situations, circumstances and differences, actively incorporating process as 'critiques' as 'real' palette, material or 'thoughtful manure' and nourishment in making such works. Such works need not be technologically informed or based, but more exist in recognition or through acknowledgement of the guidelines proposed, shared via the movements own deliberation. The movement would of course need its own doubters, critical thinkers, theorists to act as the consciousness of the collective/movement, but at the same time there needs to be a consensus and agreement that the work introduced into the world is from an activist position, and getting it out there is important and urgent, for all concerned. Even though I am equally enthralled in theorizing about various ideas, much of this excellent, independent, intelligent and inventive/imaginative discourse can work towards informing a pro-active art practice. Wishing all well. marc > Think we're pretty much in agreement here! > > Thanks for the discussion, Alan > > > On Thu, 14 Oct 2010, Curt Cloninger wrote: > >>> The best art teaching I've seen (and hopefully articipated in) was Lutz >>> Presser's in Tasmania, and David Askevold's at Nova Scotia; in both cases, >>> they/we assumed the students were already artists/agents, and treated them >>> as such. So making art became a cooperative effort - sharing techniques >>> when needed, but not imposing anything. And believe it or not, everyone >>> rose to the occasion. It's as if nothing was taught at all but everything >>> was learned. It was astonishing. >> This sits well with me as a pedagogical practice. It makes me think >> of Ranciere's "Ignorant Schoolmaster." If I am the teacher/explicator >> with the correct answer, then in order to liberate my students with >> my wisdom and knowledge, I first have to convince
Re: [NetBehaviour] Invitation to join me
Hi All, Having just spent a day with Ruth (among others) and thoroughly enjoyed talking with her about the Karens, I've decided to rise to Marc's challenge of explaining on the list what the development means to me. I often quietly follow links and engage with the postings made here, but most of the time I am either interested or not, delighted or not. Etc. When Karen made her statement about opening up her email address, my first reaction was distress. And, being an ironic sort of a being, my next reaction was sheer pleasure that something had shocked me so much. And then curiosity set in as to why. My thoughts ran 'But I won't know if it's her in that discussion thread'... 'oh my god, I won't know if it's her any time that she puts a comment on another posting'... oh lord, I won't know when the adventure is over - if ever - and I can go back to assuming she's a single being again'. Then my thoughts ran 'But why should I care that a person whom I've never had the pleasure of meeting is one person or a cavalcade?' ... 'What does this say about my interest in identity? (I've been writing papers about the effects of using digital technologies on identity lately. It's become a bit of a habit.) In consistency? In using the NetBehaviour list? Is there something about mappings and "truth" that I need to go away and think about?' Clearly there is. I now greet all postings by Karen as potentially explosive: postings to be opened with care. I now pore over them to see if I can detect the author. I now berate myself for ignoring wisdoms such as 'the author is dead', for ignoring these statements emotionally if not intellectually. And I have avidly followed the discussion of whether the list will implode and why it shouldn't. (I should have thought that the very existence of both the stance and the discussion around it is the self-evident answer.) It's like a soap opera. I haven't had so much fun with a list for ages. I wasn't around to see/feel the effect of the artists who mobbed former lists. My responses are all very naïve. I am grateful for the intervention and excited. But I think its time is almost up and, looking at the shift in topics as I run down the waiting email, I am already commenting on a phenomenon that is shifting shape, over, of its moment. Thank you Karen. I want to know who you trust so that I know how to trust. Ann -Original Message- From: netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org [mailto:netbehaviour-boun...@netbehaviour.org] On Behalf Of marc garrett Sent: 12 July 2010 12:23 To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Invitation to join me Hi mez & all, This is a very interesting dialogue. One thing that intrigues me is, whether Karen's contributions to this list (no matter how insightful) will be considered as spam anyway - useful, valid or authentic in the eyes of Netbehaviour list users themselves. Another interesting aspect is that it is bringing up a history of a past which was strongly based around net art at the time. There are a few on Netbehaviour who remember these times, such as myself. But it would be also good to hear from those who were not part of this history, not net art, Sydicate and the NN/Integer activities, their own ideas around the subject, as well what they feel is happening currently here on this list, and what it means to them. I remember arguing with the NN, Integer and other characters on Syndicate and other lists. But, in the end it felt as though whatever one said, it did not matter anyway. I'm not sure if this was a deliberate aim of the project. >the lifespan of such forums + how ppl perceive>deal with the waxing + waning of them is, overall, fascinating. I think there are many factors regarding the survival of a list or an art group, or project - and it can be things happening behind the scenes. Such as, whether the 'originators/dedicated' team moved onto other careers and experienced the call of personal situations changing their priorities, such as spending more time in bringing their families etc, which are natural changes in life. Everything has a duration and will not last forever. As long as there are artists who wish to be part of something that sees them as part of a community, and feel that such a thing is worth sharing time and ideas on, then we will actively continue to be a part of that ourselves. wishing you well. marc > hi again helen, all.d > > like any avenue designed 2 act as a public forum, there's many reasons y lists such as Syndicate evolve>progress>+ [ultimately] decline. in my opinion, Syndicate progressed thru all 3 stages + had its fair share of interesting content, engaging dialogue, empty arguments, considered replies, technical hitches, experimental form[attings], standard list displays, passionate users, power-egofied abusers, moderator/admin hassles, pr guff, power plays, extended debates, censorship wrangling etc. i [personally]
