on Mon, 27 Mar 2000 22:46:21 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Nettime-bold] RE: [Eat-raw] near-sitedness (fwd)

We apologize for cross-posting this response, but crush debates (and t
whid's comment) did begin on nettime so we figured they should be in on
the discussion.

On Sat, 25 Mar 2000, Steve Dietz wrote:

> I like TWhid's DJ analogy (in
> a different discussion) about how roles are breaking down to some
> extent--at least that was my interpretation.
lucky we subscribed to this list ..... when we read T whid's comment about
the DJ paradigm... our first reaction was ...hmm so we start by giving the
curators all the credit ... then we get the curators and theorists cooking
the books ...writing up florid explanations and interpretations of work
that has yet to be created by any artist they can get to make it?  
That seems to some of us, here at, what is already
happening with the worst of DJ culture.
Hire a band to come up with a set of beats and bass lines you can mix with
and intersperse a few popular hits.  Put it on vinyl, and boom you got a
new sound...and you don't even have to be that good with the mixer or all 
that informed about the records your spinning...just match the beats.

Mind you, we don't want to sound too elitist we just think too often the
curator(even if he's a good curator) is overly tainted by institutional

> Because of some of the discussion around this as well as the
> Crash/"Crush" symposium, I have posted the talk I gave at Berkeley
> that speculates further about the "network museum"--Signal or Noise?
> at

Thanks for posting was good to read the orginal text.  We were
worried when we saw your post that we might have to retract some of our
fuzzy memories, but the text reads pretty much as we heard it.  And let us
say that despite all of our nettime "mischief" we actually enjoyed your
talk, but felt that in the context of the larger discussions your less
institutional mindset became a bit swamped.  

In response, let us just say that it seems in all the discussions we've
read here (from the presentation at berkeley to the discussion of whether
to provide server space) you gravitate toward what our pal Jesse Ventura
likes to call the common-sense center.  We aren't inclined to think that
that center is all that common sense...or all that centered.  

While you obviously do understand the issues of networking and
computability, the premise of your talk was clearly "How can we
institutionalize the internet?"...something that networked art or highly
"computable" work resists in it's very nature. In the actual talk, the
sense of urgency seemed greater than in the text, perhaps as a
result of the informal Q&A period, but it's still there in the text.

To quote Hans Haacke from the NYTimes magazine:

"There's been a tremendous increase in the number of museum
visitors, but that has to do with entertainment value. I don't think it
has to do with a deeper interest in art."  

When we took our digs at Art Entertainment Network, it was this very point
that concerned us.  If the museum is going to begin pandering to
entertainment value for audiences; What venues will be left for
challenging work? So why do you really want to figure out how to make a
network museum?

To try to wrap this all up in a nice neat little bow.....Signal
or Noise? suggests to us an excessively accomodating diplomacy with the
institution.... a desire to do the right thing while hamstrung by a need
to support institutional interests....and these interests...we fear...may
not best support the community or the art.

And as for the DJ paradigm issue...If curators become the focus
for presenting anonymous artists (that you can dance to) what happens to
the push and pull between the artist and the institution?...(something we
obviously consider  to be a most valuable conflict...or at least one we
wouldn't want to give up in favor of dialogue entirely regulated by the
DJ/curator.) We, as curators ourselves, wouldn't say this but we've heard
others suggest "curators are just frustrated artists anyway."  Well then,
no wonder they wanna be the DJs of the art world.

As for mischief.....just call us Puck.  After this post our board of
directors may not let us use curator anymore.

Nettime-bold mailing list