|Terrence J Kosick on Mon, 24 Apr 2000 21:11:07 +0200 (CEST)|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|[Nettime-bold] Re: [eu-gene] Artwork's value|
No it is just the opposite. I want it! Not to necessarily replace the cultural system but to develop a para cultural model.
It troubles me that artists don't commercially locate their work due to thieir fears of ofending or seemingly to be be-throwning a academic/institutional cultural system. I belive the institutions have resisted the commercial model not only because they distain utility but because they might belive that it potentialy puts them out of work and the idea of cultural control or stearing commitee is undermined. Their fear, I belive, is that their system would not, as far as their preconception of a consumer culture art actualization being outside thier symbolic rewards system, benifite from such artistic/cultural self relience. I mean you don't have to pump out kitch. You can make art/culture strong in the sence that people can think for them selves and bon't need to be treated like babies by being spoon fed culture. It is not only a matter of supply and demand it is what it takes to be honest about the message you want to bring across while competing interests of investors and management and artistic pardigms threaten your cultural intent. Do artists care about intent? Do they just want to feed the institutional model and recieve symblic rewards and, not to be demeaning, cultural welfare?
Think about that seriously. As an artist I do think about it. Perhaps
such ideas lead people to belive the independant, the outsider is saying
"I am no fool and I have a mind of my own and a will to boot", but will
they also be fearing "while I distain the system I cut my own throat and
risk living in oblivion. Maybe institutions is a form of oblivion for cutural
engagement of current artistc forms. A place where the interactive form
dies as an artifact. I think other aritists could benifite by applying
some independant actualization while ceding to traditional or formal cultural
models of consumption. A cultural bridge. If others complain you just have
to reply "Hey I don't need to kiss your ass, I have a right to survive
and be self empowered". After all North America is called a consumer culture.
So be it.
( Beware; opensource can also shut down free enterprize as big companies
such as microsoft does just that. They create opensource to kill any competition
that won't let them buy them out. Opensours is visa versa a way to regulate
monopoly controll of information. It may be good business but it is just
explotation, greed and wasteful packaging)
Ade Ward wrote:
Terrence J Kosick...
> consumer society
> work is rewarded
> utilities of pleasure
> return on investment
> consuming art
You talk of consumerism and art perhaps as though this troubles you. It
troubles me. I did not mean to imply that because such work would be located
in the realm of entertainment, that it would be commercially located.
Rampant consumerism is a wealthy train to hijack, with plenty of passengers,
and the Internet is, as you say, the perfect transportation network to do
this on. Look to the Open Source model for software development inspiration.
Information should be free - can we not include knowledge and enlightenment
in that package too?
eu-gene mailing list