[NetBehaviour] erhu & Comments on Alan Sondheim's postings on this list...

Mon Jan 8 02:59:06 CET 2007

Hi Geert,

I made an effort to at least explore in my own way Alan's work, but I 
have not seen any critical conceptions from your own perspective yet, 
other than 'oh, I do not understand it...'

There is just as much non-understanding with your text, as you propose 
there is in Alan's.

So where are you really coming from and are you going to offer some 
deeper insight regarding your own ideas, either on his work or what you 
think may work better in some way?

marc

> Thanks for this. We still have absolutely no idea what these concepts  
> (the avatar, our digitalization) will mean for us.
>
> Geert
>
> On 8/01/2007, at 12:49 AM, Michael Szpakowski wrote:
>
>> Hi
>> not particularly an answer to you Geert, you just
>> happened to post the latest in this thread, but a very
>> concrete response to all those who've expressed
>> puzzlement about Alan Sondheim's work.
>> Check out the video we posted on dvblog yesterday:
>>
>> http://dvblog.org/?p=53
>>
>> it's from a series of dance/movement videos Alan's
>> been making with Foofwa d'Imobilite & Maud Liardon.
>> I think to watch it unmoved one would have to have a
>> heart of stone :)   - surely there's no *theory*
>> required, no *difficulty* to be overcome to be touched
>> in some way by this.
>>
>> If this series of videos were *all* he'd ever made it
>> would establish him as a serious force but he has made
>> an astonishing *amount* & *variety* of work over a
>> long period of time.
>> I certainly don't like *everything* he makes ( even
>> assuming that the mark of what determines whether an
>> artist is worthwhile is whether one simply "likes"
>> what they do) & I'm absolutely sure that I have
>> certain big philosophical disagreements with him, but
>> I'm constantly astonished by his sheer range, not just
>> in terms of video work but the work he does with
>> language. I also like, in the era of the one liner as
>> art, very much the way this work refuses glibness or
>> cosying up to the watcher/reader. I think if we are
>> *serious* as critics or fellow artists, or both, we
>> have a certain responsibility to attempt some
>> *serious* engagement with work before we even
>> *consider* dismissing it, though my bet is *this* work
>> will be even more alive & kicking just as hard in a
>> century...
>> best
>> michael
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- Geert Dekkers <geert at nznl.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps. But as you might know, I included Alan in
>>> "Digital Bodies",
>>> a show I did with Antoinette Reuten in her gallery
>>> in Amsterdam. I
>>> had some trouble convincing her Alan was really
>>> "doing art" (I spend
>>> most of my days wondering what that means). So I do
>>> see a consumerist
>>> stance as a real obstacle to the appreciation of
>>> art. People tend to
>>> want a finished product, and Alan jsut isn't giving
>>> this kind of thing.
>>>
>>> Geert
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7-jan-2007, at 19:52, marc wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Geert,
>>>>
>>>>> Really?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think that perhaps there those who are more
>>>
>>> interested in
>>>
>>>> collecting specific information & promoting their
>>>
>>> projects, rather
>>>
>>>> the other noise that happens on lists. I think
>>>
>>> that our list is
>>>
>>>> actually pretty mellow really...
>>>>
>>>>> Alan might make art, but we will never know
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I remember Heath Bunting stuck some text on a
>>>
>>> billboard about 15
>>>
>>>> yearsa go now saying 'most art means nothing to
>>>
>>> most people'...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> marc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Really?
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, I was just reconsidering a line
>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Alan might make art, but we will never know
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> at first I wrote
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan might NOT make art, but we will never know
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that's better
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Geert
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/01/2007, at 6:35 PM, marc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Geert,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Incidentally, I'm quite amazed that
>>>>>>
>>> leon at c6.org
>>>
>>>>>> <mailto:leon at c6.org>'s little bout of
>>>>>
>>> indigestion lead to a
>>>
>>>>>> thread  this size)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, he must of been affected in some way
>>>>>
>>> because he has
>>>
>>>>>> unsubscribed now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> marc
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to add this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Alan might make art, but we will never know
>>>>>>> - Alans work isn't a series of  "works"
>>>>>>> - Alan makes raw materials, not consumer items
>>>>>>> - We are smart enough to put it all together
>>>>>>
>>> again
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Incidentally, I'm quite amazed that
>>>>>>
>>> leon at c6.org
>>>
>>>>>>> <mailto:leon at c6.org>'s little bout of
>>>>>>
>>> indigestion lead to a
>>>
>>>>>>> thread  this size)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Geert Dekkers---------------------------
>>>>>>> http://nznl.com | http://nznl.org |
>>>>>>
>>> http://nznl.net
>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/01/2007, at 4:12 PM, marc wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Comments on Alan Sondheim's postings on this
>>>>>>>
>>> list...
>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I perceive Alan's post-works, as an going work
>>>>>>>
>>> in 'process',
>>>
>>>>>>>> expounding the very nature of process itself,
>>>>>>>
>>> as a continualy
>>>
>>>>>>>> networked , creative act of
>>>>>>>
>>> mutated-consciousness, in a
>>>
>>>>>>>> literal  form. It involves the material itself
>>>>>>>
>>> to be
>>>
>>>>>>>> distributed, when  visiting various lists as
>>>>>>>
>>> part of a
>>>
>>>>>>>> performative operation, this  is part of its
>>>>>>>
>>> context. Viewing
>>>
>>>>>>>> the function and behaviour of how  the work is
>>>>>>>
>>> solicited can
>>>
>>>>>>>> also bring about a closer understanding  of
>>>>>>>
>>> what the work is
>>>
>>>>>>>> doing, in essence, as we receive it daily.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Its value as art, or even an act of creativity
>>>>>>>
>>> rests in
>>>
>>>>>>>> appreciating that some of the work is like
>>>>>>>
>>> semiotic code,
>>>
>>>>>>>> using  the language of tools, sofware and the
>>>>>>>
>>> computer, to
>>>
>>>>>>>> build the  content, mixed with more
>>>>>>>
>>> traditional wordings
>>>
>>>>>>>> alongside other  peices of texts. His work is
>>>>>>>
>>> noise, not non-
>>>
>>>>>>>> thinking noise but a  noise that expounds, or
>>>>>>>
>>> translates the
>>>
>>>>>>>> result of Alan's poetic  imagination, melding
>>>>>>>
>>> with code. It is
>>>
>>>>>>>> not trying to communicate  as a linear message
>>>>>>>
>>> would do, or as
>>>
>>>>>>>> a singular art object like an  image. It is
>>>>>>>
>>> exploiting the
>>>
>>>>>>>> channels of communication, leaking  into these
>>>>>>>
>>> platforms like a
>>>
>>>>>>>> virus would, yet directed by his
>>>>>>>
>>> consciousness.
>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, Alan's behaviour in releasing his material
>>>>>>>
>>> around the
>>>
>>>>>>>> Internet, could be considered as acting much
>>>>>>>
>>> like a parasite.
>>>
>>>>>>>> I  do not mean this in a negative way, but
>>>>>>>
>>> more that 'this is
>>>
>>>>>>>> what  is done', it becomes, or is part of the
>>>>>>>
>>> meaning of the
>>>
>>>>>>>> work  itself - the function is component of
>>>>>>>
>>> its larger meaning,
>>>
>>>>>>>> if  there is such a thing as meaning. The
>>>>>>>
>>> intention of his
>>>
>>>>>>>> actions,  also becomes part of the work which
>>>>>>>
>>> we may not be so
>>>
>>>>>>>> clear about  which is probably what causes the
>>>>>>>
>>> most troubles,
>>>
>>>>>>>> when people ask  questions - like why is there
>>>>>>>
>>> so much of it?
>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Alan and the Internet cannot be split. His
>>>>>>>
>>> work spans its
>>>
>>>>>>>> history, and as much as it has dominated his
>>>>>>>
>>> psyche, he has
>>>
>>>>>>>> also  dominated the Internet's psyche; and
>>>>>>>
>>> perhaps also
>>>
>>>>>>>> infiltrated our  own minds just by being here
>>>>>>>
>>> or there, as we
>>>
>>>>>>>> tour many of the  lists ourselves. We are part
>>>>>>>
>>> of the work,
>>>
>>>>>>>> whether we be passively  or engaged with it,
>>>>>>>
>>> it is now part of
>>>
>>>>>>>> our online presence with  us, like a virus,
>>>>>>>
>>> hacking into the
>>>
>>>>>>>> listserv, structures and sub- structures, and
>>>>>>>
>>> into our own
>>>
>>>>>>>> contexts. We become segments of the
>>>>>>>
>>> structures that he sets
>>>
>>>>>>>> his work up to infiltrate.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What makes it a little more confusing is that
>>>>>>>
>>> we know that
>>>
>>>>>>>> Alan  harbours real emotions, ideas and also
>>>>>>>
>>> gets involved in
>>>
>>>>>>>> discourse  regarding various subject matters
>>>>>>>
>>> on lists as well
>>>
>>>>>>>> as  distributing his work on them at the same
>>>>>>>
>>> time. But, he
>>>
>>>>>>>> speaks  differently from his
>>>>>>>
>>> posts/conversations because that
>>>
>>>>>>>> is  dialogue, and this should be acknowledged.
>>>>>>>
>>> I do not feel
>>>
>>>>>>>> that  Alan is trying to impose any type of
>>>>>>>
>>> mesaage to dominate
>>>
>>>>>>>> us, or  even try and impose a claiming of
>>>>>>>
>>> territory. Much of
>>>
>>>>>>>> his work  just is, it is being, it is there
>>>>>>>
>>> and bleeds into
>>>
>>>>>>>> its  surroundings like steam into a room.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am definately not sure if Alan would agree
>>>>>>>
>>> with any of this,
>>>
>>>>>>>> but if he is not going to respond and discuss
>>>>>>>
>>> about his work,
>>>
>>>>>>>> it  is not a problem. Because going through
>>>>>>>
>>> the motions of
>>>
>>>>>>>> exploring  these texts and their purposes etc,
>>>>>>>
>>> has been
>>>
>>>>>>>> rewarding itself and  opened different
>>>>>>>
>>> possibilities, and
>>>
>>>>>>>> nuances, and also helps one  to understand or
>>>>>>>
>>> at least
>>>
>>>>>>>> appreciate (a little) work by other  artists
>>>>>>>
>>> such as MEZ and
>>>
>>>>>>>> FLorian Cramer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> marc :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --------------------------
>>>>>>>> (c)human interaction in a broad sense of any
>>>>>>>
>>> cultural
>>>
>>>>>>>> appropriation and use: in 1968, in his book
>>>>>>>
>>> Algol, Noël Arnaud
>>>
>>>>>>>> made a first attempt at using a programming
>>>>>>>
>>> language as
>>>
>>>>>>>> material  for poetic compositions. Later on,
>>>>>>>
>>> the hacker slang
>>>
>>>>>>>> “leet”, Alan  Sondheim’s “Codework” and Marie
>>>>>>>
>>> Anne Breeze’s
>>>
>>>>>>>> “Mezangelle” all  apply code as a material
>>>>>>>
>>> that can be
>>>
>>>>>>>> recomposed to create a  particular form of
>>>>>>>
>>> written language
>>>
>>>>>>>> that is recognised as  “computer talk”,
>>>>>>>
>>> imitating command lines
>>>
>>>>>>>> but readable as some  sort of English. In the
>>>>>>>
>>> same way as James
>>>
>>>>>>>> Joyce experienced with  language in
>>>>>>>
>>> “Finnegan’s Wake”, these
>>>
>>>>>>>> new forms of writing create  their own
>>>>>>>
>>> semantics and a meta-
>>>
>>>>>>>> language with social and cultural
>>>>>>>
>>> implications. On the other
>>>
>>>>>>>> hand, the work of George Pérec, Jodi,  the
>>>>>>>
>>> I/O/D group,
>>>
>>>>>>>> Netochka Nezvanova or Adrian Ward’s Auto-
>>>>>>>
>>> Illustrator introduce
>>>
>>>>>>>> what Cramer defines as “software dystopia”,
>>>>>>>
>>> the reflection on
>>>
>>>>>>>> software not as a subservient, domesticated
>>>>>>>
>>> assistant but as a
>>>
>>>>>>>> fearful, obscure and incomprehensible golem
>>>>>>>
>>> that may revolt
>>>
>>>>>>>> against us at any time or take its own
>>>>>>>
>>> decisions.  Under this
>>>
>>>>>>>> light, software becomes much more than just a
>>>>>>>
>>> tool, it  is part
>>>
>>>>>>>> of a broader concept of culture.
>>>>>>>> Pau Waelder - Words Made Flesh (2005) -
>>>>>>>
>>> Florian Cramer. http://
>>>
>>>>>>>> www.furtherfield.org/displayreview.php?
>>>>>>>> From=Index&review_id=167
>>>>>>>
>>> <http://www.furtherfield.org/
>>>
>>>>>>>> displayreview.php? From=Index&review_id=167>
>>>>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>>>>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>>>>>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>>>>>>> <mailto:NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
>>>>>>>>
>>>
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>>
>>>>>>> -- ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>>>>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>>>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>>>>>
>>>
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>>>>
>>>
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>>>
>>>
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>>
>>> met vriendelijk groet,
>>>
>>> Geert Dekkers
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> -- 
>>
>>>
>>> -------------------
>>> Geert Dekkers Web Studio | 2e Keucheniusstraat 8HS
>>> 1051VR Amsterdam |
>>> +31(0)627224301 | http://nznl.net
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> -- 
>>
>>>
>>> -------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>>
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>