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

Mon Jan 8 08:25:54 CET 2007

On 8/01/2007, at 2:59 AM, marc wrote:

> 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?

Where I'm coming from? If you mean am I a supporter of Alans work?   
Absolutely! The deeper insight will have to wait, I'm afraid.

Geert

>
> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour