[NetBehaviour] The Jeremy Bailey Interview on the Netbehaviour.

[marc garrett]

Hi Jeremy & all Netbehaviourists,

A warm thank you to Jeremy, for finding the time to take part in the 
interview on the Netbehaviour list.

I hope those who specifically joined the list for the discussion, as 
well as regular subscribers, enjoyed the interview as it progressed.

For those who still wish to visit The Jeremy Bailey Show:
It will be at HTTP until 19 Oct 2008
http://www.http.uk.net

I have been away in Sheffield this last week, but have heard there has 
been plenty of visitors since the opening. We will be putting photos up 
of the opening night this week coming.

There will also be a cleaned up version of the interview with Jeremy, 
available on furtherfield.org site by the end of this week, with new 
reviews.


 >thanks to all those that came out on friday,
 >especially to all the HTTP staff, I really
 >enjoyed my time in London and met so many nice
 >people I might have to consider returning
 >sometime very soon,

Thank you for the kind words Jeremy & (of course) for your patience - 
especially in regard to whenever a glitch occurred with tech - testing 
our resolve ;-)

wishing all well.

marc

> Hi Marc,
>
> Friday's performance went really really well,
> great turn out and amazing audience, who of course were integral to
> the performance,
>
> for those who are just checking in, I wrote a new piece of software
> called WarMail that lets groups of people work together on an email
> using an asteroids like interface. The premise being that in the
> future we will colonize space but will be spread so thin that everyone
> will  have to have a certain military readiness to defend our
> intergalactic borders. We'll also want to keep in touch with loved
> ones, WarMail, represents a multitasking approach to this problem. It
> provides both military training and communication with loved ones. As
> an added bonus it requires you to do so in public with a group of
> strangers (collaborative team building!). On friday we composed an
> email to my mother using glowsticks and our voices to navigate a ship
> and attack clusters of letters that represented an alien army. The
> movement of our glowsticks rotated the ship, and our voices(in song)
> created thrust.
>
> Together we fired at letters to compose a message which, after much
> effort, read, "goddd". I originally wanted something longer but the
> group was a bit disorganized and had trouble working together. We
> started things off by accidentally hitting the letter 'g', this is why
> we chose to start with god. It then took so long to get 'o' that I
> decided one word would be sufficient. Hitting the final letter 'd'
> resulted in much excitement and cheering which caused an accidental
> misfire and then laughter that triggered a second misfire, and thus
> the misspelling.  I spoke to my mother today and she had received the
> email but was slightly confused and worried that I she had upset me
> somehow.
>
> The most interesting part of Friday's performance were the moments
> when individuals decided to act independently of the group. For
> instance at one point a lone clapper attempted to fire at the final
> 'd' as it was drifting past our sights. I was also surprised by the
> willingness of the audience to sing, in fact it seemed they enjoyed it
> a little too much, often over thrusting the ship past our target. They
> also sometimes sang overtop of my voice, missing crucial instructions.
>
> Overall it was really exciting for me to mesh my performance with a
> live audience and I learned a lot about how groups of drunken
> strangers interact with each other,
>
> for those interested, documentation of the performance (the actual
> screen capture video of the audience in the interface) can be seen at
> the gallery now. It's also secretly posted online, but I think I'll
> wait for the exhibition to expire before I publish the link.
>
> thanks to all those that came out on friday, especially to all the
> HTTP staff, I really enjoyed my time in London and met so many nice
> people I might have to consider returning sometime very soon,
>
> Jeremy
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:42 AM, marc garrett
> <marc.garrett at furtherfield.org> wrote:
>   
>> Hi Jeremy,
>>
>> Before we wind this interview down - could you explain to those who were not
>> present at the HTTP Gallery for your performance, what you did and how you
>> feel it went, along with any other observations that you feel worth
>> mentioning?
>>
>> marc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hey Marc,
>> sorry for taking so long to reply, last minute business in prep for friday,
>>
>>     
>>> Much of your work involves a GUI (Graphic User Interface). User
>>> interfaces as we generally experience them, provide components for users
>>> to communicate with a computer. The interface defines the boundary
>>> between software, the hardware device or a user. What is interesting is
>>> that you are actually within the interface as well, performing in these
>>> environments.
>>>
>>> Could you talk about the relationship between you as the software
>>> developer and the software itself, within your performances?
>>>       
>> It has always been very important for my image or the image of the
>> user to be a part of the interfaces I create. My reason has a lot to
>> do with my historical/theoretical approach. I have been exposed to a
>> lot of 1970s performance video and have developed a very keen interest
>> in the theoretical context of the period. Specifically, for what is
>> termed "Performance for the Camera". A popular term, but for those
>> unfamiliar, it specifically refers to a state as described in Rosalind
>> Krauss' essay, The Aesthetic of Narcissism, in which the artist
>> becomes part of a feedback loop between his or herself and the
>> electronics of the camera. This creates a unique self awareness
>> (reflectivity) that was not present prior to this time. The artist
>> literally watches themselves (on a close circuit monitor) creating the
>> work and responding simultaneously. To put this in perspective, take
>> one step back in time and performances were created for live audiences
>> (less feedback), take one step forward and we land in the digital era
>> and our camera from the 1970s has become a computer (hyper feedback).
>> I like to call what I do Performance for the Computer, and it
>> necessitates a re-evaluation of some of the psychological paramters
>> that artists were working with in the 1970s. There's a lot of shit
>> that happened in between then and now, that's where things get very
>> interesting IMO.
>>
>> ok, so with this in mind I can answer your question regarding my role
>> as a software developer, I'll have to tell a fable. It's going to be
>> long and poorly written and will repeat some of the above in crude
>> language, I'm tired...
>>
>> So, it's 1970, you're a performance artist, you've been doing
>> performances all over the place, in studios, outdoors, in concert
>> halls, the back of police vans... you've got little to no
>> documentation... probably some photos, maybe some writing, maybe
>> you're lucky enough to have some super 8 footage and some halfway
>> decent audio recordings. Consumer video comes along, The Porta Pack,
>> wow, this is great! cheap tape, sync audio, live previewing. But shit,
>> the thing is prone to unspooling when jostled, and to see what things
>> look at you need a hefty monitor. Fuck, maybe it's not so great... but
>> wait, you've got a studio, you could setup there and do all kinds of
>> performances, watch them, adjust, finally get an idea of what/who
>> you're working with. Ok, this is strange, if I turn the monitor toward
>> me I can watch myself as if I were the audience. Hmmm... there's
>> something different about this. I can't go on doing the same kinds of
>> performances. Nope. this is brand new. Yay! Video Art is born!!
>>
>> Ok, so fast forward a decade. It's 1980something, you're an upcoming
>> electronic artist using computers to make amazing things happen in
>> REALTIME! You have one problem, how do you document and show people
>> what you're working on. Oh, of course!!! you record it on a Handycam!
>> You pass the tapes around, copy them, they get copied, you end up
>> representing your country at the Venice Biennial. Happy endings are
>> great! Strange thing is you don't ever notice any of the things your
>> friends noticed in the 70s, nope, you go right on making documentation
>> on video without thinking twice about yourself as a performer. "I'm
>> not a performer, I'm a programmer, my MACHINE is the artist, HE's
>> performing, ask HIM what HE thinks! this shows you what he does,
>> that's all"... Ok... I'll do that, but don't you think your macho
>> friend is making you look a little meek on tape? "nope, that's the way
>> I like it, I've put all of me into that thing, don't pay attention to
>> me". Ok, I'm going to just say it dude, your machine's got a bigger
>> dick than you and you're a bit of a chauvinist for masculinizing it
>> the way you are. I think you're using your machine in all kinds of
>> weird ways and I think you should think about what it means to give
>> yourself over to an object like that. I mean, seriously dude.
>>
>> Ok, let's fast forward 2 more decades.
>> This thing called the internet is popular, everyone has a computer,
>> realtime video processing is on every cpu, we video conference with
>> friends and family, augmented reality is a burgeoning field. Ya, we
>> can do anything with our data selves, artists and non artists alike.
>> Yes! I'm going to share this video of me rotating photos and tossing
>> them around using just my flailing arms to everyone in the entire
>> world!! I look like an idiot? why do you keep looking at me??! Are you
>> gay? yah. that's it, I'm gay. Fuck dude, would you realize what the
>> fuck it means to warp your face with that ichat filter? PLEASE!
>>
>> end of story, guy is increasingly clueless, distractions are
>> increasingly numerous.
>>
>> so, I've used some colloquial language here to try and get a point
>> across in impossibly high contrast. I play the role of the software
>> developer in performances because I insist on forcing the
>> acknowledgment  that the computer is a site for performance and
>> reflectivity. I am trying to use a laptop in 1975. I'm trying to
>> understand what that means I guess.
>>
>> I hope this response doesn't offend anyone. I was just trying to have
>> some fun with it,
>>
>> see you all on friday?
>>
>> jeremy
>>
>>
>> I started this trajectory near the end of my undergraduate studies and
>> built my graduate research around this idea.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:26 AM, marc garrett
>> <marc.garrett at furtherfield.org> wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi Jeremy,
>>>
>>> Thank you for taking part in the dialogue so far, it has been both
>>> enjoyable and illuminating.
>>>
>>> Much of your work involves a GUI (Graphic User Interface). User
>>> interfaces as we generally experience them, provide components for users
>>> to communicate with a computer. The interface defines the boundary
>>> between software, the hardware device or a user. What is interesting is
>>> that you are actually within the interface as well, performing in these
>>> environments.
>>>
>>> Could you talk about the relationship between you as the software
>>> developer and the software itself, within your performances?
>>>
>>> marc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>> marc,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Do you think that going through the re-evaluative process of
>>>>> justification has helped or hindered your practice, in regards to your
>>>>> creative-identity and approach to what your artwork could of been?
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> I think it's healthy to re-evaluate, at least it's healthy for me. It
>>>> keeps me in check and appreciative of those around me. It has also
>>>> heightened my critical awareness, not just of myself but of everything
>>>> in my vicinity, which I think is what every artist should do.
>>>> Ultimately if you're not critical of yourself, how on earth can you be
>>>> critical of others?
>>>>
>>>> not sure what things could have been, I used to do a lot of
>>>> impressionist landscape paintings in high school. I guess I could be
>>>> in a rocky farmer's field right now, watching the sun set and
>>>> considering the beauty of the amber light catching the silhouette of a
>>>> windswept pine.
>>>>
>>>> jeremy
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 4:51 PM, marc garrett
>>>> <marc.garrett at furtherfield.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Hi Jeremy,
>>>>>
>>>>>  >kickn' it up a notch with the Freud! great stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I may do this every now and then. Not necessarily with Freud, but
>>>>> with other references, just to open things up but only if it feels
>>>>> relevant.
>>>>>
>>>>>  >the truth is, I started art school in the 90s
>>>>>  >and all of my profs taught identity politics work.
>>>>>  >Actually my first EVER studio class was called
>>>>>  >women in art (I was the only man in the course).
>>>>>
>>>>>  >So starting out I always felt as though I wasn't
>>>>>  >allowed to make art. I wasn't a victim of any
>>>>>  >societal prejudices or discrimination, I was a
>>>>>  >very happy privileged white man with very few cares.
>>>>>
>>>>> With identity politics being such a primary influence, it sounds like
>>>>> your art education was a complex yet insightful beginning. I can imagine
>>>>> that in order to find a voice for your work, there has been much
>>>>> re-evaluation taking place.
>>>>>
>>>>>  >The type of work I make now, the type that casts
>>>>>  >me as an ignorant/naive modern artist playing with
>>>>>  >technology, was developed to try and create some
>>>>>  >justification for myself in an ocean of those more
>>>>>  >deserving than I.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you think that going through the re-evaluative process of
>>>>> justification has helped or hindered your practice, in regards to your
>>>>> creative-identity and approach to what your artwork could of been?
>>>>>
>>>>> marc
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>
>>>       
>>     
>
>