[NetBehaviour] Internet of Things....ResearchOpportunitiesonEPSRC funded Project]
Pall Thayer
pallthay at gmail.com
Fri Jun 26 13:43:48 CEST 2009
These are of course all valid points and I would say that at the very
tip of things, one of the biggest choices an artist makes is whether
to operate within academia or outside of it. Then there are choices to
make within those two realms as well. I, for instance, have (for now
at least) chosen to have a "day job" that frees me from having to rely
on my art as a source of income. This suits me well right now and I
feel quite unencumbered in not having to explain to anyone what I have
in mind before I do it. I just do it and in comparison to producing
work within the academic realm, I personally feel that it's having a
positive effect on my creativity. That being said, it does however
suck having to work two jobs with the more interesting of them not
being the one that pays the bills. I do make compromises but these are
compromises that I choose to make, not that are forced upon me. But
all in all, I feel emboldened in my art and am daring to explore paths
that I wouldn't have done before. It's always a bit of a catch 22
though. I feel that in exploring these paths, I'm making valuable
discoveries that would benefit the academic realm. Would I then accept
a job if offered? I don't know. It would be a tough choice.
best r.
Pall
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 7:37 AM, Simon Biggs<s.biggs at eca.ac.uk> wrote:
> I don't think the problem is with art and other disciplines getting
> together. Nor do I think it is with research. There is nothing intrinsically
> at fault with any of these activities or how they can be undertaken in
> various combinations. They can be hugely beneficial to one another. If you
> are constantly looking for new methods of making and disseminating art, of
> how art can exist and people constitute themselves around it, then mixing
> things up is default. That is how new ways of seeing and being are
> uncovered.
>
> The problem is when the things that makes these activities personally and
> collectively rewarding are expected to fulfil other forms of utlility.
> Montserrat is right in her analysis that those who hold the purse strings
> expect a return on their investment. Whether that money comes from academic
> or cultural funding agencies doesn't matter. It is all government money and
> these days governments, in their desire to constantly show value to others
> (the electorate, industry, etc), instrumentalise everything they touch. This
> has a bad effect on art and science (both are creative activities with
> similar requirements). Neither are industries. They are not means of
> production that can be assimilated into that economic model.
>
> The commercial art market offers no succour either. That is a world where
> novelty, rarity and authenticity have been fetishised and commodified to the
> point of obscenity. In that environment shit smells sweet.
>
> Artists have to make choices, just like anybody else. You can starve, take
> government money or sell-out. What are the other currently available
> options? I can think of some which exist in very specific contexts (gift
> economies in small tribal contexts) but without changing the whole global
> economic model I don't see anything viable. I also do not think the world is
> going to change - at least, not through good intentions.
>
> Sorry to be so down. I'm not really. I'm in Berlin setting up a show and
> quite happy. It is one of my favourite cities, even though it has changed
> horribly over the past twenty years. Nevertheless, whilst Berlin has been
> profoundly damaged by corporate and governmental pressures it is better off
> as a real city, open and evolving, than in its prior existence in a
> netherworld created by some of the more absurd geo-political dynamics of the
> Cold War.
>
> Regards
>
> Simon
>
>
> Simon Biggs
> Research Professor
> edinburgh college of art
> s.biggs at eca.ac.uk
> www.eca.ac.uk
> www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>
> simon at littlepig.org.uk
> www.littlepig.org.uk
> AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pall Thayer <pallthay at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <netbehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 23:21:48 +0000
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <netbehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Internet of
> Things....ResearchOpportunitiesonEPSRC funded Project]
>
>> unlikely outcomes of uncertain value. It is just that the way academic
>> research is funded there is this pressure to prove the economic and social
>> value of the probable outcomes well in advance of them coming into being.
>
> This is exactly the problem I have with the "art practice as formal
> research" trend. It's great that this has opened new avenues for art
> funding but at what price? I fear that this is going to produce a lot
> of boring art that probably sounded interesting on paper but is
> missing the spontaneity that makes some artwork really leap out and
> grab you. Too precisely calculated. Art should, at the very least,
> have strong elements of spur-of-the-moment whim to highlight that
> violent tumultuousness that is unbridled "Creativity" (with a capital
> C). The "academic research" approach is always going to involve major
> compromises. The magic happens when just dive in. You'll have plenty
> of time to ask questions and fine tune concepts later. Hmm... how
> about a research project that examines the effects of academic
> institutionalisation on creativity?
>
> best r.
> Pall
>
>> These pressures function to pervert what research is all about
>> (finding/creating things you didn't know you might find/create). How can
>> you
>> know the value of something that doesn't exist yet? Why does everything
>> have
>> to have a value? Many artists and scientists prefer not to be concerned
>> with
>> these things. Such considerations are imposed upon them.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> Simon Biggs
>> Research Professor
>> edinburgh college of art
>> s.biggs at eca.ac.uk
>> www.eca.ac.uk
>> www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>>
>> simon at littlepig.org.uk
>> www.littlepig.org.uk
>> AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: james morris <james at jwm-art.net>
>> Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>> <netbehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
>> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 23:26:29 +0100 (BST)
>> To: <netbehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
>> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Internet of
>> Things....ResearchOpportunitiesonEPSRC funded Project]
>>
>>
>> On 25/6/2009, "Simon Biggs" <s.biggs at eca.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>recorded and all original material retained for peer assessment. This is
>>> not
>>>foolproof (there are plenty of examples of poor science around) but nobody
>>>has proposed a better system yet. It is unusual for artistic work to be
>>>undertaken in this context but not novel. Otherâ*˙s have done it. It often
>>>leads to surprising outcomes, especially for the scientists.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm interested to know what the nature of the surprising outcomes are
>> for scientists? (Are the artists less surprised by the outcomes?)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.principlesofnature.net/gallery_of_selected_art_works/the_discreteness_of_infinity_art_science_parallels.htm
>>
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2008/sep/02/darwinscanopy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>> Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number
>> SC009201
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *****************************
> Pall Thayer
> artist
> http://www.this.is/pallit
> *****************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
> Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number
> SC009201
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
--
*****************************
Pall Thayer
artist
http://www.this.is/pallit
*****************************
More information about the NetBehaviour
mailing list