[NetBehaviour] NetBehaviour Digest, Vol 1689, Issue 1

Suzon Fuks suzon at water-wheel.net
Sun Jun 23 02:51:56 CEST 2013


>We do still engage. We engage at different levels: there is a shift from
>products to process(es) and a will of connection through some kind of new
>rituals and internal enquiring of how we can translate our awareness of
>time to artsŠ Mutating!
>The shift might be/seem clumsy, as a lot of the former values are
>re-assessed and re-addressed. Trials of all kind are much needed!
>Some people are proning LESS IS MORE (in this tsunami of info and
>prodcution-s), some prone ELIMINATE but there is a need for buffer timeŠ
>We are HUMANSŠ
>
>I did stand still yesterday as part of a performance/context/event
>offered by James Cunningham: "Anyone is Free to Do Nothing With The
>Artist" - and found that somehow when doing nothing, I dissolve in the
>wholeŠand somehow engage at that times in a very nuanced way. Then, when
>coming out of this state of surrender, I can be in several states of
>awareness being in/out but still engaging at various levelsŠit is
>comparable to mediation.
>There is a really ennoying point though, where there is a feeling of
>shuffling to pretend to be there, where parts are just drifting, but the
>shuffling is so obvious! :-)
>
>Am I an enthusiast sinking in a glass of water?



Message: 9
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 04:41:57 +0100
From: Johannes Birringer <Johannes.Birringer at brunel.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Do we still engage?
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
    <netbehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
Message-ID:
    <DF657B70CB20304DB745D84933F94B1E03C150C6BD at v-exmb01.academic.windsor>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

dear Mark and Alan and all:

I appreciate the responses, I was not sure how to engage the philosophical
texts,
and Mark's extremely valuable response left me reeling. I realize a few
things, also
about reference points. and i do agree with Alan of course, surfaces are
not cool.

And Bishop Zareh suggests philosophy is nor relevant any more.
I am not sure in agree. (and i don't care about facebood). I wonder what
is read
and what is practiced, or how we teach. and in terms of political
organization, my question about the protesters in Turkey or Brasil
was to some extent rhetorical, what makes someone stand still in a public
square, for a few moments, when
on the previous night, the others or her/him have been shot at by water
cannons and tear gas guns?
Alan, this is not a good question either, i know.

You cannot stand still. (yes you can protest by doing so, momentarily).
Mark said it quite vigorously.
I agree with everything he says, and it cuts to the bone.  I admire what
you say.
I wonder how it pans out for you as a director of an independent arts
organization, you are promoting
and supporting independent work.
you scold (me) for refering to artists I might admire.

>>
One of the issues I find constantly infuriating - personally, is how
certain writers on media art culture, tend to reflect a repetitive set
of hierarchical that more relates to their careers, rather than trying
to engage genuinely in creating possibilities with others whom are
actively dealing with such questions as we are asking here, in our
practice and infrastructures. One example, is how many academics are too
easily diverted to reference not only the same names over and over
again, but also referencing an art context as if it only happens in the
main institutions. This is not a true representation of the dynamic
culture that I am part of, and many on this list. And, for me this part
of the larger problem where people fall into mannerisms that reflects a
submission and dedication towards power rather than 'real' social change.


can we discuss this?


Mark, I feel you are aiming at a larger issue, and i completely agree with
you. at my institution, where  I am employed,
we are undergoing what the management calls "restructuring for success"
and it is obviously a corporate maneuver
to streamline education for economic profit and new goals determined by
the economy and changes in the "sector."
It is also going to result in cuts and redundancies and changes that
affect our teaching and research autonomy,
it will affect morale and it will condemn cooperation or comradeship, as
competition (about research income)
will be prevalent, and impact (on social and economic levels) will have to
be proven by the arts. my colleagues at the university
seem to be very guarded, afraid....

My reference to Pina Bausch was strategic, as it has to do with historical
references to the post war era in which
grew up. Tre citation was not funny.  I did not laugh when i heard it.
But you are obviously right in regard to how researchers and teachers
create a continuous reference
system that might be exclusive or elitist, less able to encompass a range
of many alternative projects and
activities, like the ones you support at furtherfield or that others here
support. i also have a research student
at this moment who is pondering quitting as she cannot conduct her
artistic research due to lack of support,
and the support systems are failing and the institutions are failing them.
that may imply,  I am failing them too,
and so my reference to Istanbul or São Paulo is defensive, I know full
well that i need to speak and articulate
my objections to restructuring for success. I did and I objected to the
process as I thought it was authoritarian
and untransparent, and I requested democratic procedure and consultation
with everyone, and was told
"this is not a country" (but, I guess, they mean, i am in a corporation).

see

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22976409

".. today capitalism is becoming identified with the rule of unaccountable
elites, lack of effective democratic accountability, and repressive
policing."


quite so, and where does this leave engagement with philosophy?
i guess nowhere and everywhere, depending on 'Zivilcourage,' and  how we
stand up and object, to be told we don't live in a country, but in a
corporation.

(I also refered to art and art that makes images of water cannons shooting
at protesters, to be exhibited in galleries and sold to collectors)


wth regards
Johannes Birringer



+++++

Hi Johannes & all,

Thanks for making the time to share your thoughts?

> Tell me about the standing still, and what are these young women and
men inspired by to resist
> the banality of authoritarian power? And are you/we asking the right
questions?

I think what you propose is a necessary question in itself. Especially
in light of the various anti-corruption protests across the world. It's
kicking off, and I think everyone has a part to play in this; in respect
of our own personal attributes which include asking questions and
enacting upon them according to situational, circumstances and skills.

Not everyone has the desire to go out in the streets and demand change,
but not everyone needs to -- I think that critical acts against the
neoliberal takeover of our public lives can be challenged in different
ways. In the work place, on the streets, in our family relations and
friends, on the Internet, in publications, everywhere in fact.

Trying to find ways to challenge this 'banality of authoritarian power',
which I see as a form of corporate totalitarianism, is one of those
choices we have to make if we are 'seriously' concerned in creating
alternative ways of living with others, that serve to bring about
something that includes a 'commons or shared values', which are not
'given' or 'scripted' by a hegemony controlling our general behaviours
through the interfaces, platforms and different media we use.

Neoliberalist strategies have successfully dismantled collective
institutions, once able to challenge the effects of its global
dominance; especially the organisations sharing values associated with
social needs in the public realm. It is a term rarely discussed in
traditional broadcasting and printed news media, but we are all affected
by its dominating ideologies. It is the situation where governments have
handed over their public responsibilities for companies to manage
instead in the form of privatisation. Noreena Hertz, an advocate for
market systems, who set up Russia?s first stock exchange, in her book
The Silent Takeover, says ?We are all in the midst of a corporate
takeover, and no gated communities of six-figured salaries will protect
us from its impact.? Noreena Hertz. The Silent Takeover: Global
Capitalism and The Death of Democracy. Published by William Heinemann.

In Power Systems Noam Chomsky discusses political and economic forms of
power in democracy, and that it is no longer in the hands of merchants
and manufacturers. Instead, most of the power now rests in the hands of
financial institutions and multi-nationals.

One of my questions (out of too many) is, how can artists and artists?
groups maintain control over their own imaginative ideas, and fulfil
their individual and collective intentions, whilst maintaining critical
positions; within the context of a globalised culture where prevailing
attitudes fashioned on austerity measures and the economic crisis are
now part of our everyday lives?

If artists are not in some form of expression dealing with these
questions, whether it be through the medium itself, or in their
intentions, and their ideas etc, then I do not see how artists are
relevant anymore other than as small-minded careerists feeding their
immediate and myopic desires, which is a kind of falling into a generic
default or type. And yes, artists are going to be able to do this on
their own -- academics, galleries, arts organisations, imaginative
thinkers, and entrepreneurs, need to be brave build these questions into
their own everyday experience, social and public interfaces.

Something as damaging as corporations controlling our 'supposed'
democracies is one of the main issues that needs to be part of wider and
varied critique that is not just hidden in 'clever' books but also on
the lips of all people at all times, in all forms and in all languages.

One of the issues I find constantly infuriating - personally, is how
certain writers on media art culture, tend to reflect a repetitive set
of hierarchical that more relates to their careers, rather than trying
to engage genuinely in creating possibilities with others whom are
actively dealing with such questions as we are asking here, in our
practice and infrastructures. One example, is how many academics are too
easily diverted to reference not only the same names over and over
again, but also referencing an art context as if it only happens in the
main institutions. This is not a true representation of the dynamic
culture that I am part of, and many on this list. And, for me this part
of the larger problem where people fall into mannerisms that reflects a
submission and dedication towards power rather than 'real' social change.

Wishing you well.

Marc


________________________________________
From: netbehaviour-bounces at netbehaviour.org
[netbehaviour-bounces at netbehaviour.org] On Behalf Of Alan Sondheim
[sondheim at panix.com]
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 6:37 AM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Do we still engage?

Are any questions the right questions? When I read Wired Magazine, and I
keep coming back to this, I feel that evil has been banished; it has no
place in Californian technophilia: as a concrete example, a couple of
years ago a full page diagrammatic article on how diamond mining was
carried out in Africa - the wonders of making the mine environmentally
ok for miners. The current issue shows a mouse with a large contraption
attached to its head for monitoring neurons and an article on using pig
manure in a compound to replace asphalt. The facts the mouse might be
uncomfortable, that the manure is from pigs on the way to the slaughter-
house - these are irrelevant, we'll have new brain-mappings and better
roads. For me, there's evil in factory farming, an evil like the evil of
attacks on civilians, that I can't define, that doesn't play well into
techno-fantasy, just as digital technology is to blood technology as
diamonds are to blood diamonds. Which is where Arendt, Sartre, Celan, for
example, come in; I'm not necessarily even arguing against the _use_ of
animals (although I am, through a back door), just suggesting that there's
not even discussions of such. I remember - and wrote about it somewhere
recently (maybe Fb not sure) that for so many people outside the circuit,
the Arab Spring was characterized by the cellphone and social media - as
if these sparkling stars could somehow encompass a long legacy of
colonialism, racism, class/economic inequalities, foreign wars, etc. etc
in the region. (This is why I like nettime, for example, where analyses do
run deep - what I'm talking about here is the vast majority of people, who
probably never paid much attention to philosophy anyway, so this whole
convoluted reply is somewhat of a red herring...)
_______________________________________________




>





More information about the NetBehaviour mailing list