[NetBehaviour] aesthetics examples ... forked from : Re: Accelerationist aesthetics

[ruth catlow]

Yes Annie,

 > Ok let's discuss concrete art works, activities etc - let's leave for 
a moment the theorethical philipoli stuff

More examples would be good.

 > In this discussion we have until now Ruth's work 
http://gtp.ruthcatlow.net/ on time: human time, life time, computertime, 
scientific time, stone time and Rob's examples in his article 
http://furtherfield.org/features/articles/accelerationist-art  - what 
are these doing, what duscussion, thoughts they further ...
 >

To answer your particular questions about my work....

 > I just watched Ruth's work again, I like the reflexion it brings, how 
it articulates all these times.
 > I have a question: - What do the people who go to the installation 
get from this, is there a live video projection?, Can they understand 
how time is at stake in this work? (In the catalogue text I read Edward 
mentioned a projection, but so far I didn't see any photos of it)*
 > I admit I had difficulties understanding the complexity of the piece 
in the beginning but now, at the end I can enjoy it's beauty.
 > So probably what I want to know Ruth, is where was your focus on the 
final video object or on what happened in the installation ...

I think/hope that the work is totally explicit for gallery visitors.  
But now I understand that the documentation needs more clarity for 
online viewers

The plasma screen displays this webpage http://gtp.ruthcatlow.net/ which 
shows the most recent image taken by the web cam, along with the looping 
video to which images are added every 3 or 4 images.

People can pose for the web cam, or might be caught looking at the video 
in which they are soon to be portrayed.

Here is a photo which shows the set up.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/60673926@N02/24540097322/in/album-72157663958436545/
Here you can scroll through a set of images showing selected stills from 
the video, as well as some installation shots 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/60673926@N02/albums/72157663958436545


 >
 > What did I get out of the examples Rob gave in his article? They are 
almost all art, just art, as far as I can see. Objects, you can show and 
sell. They function mostly in the Artworld. Holly Herndon and probably 
also Morehshin Allahyari & Daniel Rourke seem to be a bit different in 
the sense that they also engage with other domains and feel "whole". 
They reach out.
 > As feel "whole" for me someone like Hito Steyerl whose work I like a lot.
 > 
http://www.e-flux.com/journal/a-sea-of-data-apophenia-and-pattern-mis-recognition/
 > the dissappearance of an horizon - acceleration as stasis 
https://vimeo.com/81109235#t=99s
 > Does this have anything to do with accelerationism? I don't know and 
would that be important to know?

Acceleration as stasis. Yes I think this is right Annie.

Yes! more examples

Thank you

:)
Ruth


 >
 > Please diversify examples ...
 >
 > Thanks for these discussions!!!!!!
 > Annie
 >
 > *I found a photo of a screen showing what? 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako/24284339460/in/pool-wana2021/ a 
still, a looping video?
 >
 >
 >
 > On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Gretta Louw 
<gretta.elise.louw at gmail.com> wrote:
 >
 >     This makes so much sense to me, thank you Ruth. I see so much of 
this in Europe, North America and the western, urban mainstream; an 
utter inability (and, probably, unwillingness) to look outside our own 
narrowly defined cultural lens when purportedly studying/attempting to 
understand technology, media, digitalisation, and their impacts. It 
hampers real discussion and cross-fertilization of ideas. Preaching to 
the (mostly white, educated, urban, western, northern) choir - as most 
tech/ digital/ futurist and possibly accelerationist (I hope I'm wrong 
about the last one, still too early to tell) 
festivals/meetings/discussion do - is a futile endeavor and exhausting 
to watch. Diversification is essential, but the way the discourse has 
developed around diversity actually is counterproductive to achieving 
greater diversity. Just as an example, there are studies that have shown 
that reminding applicants of their 'diverse' (one must ask, according to 
whom, diverse from what??) background in a job ad by specifically 
stating that one is an equal opportunities employer etc, will in fact 
reduce the number of applicants from diverse backgrounds.
 >
 >     I am rambling, but this issue is always tacked on to the 
sidelines of debates around the pressing issues of our time; an 
afterthought or a nod to political correctness. It needs to be at the 
core: we should not discuss these issues unless we have sufficiently 
broad input, otherwise we are just talking ourselves into 
insignificance. NB: I am talking generally and from some disappointing 
experiences at European 'digital futures'-type round tables and panels, 
not about netbehaviourists. I do think that we all need to take a much 
more radical approach to inclusivity though. Let's not participate in 
mutual back-slapping or hand-wringing with ppl only from our own 
sub-cultures...
 >
 >     All the best to everyone, and thank you for sharing your thoughts. xx
 >
 >     > On 23 Apr 2016, at 21:54, ruth catlow 
<ruth.catlow at furtherfield.org> wrote:
 >     >
 >     > Here Baruch Gottlieb reviews “Inventing the Future”by Srnicek & 
Williams  (co-authors of the Accelerationst Manifesto)
 >     > 
https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/inventing-future-beholden-present-review/2016/04/08
 >     >
 >     > He says
 >     >
 >     > "visions or projects for teleportation, nano-surgery and 
socialist Mars colonies, are not going to convince capitalists to stop 
attacking socially produced value every way they can. We need more 
fundamental knowledge about how the present is reproduced in this first 
place, the legacy of colonialism, imperialism, patriarchy and slavery in 
the very devices we use to understand such things, and we need social 
and cultural technologies to integrate that consciousness into new 
behaviours, new sociabilities, new modes of exchange."
 >     >
 >     >
 >     >> On 23/04/16 13:15, ruth catlow wrote:
 >     >> So is this the accelerationist aesthetics question?
 >     >>
 >     >> Q. How can we as artists and people use the logics & tools of 
automation and markets as part of making better art and better life for 
us all?
 >     >>
 >     >> : )
 >     > Tom said
 >     >>
 >     >>>>> when it appeared that the prognostications of the first wave of
 >     >> accelerationists had partly came true: namely, that the 
accelerations
 >     >> inherent in capitalism, specifically the tendency to mobilize more
 >     >> surplus labour and resources at greater rates of efficiency and
 >     >> abstraction, would exacerbate the system's inherent 
contradictions to a
 >     >> catastrophic point. Only partly came true though: the system 
did not
 >     >> collapse but massively reorganized itself (all those would-be 
John Galts
 >     >> suddenly all too happy to accept government bail-outs, massive
 >     >> expropriation of assets from the poor). This required a 
recalibration of
 >     >> the theses of that first wave of accelerationists, a 
recalibration that
 >     >> perhaps either is reflected in art, or in which<<<
 >     >>
 >     >> The unfettered development of automation and market-forces is 
currently seen as the preserve of people on the political right (who 
seek to preserve the status quo or enhance their wealth and power). But 
who may at some points ask for time-out (and bail-outs) in order to 
re-set their position of advantage.
 >     >>
 >     >> Rob said
 >     >>
 >     >> If I was trolling I'd argue that if you're on the left you're 
either a
 >     >> conscious or an unconscious accelerationist. But it's possible 
to do
 >     >> things in an un-Accelerationist way - it's not an inescapable or
 >     >> inevitable cultural condition.
 >     >>
 >     >> Yes, this is why I declared myself an Accelerationist- it was 
not a proud declamation (a la 'I'm a feminist and I'm proud') more an 
admission (a la, the declaration at meetings of people participating in 
the 12 step programme).
 >     >>
 >     >> What I think is worth reflecting on (even if only idly) in this
 >     >> discussion is whether there is anything in one's own life or 
work that
 >     >> this strategy would be productive for. What could each of us 
better
 >     >> understand and reason about (in some sense) so as to be able 
to better
 >     >> change it?
 >     >>
 >     >> Both these points indicate something that Left Accelerationism 
has been
 >     >> criticised for from various angles - it is a *selective* 
acceleration.
 >     >>
 >     >>
 >     >> Left Accelerationists are critiqued as these 
social-power-tools (of automation and market-forces) are seen as 
inherently dehumanising and destructive of solidarity and freedom?
 >     >>
 >     >>
 >     >>
 >     >>
 >     >>> On 23/04/16 02:49, Rob Myers wrote:
 >     >>>> On 22/04/16 03:27 AM, ruth catlow wrote:
 >     >>>> Not that we all need to be in an unending frenzy of 
communication and
 >     >>>> exchange. More that we have ever-more nuanced ways to sense the
 >     >>>> significance of different kinds of participation: in a loop 
of unwitting
 >     >>>> participation and active collaboration and organisation.
 >     >>> I think this (and Simon & Pall's conversation) raises two 
important
 >     >>> points about "Accelerationism".
 >     >>>
 >     >>> The first is that contemporary society appears to have speeded up
 >     >>> anyway. We can debate whether progress or the economy has 
stalled, but
 >     >>> our experience of life seems to involve the compression of 
time by
 >     >>> technology and by socioeconomic demands.
 >     >>>
 >     >>> The obvious critic of this kind of speed and acceleration, as 
Paul
 >     >>> mentioned, is Virilio. Who I think relates speed to power in 
a way that
 >     >>> makes sense of our experience of it as disenfranchising.
 >     >>>
 >     >>> Wanting to slow down from *this* kind of acceleration isn't a 
bad thing
 >     >>> and is in fact the end point of MAP/Fixing The Future -style
 >     >>> Accelerationism: let's get the machines to do the busy-work 
so we can do
 >     >>> something actually useful with our time instead.
 >     >>>
 >     >>> The second is that Accelerationism isn't a historical epoch like
 >     >>> postmodernism or globalisation. It's a *strategy*.
 >     >>>
 >     >>> If I was trolling I'd argue that if you're on the left you're 
either a
 >     >>> conscious or an unconscious accelerationist. But it's 
possible to do
 >     >>> things in an un-Accelerationist way - it's not an inescapable or
 >     >>> inevitable cultural condition.
 >     >>>
 >     >>> What I think is worth reflecting on (even if only idly) in this
 >     >>> discussion is whether there is anything in one's own life or 
work that
 >     >>> this strategy would be productive for. What could each of us 
better
 >     >>> understand and reason about (in some sense) so as to be able 
to better
 >     >>> change it?
 >     >>>
 >     >>> Both these points indicate something that Left 
Accelerationism has been
 >     >>> criticised for from various angles - it is a *selective* 
acceleration.
 >     >>>
 >     >>>> I am currently showing a live networked video piece, I 
created with
 >     >>>> Gareth Foote, called /Time is Speeding Up/ at 20-21 Visual 
Arts Centre
 >     >>>> up in Scunthorpe as part of the show We Are Not Alone. I 
have no idea
 >     >>>> whether this is an Accelerationist artwork.
 >     >>> It's increasing our ability to perceive and reason about our 
situation,
 >     >>> so quite possibly.
 >     >>>
 >     >>>> I agonized about the aesthetics of the work- at first- so 
un-"cool", so
 >     >>>> un-cyber - because the humans are so alive AND they make the 
work.
 >     >>>> But now I'm really happy with it and would like to assert a 
place for
 >     >>>> this almost folksy aesthetic (rather than a rush to slick, black
 >     >>>> fluidity) in post-capitalist art.
 >     >>> Bladerunner's lived-in street-culture future is 
paradigmatically cyber,
 >     >>> but I do know what you mean. The work is qualitative (or has 
a strong
 >     >>> qualitative element), and this is in contrast to the strong 
quantitative
 >     >>> bias of shiny information graphics and *some* proposals for
 >     >>> Accelerationist aesthetics.
 >     >>>
 >     >>> - Rob.
 >     >>>
 >
 >
 >
 > _______________________________________________
 > NetBehaviour mailing list
 > NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
 > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour


-- 
Co-founder Co-director
Furtherfield

www.furtherfield.org

+44 (0) 77370 02879
Meeting calendar - http://bit.ly/1NgeLce
Bitcoin Address 197BBaXa6M9PtHhhNTQkuHh1pVJA8RrJ2i

Furtherfield is the UK's leading organisation for art shows, labs, & debates
around critical questions in art and technology, since 1997

Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee
registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade, 
Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH.