{ brad brace } on 25 Feb 2001 14:17:34 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Questions for "15 Minutes" (fwd) Sep 1999 |
On 26 Sep 1999, ARTspeak & WAA wrote: > Dear Brad - Please answer the following questions for the 15 Minute interview > for October - > > 1. Tell us about your first exposure to the internet? Many people can claim earlier dates than me; not sure it matters-much; it merely depended where you happened to be living and which technological resources you happened to have access-to. So, I guess it was mid-80's text-based mailing-lists, although I was/still-am very interested in BBS and FidoNet earlier/still -- and Ham-Radio and Fax-lists and Phone-Art and Pirate-Radio and Artists' Publications/Multiples and Community-TV and Streaming-Media... any kind of independent delivery system. More is very often accomplished with less. > 2. What changes have you witnessed since first using the internet, and what > does the future hold for art and technology? Aspects of net-technology fall-in-and-out of fashion. I still think Usenet is an ideal system for exchanging imagery; I'm a little mystified why more creative projects don't make use of it. Many people have stumbled-onto my 12hr-project through the <alt.binaries.pictures.12hr> newsgroup (and others). I suppose there was a greater sense of camaraderie when the net was unix/text-based and everyone collectively struggled with the same problems toward a similarly-common acceptance. Now, even HTML-laced gibberish on mailing-lists seems maddening ;-) Very few people saw what the Net would become; few paid it any heed, with the very pleasant result of unrestricted (for the most part), unimpeded development. I still remember 'communications-professionals' earnestly insisting that the Net was merely a short-lived fad like CB-radio. Thankfully, the 'experts' didn't see it coming... the Net is major Media without overbearing Network-Monopolists. The internet provides an audience for creative pursuits that would be rigorously denied by centrist art institutions. If you're the slightest bit 'uncooperative' with artworld powers you'll never be granted any (meagre) 'rewards;' the only reason artist-victims are drawn into this skewed scheme, is that the artworld acolytes have for so long denied other 'invalid' options. It's really just a big pyramid scheme with no substantive prize anyway... the only people who benefit are those swallowed-up by the Institutional Beast: the artworld-acolytes, the curators, the administrators, the gallerists, the incestuous art-'academics,' the arrogant, bitter, wannabe-artists-turned-critics... perpetual artworld-lapdogs all. (Institutions may have their place, but Not in art-- of all places.) When "new technology" comes-by they inevitably clamber all over themselves in a rush to be the first to package this 'newness' for the Beast -- bring on the petty collegial rewards, and suck-up every drop and hope of vision and poetry.... by merely showcasing the latest technological products and fashionably validated 'critical theory.' Art is All that Cannot be Suppressed. > > 3. Do you consider the internet an art medium? Why? I think the internet, despite all the new buzzwords: 'net-art,' new-media art,' 'web-art,' 'electronic-art...' has further reduced the claims of big-A-art classifications. The last thing true creatives want to produce these days is something that might be instantly designated as Art. There is no link that could move from the visible to the statement, or from the statement to the visible. But there is a continual relinking which takes place over the irrational break or crack. The Net is primarily a delivery-system. > 4. Share some of the positive and negative aspects of using technology in > artistic expression. 'Pixel-stirring' is often a welcome counterpoint to usual physical-media concerns -- and, in most cases, the gallery/museum is effectively little-more than a photo-studio for the work's subsequent dissemination anyway. Reproduction technology is part-and-parcel... VRML still seems an especially hard-nut with its integral connection with military applications and vacuous architectural pre-determination; the medical aspects seem promising... And there's some potential lurking in those 360-degree panoramas with 'hot-spots/links' into other views... (I know there's fancier-shit.) > 5. Why do you feel the internet is a good forum for displaying work like your > conceptual photography? It's durn-near perfect! Can you imagine an art-gallery staying-open 24 hours a day for worldwide visitors and changing the displayed photo every 12 hours? I think my imagery is more poetic than conceptual. > 6. Your site's minimalist approach to web design is refreshing and attractive. > What are your feelings about "heavy" web media like shockwave, java, > JavaScript, etc? Accessibility is key -- bandwidth is still a big issue in most of the world; my site began as an FTP-site. It's still Lynx-friendly. Like many early homepages, mine still begins with a picture of me, standing-on my front-porch... how radical! ;-) The initial intent of independent media are embodied in the concept of the homepage -- they're worth recalling. Some portions of the Net are striving to provide a TV-like experience. Plug-ins can be disruptively exasperating. I think about using Flash/Director/Java... but I haven't been able to work-up much enthusiasm for having things fly around the screen... something will occur to me eventually I suppose. I _am interested in 'particle art:' basically the algorithms used in digital-film-effects to describe organic conditions like fog, smoke, fire, water, etc. That kind of inherent randomness _within a simulation is intriguing somehow... > 7. As the end of the 20th century approaches how do you see artists > contributing to society? What should artists be doing now? Art's not important -- it really isn't... and that's paradoxically why it _can be... unleashed, it can silently (st)reach around the globe and infiltrate histories. What might matter is the way in which it can gain brief and corollary significance... unfortunately art-institutions know this all too well and position themselves accordingly. Fifteen minutes for you and everything else for the entrenched expert-hierarchy. The Net continues to illustrate just how antiquated that privileged notion is... I think the 'profession' of Artist... well, it's already something of a misnomer... will all but disappear. (How many art-professors can make a living doing what they presumably teach? How many hundred-thousands of basically-worthless MFAs are sold to upper-middle-class artist-victims? Why does art-academia cling to inadequate, outgrown curriculum?) Later-on we'll still be interested in artworks but morely likely because we want to know more about and perhaps live-with a physical trace from someone we respect in the world... someone with whom we have some connection. The 12hr-ISBN-JPEG Project >>>> since 1994 <<<< + + + serial ftp://ftp.eskimo.com/u/b/bbrace + + + eccentric ftp://ftp.idiom.com/users/bbrace + + + continuous ftp://ftp.teleport.com/users/bbrace + + + hypermodern ftp://ftp.rdrop.com/pub/users/bbrace + + + imagery ftp://ftp.pacifier.com/pub/users/bbrace News://alt.binaries.pictures.12hr ://a.b.p.fine-art.misc Reverse Solidus: http://www.teleport.com/~bbrace/bbrace.html http://www.eskimo.com/~bbrace/bbrace.html Mirror: http://bbrace.laughingsquid.net/ { brad brace } <<<< [email protected] >>>> ~finger for pgp Note: all "Teleport" addresses (web/ftp/email) are being eliminated: no thanks to Earthlink scum. Please choose from listed alternates. _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list [email protected] http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold