<nettime> Re: net art history - Interview Yourself!

[Amy Alexander <plagiari@plagiarist.org>]

Olia's right! Josephine's right! The critics are short on time, and 
having them spend it doing interviews just creates a bunch of Art Stars 
- it's essentially a whole new Art World created in the process of 
trying to flee the old one... and look what we've got; overworked 
critics, unhappy net artists... this won't do....

I propose a new approach, as part of the Plagiarist "New Millenium 
Disorder" project: The Interview Yourself Project. Since it will 
hopefully generate lots of interviews, the acronym will be the
"IY-IY-IY-IY-IY" Project. Everyone, please interview yourself, and post 
your interview to the usual mailing lists; heck, I'll even make a whole 
website for the archives if people submit them.

Think of the benefits... it subverts the Net Art World Institution, and 
makes everyone a star.... or, uh, makes nobody a star, depending on how 
you want to look at it... it finally gives the interviewees a chance to 
answer the kinds of questions they *wish* they'd be asked about their 
work... it gives us shy people who sometimes clam up with real 
interviewers the chance to finally open up in an interview...  and, it 
saves wear and tear on critics and journalists! Concerned that the tough 
questions won't get asked? Not to worry; IY-IY-IY-IY-IY doesn't preclude 
critics from doing interviews, just sort of er, open sources the 
interview process. (I just love working "open source" in anywhere I can... )

So, hop to it everybody! (you too, critics!) you've got an interview to 
prepare - History Awaits!

-@


olia lialina wrote:


Josephine Bosma wrote:

>err.... ascii paparazzi? Sorry dear Olia, this is too insulting to come
>from you. Anyway, the biggest problem net art journalists and observers
>have is that we are too few with too much to do.

Josephine, I don't underestimate your work. The paragraph you refer to is
full of love and respect. And I do enjoy interviews as a genre (I love
dialogues).

But it is a pity that interviews dominate the critics' output.

The interview approach cultivates stars, not ideas. And stars, especially
superstars, can be very lovely targets. You can pronounce them dead
whenever you like. Ideas live longer.

Interviews are easy to read. They catch a moment. They let future readers
touch the past. A picture develops. History's created. But it's a history
of artists' arrogance, self promotion, mood changes.

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net