RE: <nettime> Rhizome's revenge

["Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>]

You make a really good case, Brad.

What I like about rhizome is that, unlike a lot of other lists, you don't
encounter a more or less dominative group who are afraid of using
technology and new ideas in the art. Rhizome is boldly and intelligently
into new media and that's relatively rare because there is so much fear of
it among artists who feel that it threatens their non-technical modus. But
they're not 'brave new world' types either.

Also, i find the odd post interesting and useful. you get a lot of notices
on that list i don't see elsewhere. and it is fairly broad. not just
web.art or net.art but posts concerning offline work that relates to the
digital and so on.

What I don't like about rhizome is a lot of the stuff you mention. and it
is very new york. new york's a great place but it's a bit insular
concerning the rest of the world. lots of crap is lauded in new york
because it's from new york.

But at least rhizome does stuff. a lot of orgs it's talk talk talk and
little else emanates from them. they have their shit together. How many
online orgs can you say that about? and, like i said, they're into types of
art, and pushing those in various directions that are often progressive.
sometimes, though, the directions seem more like what you describe. I'm in
Toronto now, though I'm from the west, like you, and wow there's a lot of
important mediocrity here. The New York of Canada. This is where curators
at the national gallery in Ottawa can say, as Jean Gagnon did, "artists
without a gallery are nothing."

Is supporting rhizome like supporting Jean Gagnon and the national gallery?
To be truthful, I don't know. One would hope it's possible to have useful
art organizations without them becoming cancerous to the point where
pronounements like "artists without a gallery are nothing" begin to break
like pustules.

o, and, by the way, i don't scoff at what you do. i have always found you
an intelligent and forceful writer. often very funny, too, and often
ascerbic. You speak out for the value of independent artistry, and I
respect that a great deal.

ja

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nettime-l-request@bbs.thing.net
> [mailto:nettime-l-request@bbs.thing.net]On Behalf Of { brad brace }
> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 10:03 AM
> To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net
> Subject: Re: <nettime> Rhizome's revenge
>
>
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, t.whid wrote:
>
>  brad,
>
>  you have yet to make a decent argument for whatever your alternative
>  system may be...
>
> That's merely an old trap that prolongs the misery. Artists
> would have much better careers/work if they didn't also have
> to pay insipid institutional homage/extortion at every
> juncture. Everyone is compelled to pay (on many levels) for
> the subsidized institutional artworld -- that 'network'
> enslaves. Rhizome's done little for me -- yet I've done
> plenty for it: and now it wants me to pay for the
> 'privilege.' Its desire to join the ranks of major cultural
> imperialists on the insufferable 'new media ticket' is
> clear. Its priorities are blinkered and suspect. This is how
 <...>

#  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