on Internet Re: [syndicate] Tr: Rejet de votre message

[Aliette Guibert]

At once and before I go to work right now because so much time is spent
here in stupid allegations, I want to talk you of your field : the
interactive server lists and
Internet.

If here they are the new technics (digital) designing communication and more
a new social relationship - but not so new in the immediate actual - as your
elected modern advanced field: can you really defend it with the values od
the past avant-gardes as you use of it if you are not programmer - I mean
hacker in the sense of working the sources - as an artist?

Is it not the sense of the name of the server: "anart"? one art, an art as
other said any and one art, an art the historical time of avant-gardes being
past but not this time of an art ? and designing of something of my words
which is not so singular as you would say?

At first: the transparence of modernity it is the transparence of technics
in all the relationship depending of the mode of production and its
languages in matter of representative historical avant-garde. So in this way
technical resource cannot be only a representation but a technical practice.

Are you better than myself able to developpe, to program digitally - to hack
sources as new progressive dispositives of the technics you pretend to be
representing among others artists  of this field of universal media?

BUT NO I mean:)

I think of any artists going till to learn of sources and of php at least
are more logical in the dispositiveyou defend than yourself: but it is not
your cup of tea -you told me.

So could be you are a fake artist in your own vision of avant-garde. As I
think you are not fake in your self practice to represent what you use and
do as message: because my own vision right nowis not exclusive of the way
but yours.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Aliette Guibert" <guibertc at criticalsecret.com>
To: <syndicate at anart.no>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: [syndicate] Tr: Rejet de votre message


> To frederic
> Nothing is dangerous for me or on my material life as telling of things in
a
> relative mode, but without a jugment : avant-garde is very dangerous for
you
> as you look in a former and integrist vision of the advance of
> righteousness.
>
> I have no ghosts: you are living in the ghost of histories that you did
not
> make yourself. I am in peace with my past as I did it : there are no
ghosts
> here or I would not be activ nowadays. I am not in a frustration of the
past
> and I am very pleased that I could appreciate the changes in which I can
> read sometimes better as a younger person -simply as I can appreciate for
a
> largest time what has resisted in the time, what is only repeting, and
what
> it reappears only as a sign far from symbolic, or new symbolic or
> paradigmatic.
>
> Avant-garde as collective representative it is linked to political
economy,
> it is an historical progressive move linked to history of modernity and
> post-modernity. Being past the political economy linked as linking
> industrial mode and theiur singular social mode: there is no more
> avant-garde or YES : BUT only self-representative.
>
> To have a radical representative avant-garde right now we would need to
> notice a collective new paradigm to be collectively recognized - so it its
> exactly the part and the rule of avant-garde to get it to be known at
first.
>
> Tell me of the new paradigm you defend, please.
>
> Would you be stupid yourself ?
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <fmadre at free.fr>
> To: <syndicate at anart.no>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 11:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [syndicate] Tr: Rejet de votre message
>
>
> > Aliette,
> >
> > You, who are constantly claiming that the avant-garde is dead, are
> > disqualified
> > to intervene in this debate. It is worse with Bourseiller, he's just a
> joker
> > with too much time on his hands.
> >
> > Debord has decided to state in writing how much he disliked Guegan and
> > Sorin and
> > how little they had to do with the actual creation and running of Champ
> Libre.
> > This is why they were thrown out, they came to Lebovici and said they
> wanted
> > the house: they were kicked out within the minute because they had no
> ground
> > for their claim.
> >
> > The avant-garde is dangerous for you, as is the "underground", because
> > you have
> > given up and you don't want to have ghosts haunting you and showing you
> what
> > can still be achieved. I find it amoral and I praise Debord for his
> > righteousness.
> >
> > f.
> >
> > > Useless to add it.
> >
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ----
>
>
> >
> > -----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------
> > Syndicate network for media culture and media art
> > information and archive: http://syndicate.anart.no
> > to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate at anart.no>
> > Shake the KKnut: http://syndicate.anart.no/KKnut/
> > no commercial use of the texts without permission
>
>
>
>
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


>
> -----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------
> Syndicate network for media culture and media art
> information and archive: http://syndicate.anart.no
> to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate at anart.no>
> Shake the KKnut: http://syndicate.anart.no/KKnut/
> no commercial use of the texts without permission