[syndicate] Fwd:REFRESH! conference, some impressions
anna balint
abalint at merz.hu
Fri Oct 7 19:01:46 CEST 2005
> _ x _ __ ___
> > / | / / |
>> |- | | \--\ |
> > | | | __/ |
> > \ .
> > \\
> >I am \\
> > \\
> > \\ new My own
> > \ , including Fluxus
> > \\
> > \\
> >the real"-that \\
> > \\ ---------
> > \ -----------------
> > follows ----------------- comes
> > --------- \\
> > \\
> >The first thing \\
> > \\
> > \
> \\
> >I thought was pretty good, \\
> >histories" to a session on \\
> "history \\
> > \
> > \\ --------
> i ----------------
> > ---------------- \\
> > -------- \\
> > X
> > //
> > // pleasure.
> > // the young
> >nothings, a bit more // occasion.
> > //
> > //
> > // point
> // ---------
> >s // ----------------
> > ----------------
> > --------- // order:
> > // the age
> > // shift
> > //
> > // ----
> > // ------
> > // . I learned something. -------
> > // ------
> > // -------
> > // ------
> > // -------
> > // ------
> > // -------
> > // ------
> > ----
>
> > I mean o c , t int)
> > la if
> > i
> > s
> > c
> This
> > was an -no discussion of
> > mentio en
> > machi nd-b
> value-
> > for
>
> >
> >
> > clu
> peopl
> > rea
> >
> lazy
> > but p
> > to be
> > presen
> > the Oc
> > * Mi
> > sustain
> > * Joha
> > institution
> > * the final,
> > Diamond. This wa
> the
> > table, nd it was
> > it was eally a hi
> > feelin that while t
> >
> >I didn' go to everything, needless to re were good
> >things other panels. I heard that Clau cybernetics
> was
> >excellen for instance.
> >
> >That said he conference overall suffered gr what Trebor
> Scholz
> >and Geert nk have dubbed "panelism": a terri structure in which
> >moderators delivered papers within the format a way over-tight
> >schedule and h virtually no time for questions; a few speakers went
> >beyond their d minutes in the first sessions and then panels were
> >policed to an a conian degree, making the entire assembly tense.
> >Discussions were d. In , to this art historian it
> >seemed weird that peop conference on something as
> >shifting and relatively openly ew media" (how many papers in
> >fact began with loose attempts to list the salient features of new media)
> >and then sit and hear something they could have read already. for though
> >the organizers had posted quite a number of papers on their official
> >website _____ __ __ _ __ those
> >papers. / ___/__ ___ ____/ /_ / / ___ _ __(_)__ / /__
> > / (_ / -_) -_) __/ __/ / /__/ _ \ |/ / / _ \/ '_/
> >What sur \___/\__/\__/_/ \__/ /____/\___/___/_/_//_/_/\_\ ess of
> >anxietie egorized
> >as "art" or as "new media," these inflected many of the panel
> >presentations and discussions, and not in a productive way. Part of the
> >problem, as Andreas Broeckman pointed out in the final crit session, was
> >that the mission of the conference was probably too broadly and vaguely
> >defined. But what ___ __ rt
> >history" can't de / _ | ___ ___/ /______ ___ ____ know is,
> >what precisely is / __ |/ _ \/ _ / __/ -_) _ `(_-<
> >castigation of ar /_/ |_/_//_/\_,_/_/ \__/\_,_/___/ ., it
> >sounded to me lik p; this
> >seemed overwrough ___ __ and
> >politically thoug / _ )_______ ___ ____/ /__ __ _ ___ ____ as quite
> >right to note tha / _ / __/ _ \/ -_) __/ '_// ' \/ _ `/ _ \
> >conference his ch /____/_/ \___/\__/\__/_/\_\/_/_/_/\_,_/_//_/ times.
> >Art history and n or worse,
> >Rudolf Arnheim; new media people would do well to read Panofsky and
> >Warburg, just as I and at least some of my colleagues read Weiner and
> >Kittler. Art history may not yet be able to deal with new media, but
> >perhaps it is also the case that new media doesn't know how to deal with
> >art history.
> >
> >On this score a truly ck on the first day by Mark
> >Hansen, whose h lame that even the
> new
> >media theori ere bugged. Instead of new media g its lack of
> >recognition by art history and then its savaging of sa e want to be
> >with you; we hate you" or "I love you; go away") it migh more
> >productive to stage a genuine encounter. Leaving aside And s Broeckman,
> >who gave a very nice but grossly amputated (ran out of time resentation
> > __ ___ __ ful presentati comparing
> > / |/ /__ _____/ /__ the art histor s who were
> > / /|_/ / _ `/ __/ '_/ dieval Islamic or with
> > /_/ /_/\_,_/_/ /_/\_\ were no art his rians
> > ready part of th inner
> > ______ _ __ sely the encoun that
> n /_ __/___(_) / ___
> > / / / __/ / _ \/ -_) t historian, an
> > /_/ /_/ /_/_.__/\__/ on appropri , and while
> > tation of historical
> >material was painful and for at least this listener un ined his
> >credibility. (On the other hand, Cornelius Borck, a h orian of
> medicine,
> >gave a |errific presentation-historically nuanced, lligently read,
> and |
> >careful|y resea|ched-on the optophone of Raoul Hausman and Hausman's
> >complic|ted rel|tionship to prosthesis.) From my perspective this
> suggests| |
> >a serio|s probl|m of disc|plinarity: surely just as new media
> >artists|theoris|s expect | sophisticated treatment from art historians
> >(Simon |enny ag|in: art h|storians|should learn engineering, cognitive
> >science| neuros|ience bef|re they |iscuss n|w media.) so new media
> artists | | | | |
> >and the|rists s|ould trea| the wor| that co|es before-both art and
> >media-w|th the |istorical|complexi|y (witho|t going |o Pennyian excess)
> >art his|ory at |ts best d|monstrat|s. | |
> > | | | | | |
> >Other i|sues th|t came up| | | |
> > * P|oblems |f storage|& retrie|al of ne| media w|rk. From an
> > histor|cal poi|t of view|this dem|nstrates|a remark|ble degree of
> > self-c|nscious|ess on th| part of|new new |edia-som|thing new,
> > incide|tally, |n the lon|er histo|y of med|a, and i|terest|ng as a
> phenomen|n. | | | | | |
> > * H|ge anxi|ty about |he "art"|status o| new med|a, alo|gside a
> > subthe|atic of|the relat|on to sc|ence and|to scien|ific m|dels of
> research| | | | | | |
> > * A|ulatory|fetishizi|g of cog|itive sc|ence, en|ineeri|g, and
> > neuros|ience (|n marked |ontrast |o the di|sing of |rt his|ory).
> > * L|ck of a|fixed def|nition o| new med|a, with |epeate| nods|to
> > hybrid|zation,|bodily en|agement,|non-hier|rchical |tructu|e, |
> networki|g, | | | | | | |
> > and so|on. | | | | | | |
> > * D|sconnec| of the k|ynote sp|akers. C|uchot ha| diffi|ulty |ith
> > Englis| and se|med, whil| emphasi|ing hybr|dity, to|be spe|king |rom
> > another time. Sarat Maharaj rambled for nearly 2 hours abo|t Rud|lf
> > Arnheim and the Other; I found this talk excruciating, though I |ater
> > spoke with someone (media artist, go figure) for whom it had bee| a high
> > point. And Lucia Santaella's beautifully delivered, rigorously
> > near-hallucinatory and religious but to me quasi-apocalyptic vision of
> > the "semiotic" and "post-human" present/future of the "exo-brain" was a
> > chilling picture of species-death.
> > * Ongoing problem of gender and geographic distribution. While
> > non-Western topics one
> > panel that dealt i _ _ ._ _| _ ._ also
> > the one panel that(_| (/_ | | (_| (/_ | t the
> > most flak in its f _|
> those
> > dealing with non-Western paradigms were Western. This relegation of
> > dealing with the Other to the women is typical. There was also some
> > grumbling that many of the non-Western projects had been tucked into the
> > _ . It would have been
> > \_|_) o en a panel on doing
> > | _ _ -Ameri-Nippon.
> > _| | / |/ | | | /\/ rpoint.. And then, as
> > (/\___/|_/ | |_/ \_/|_/ /\_/ of the people at the
> > dom had little
> gl
> > apples at their desks. No sign of Linux.
> >
> > _
> > \_|_) o
> > | _ _
> > _| | / |/ | | | /\/
> (/\___/|_/ | |_/ \_/|_/ /\_/
>
>
>
More information about the Syndicate
mailing list