----------empyre- soft-skinned space---------------------- Also take a look at Claudia Gianetti's book/writings on digital aesthetics (http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/themes/aesthetics_of_the_digital/). Matt Fuller, Alex McLean, Adrian Ward, Geoff Cox, Florian Cramer (http://www.netzliteratur.net/cramer/concepts_notations_software_art.html) have witten on aesthetics of software art, in particular. Also see Max Bense's work on computational aesthetics (and Vilem Flusser)
I'm editing a book right now (Blackwell Companion on Digital Art that will have a whole section on aesthetics). C. ________________________________________ From: empyre-boun...@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au [empyre-boun...@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] on behalf of Nell Tenhaaf [tenh...@yorku.ca] Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 11:31 AM To: soft_skinned_space Subject: Re: [-empyre-] ah, aesthetics ----------empyre- soft-skinned space---------------------- Michele, there are a lot of ways to approach the expansion of aesthetics, some examples I like: Brian Massumi on event-based "lived abstraction"; Jennifer Fisher on the non-visual senses; Margaret Morse on "viewer-turned-participant" going back to 1970s interactivity. I've just been looking at the material Oron referred to, found the really interesting Introspective Self-Rapports: Shaping Ethical and Aesthetic Concepts 1850-2006, by Katrin Solhdju that includes Neal White's work and some "bottom-up aesthetics" basics. -Nell On 2013-09-12, at 3:21 PM, Michele Danjoux wrote: > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space---------------------- > Hello Oron and Nell, > > Just enjoying reading your posts. I am finding the discussion fascinating > thank you and was wondering what kinds of references might be ones to look at > on aesthetics aside of "the heavyweights of aesthetic philosophy?" > > Thank you > Michele > ________________________________________ > From: empyre-boun...@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au > [empyre-boun...@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] on behalf of Oron Catts > [oron.ca...@uwa.edu.au] > Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 6:35 PM > To: soft_skinned_space > Subject: Re: [-empyre-] ah, aesthetics > > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space---------------------- > Thanks Nell, > Interestingly enough- in 2002 we organised a conference titled the > Aesthetics of Care, there also was very little reference to the heavyweights > of aesthetic philosophy. > What we had instead was lots of discussion about the non-human on display and > references to performance/live art as point of departure for biological art > practices. Later, Neal White talked about invasive aesthetics, an idea we > liked very much as it yet again disrupt the ocular centric bias of the field. > > The most intimate relationship one can have with an art work is by digesting, > incorporating it into one's body- you can't really do it with a-life... and > it is a very different aesthetic experience than just watching > > > But as Samuel Butler wrote in Erehwon, 1872 '...for an art is like a living > organism - better dead than dying.' No cascade there... > > > Oron > > -----Original Message----- > From: empyre-boun...@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au > [mailto:empyre-boun...@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] On Behalf Of Nell Tenhaaf > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2013 7:30 PM > To: soft_skinned_space > Subject: [-empyre-] ah, aesthetics > > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space---------------------- Hello everyone, > > Oddly, aesthetics has become one of my favourite topics even though I come > out of the 70s "postmodern" and otherwise busted-open art moment. when it was > the last thing anyone wanted to invoke. My feeling is that we will get > hamstrung in seeking an aesthetic for bioart (or a-life art, or any of the > marvellous outlier practices of the past decades) if we drop back to, say > Kant - as comforting as that might sound. This came up in the context of a > TOCHI (computer-human interaction) special issue I was part of a few years > ago, on "aesthetics of interaction", which had a lot of good thinking about > Dewey's pragmatist aesthetics that keeps real world deployment in view, and > in general focused on ways of designing experience or interfaces to engage > multiple kinds of embodiments and types of events. One commentator lamented > than in the whole issue, the heavyweights of aesthetic philosophy were nearly > invisible. It was a bit of a shock - although if the concern is to legitimate > some k in > d of practice or set of practices, then yes, not such a surprising comment. > Can't we legitimate at this point if we need to, via practices that we feel > have a kinship in their kind of renegade approach to asking questions? - this > reminds me of Rob Mitchell's comments about performance art as a key > precursor to bioart, linking it with human/non-human population interactions > - and it also links up to often physical risk and lots of good subject/object > permeability. > > all best, > -n > > > _______________________________________________ > empyre forum > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au > http://www.subtle.net/empyre > _______________________________________________ > empyre forum > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au > http://www.subtle.net/empyre > _______________________________________________ > empyre forum > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au > http://www.subtle.net/empyre _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
