Hi Jeremy & all, Thank you for your recent post to netbehaviour.
I am sure that many on here are aware by now, - the show is today. We are currently getting everything ready. So, I will respond to Jeremy's questions over the weekend. If anyone on this list just so happens to be in London, come along it would be great to meet :-) chat soon. marc > Hey Marc, > sorry for taking so long to reply, last minute business in prep for friday, > > >> Much of your work involves a GUI (Graphic User Interface). User >> interfaces as we generally experience them, provide components for users >> to communicate with a computer. The interface defines the boundary >> between software, the hardware device or a user. What is interesting is >> that you are actually within the interface as well, performing in these >> environments. >> >> Could you talk about the relationship between you as the software >> developer and the software itself, within your performances? >> > > It has always been very important for my image or the image of the > user to be a part of the interfaces I create. My reason has a lot to > do with my historical/theoretical approach. I have been exposed to a > lot of 1970s performance video and have developed a very keen interest > in the theoretical context of the period. Specifically, for what is > termed "Performance for the Camera". A popular term, but for those > unfamiliar, it specifically refers to a state as described in Rosalind > Krauss' essay, The Aesthetic of Narcissism, in which the artist > becomes part of a feedback loop between his or herself and the > electronics of the camera. This creates a unique self awareness > (reflectivity) that was not present prior to this time. The artist > literally watches themselves (on a close circuit monitor) creating the > work and responding simultaneously. To put this in perspective, take > one step back in time and performances were created for live audiences > (less feedback), take one step forward and we land in the digital era > and our camera from the 1970s has become a computer (hyper feedback). > I like to call what I do Performance for the Computer, and it > necessitates a re-evaluation of some of the psychological paramters > that artists were working with in the 1970s. There's a lot of shit > that happened in between then and now, that's where things get very > interesting IMO. > > ok, so with this in mind I can answer your question regarding my role > as a software developer, I'll have to tell a fable. It's going to be > long and poorly written and will repeat some of the above in crude > language, I'm tired... > > So, it's 1970, you're a performance artist, you've been doing > performances all over the place, in studios, outdoors, in concert > halls, the back of police vans... you've got little to no > documentation... probably some photos, maybe some writing, maybe > you're lucky enough to have some super 8 footage and some halfway > decent audio recordings. Consumer video comes along, The Porta Pack, > wow, this is great! cheap tape, sync audio, live previewing. But shit, > the thing is prone to unspooling when jostled, and to see what things > look at you need a hefty monitor. Fuck, maybe it's not so great... but > wait, you've got a studio, you could setup there and do all kinds of > performances, watch them, adjust, finally get an idea of what/who > you're working with. Ok, this is strange, if I turn the monitor toward > me I can watch myself as if I were the audience. Hmmm... there's > something different about this. I can't go on doing the same kinds of > performances. Nope. this is brand new. Yay! Video Art is born!! > > Ok, so fast forward a decade. It's 1980something, you're an upcoming > electronic artist using computers to make amazing things happen in > REALTIME! You have one problem, how do you document and show people > what you're working on. Oh, of course!!! you record it on a Handycam! > You pass the tapes around, copy them, they get copied, you end up > representing your country at the Venice Biennial. Happy endings are > great! Strange thing is you don't ever notice any of the things your > friends noticed in the 70s, nope, you go right on making documentation > on video without thinking twice about yourself as a performer. "I'm > not a performer, I'm a programmer, my MACHINE is the artist, HE's > performing, ask HIM what HE thinks! this shows you what he does, > that's all"... Ok... I'll do that, but don't you think your macho > friend is making you look a little meek on tape? "nope, that's the way > I like it, I've put all of me into that thing, don't pay attention to > me". Ok, I'm going to just say it dude, your machine's got a bigger > dick than you and you're a bit of a chauvinist for masculinizing it > the way you are. I think you're using your machine in all kinds of > weird ways and I think you should think about what it means to give > yourself over to an object like that. I mean, seriously dude. > > Ok, let's fast forward 2 more decades. > This thing called the internet is popular, everyone has a computer, > realtime video processing is on every cpu, we video conference with > friends and family, augmented reality is a burgeoning field. Ya, we > can do anything with our data selves, artists and non artists alike. > Yes! I'm going to share this video of me rotating photos and tossing > them around using just my flailing arms to everyone in the entire > world!! I look like an idiot? why do you keep looking at me??! Are you > gay? yah. that's it, I'm gay. Fuck dude, would you realize what the > fuck it means to warp your face with that ichat filter? PLEASE! > > end of story, guy is increasingly clueless, distractions are > increasingly numerous. > > so, I've used some colloquial language here to try and get a point > across in impossibly high contrast. I play the role of the software > developer in performances because I insist on forcing the > acknowledgment that the computer is a site for performance and > reflectivity. I am trying to use a laptop in 1975. I'm trying to > understand what that means I guess. > > I hope this response doesn't offend anyone. I was just trying to have > some fun with it, > > see you all on friday? > > jeremy > > > I started this trajectory near the end of my undergraduate studies and > built my graduate research around this idea. > > On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:26 AM, marc garrett > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi Jeremy, >> >> Thank you for taking part in the dialogue so far, it has been both >> enjoyable and illuminating. >> >> Much of your work involves a GUI (Graphic User Interface). User >> interfaces as we generally experience them, provide components for users >> to communicate with a computer. The interface defines the boundary >> between software, the hardware device or a user. What is interesting is >> that you are actually within the interface as well, performing in these >> environments. >> >> Could you talk about the relationship between you as the software >> developer and the software itself, within your performances? >> >> marc >> >> >> >> >>> marc, >>> >>> >>> >>>> Do you think that going through the re-evaluative process of >>>> justification has helped or hindered your practice, in regards to your >>>> creative-identity and approach to what your artwork could of been? >>>> >>>> >>> I think it's healthy to re-evaluate, at least it's healthy for me. It >>> keeps me in check and appreciative of those around me. It has also >>> heightened my critical awareness, not just of myself but of everything >>> in my vicinity, which I think is what every artist should do. >>> Ultimately if you're not critical of yourself, how on earth can you be >>> critical of others? >>> >>> not sure what things could have been, I used to do a lot of >>> impressionist landscape paintings in high school. I guess I could be >>> in a rocky farmer's field right now, watching the sun set and >>> considering the beauty of the amber light catching the silhouette of a >>> windswept pine. >>> >>> jeremy >>> >>> On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 4:51 PM, marc garrett >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hi Jeremy, >>>> >>>> >kickn' it up a notch with the Freud! great stuff. >>>> >>>> Yes, I may do this every now and then. Not necessarily with Freud, but >>>> with other references, just to open things up but only if it feels >>>> relevant. >>>> >>>> >the truth is, I started art school in the 90s >>>> >and all of my profs taught identity politics work. >>>> >Actually my first EVER studio class was called >>>> >women in art (I was the only man in the course). >>>> >>>> >So starting out I always felt as though I wasn't >>>> >allowed to make art. I wasn't a victim of any >>>> >societal prejudices or discrimination, I was a >>>> >very happy privileged white man with very few cares. >>>> >>>> With identity politics being such a primary influence, it sounds like >>>> your art education was a complex yet insightful beginning. I can imagine >>>> that in order to find a voice for your work, there has been much >>>> re-evaluation taking place. >>>> >>>> >The type of work I make now, the type that casts >>>> >me as an ignorant/naive modern artist playing with >>>> >technology, was developed to try and create some >>>> >justification for myself in an ocean of those more >>>> >deserving than I. >>>> >>>> Do you think that going through the re-evaluative process of >>>> justification has helped or hindered your practice, in regards to your >>>> creative-identity and approach to what your artwork could of been? >>>> >>>> marc >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>>> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> >> > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
