I don't think this reached the list, just to Chris- so here it is maybe again...I get the feeling that forthis could be true... again, is net knowledge as good as contsact knowledge?many people this is the only list of its kind to which they are subscribed.
After all we talk as if we know about each other yet we don't really; if we all met up then the question of whether we are heterogenous or homogenous would be immediately apparent. as it is, we can't make assumptions about the level of engagement of the list members. Or maybe the moderators can and could share that with us so we can pitch our contributions a bit more accurately?
It's impossible for me to say accurately, but at least twenty, maybe more <ambit> people are also present on other media/art lists such as Spectre, Rhizome, Xchange, Syndicate, nettime, Crumb, Glasgow Project Room, etc. I know this from seeing their postings on these other lists or from their forwarding messages from these lists. My guess is that the extent of the electronic networks of which ambiteers form nodes is far greater than this modest estimate.
to return to the original point:
how many people who look at the web joke would actually go and buy the book?
not many. It seems to me that one of the tragedies of situationism (and those who quote debord not wisely but too well) is that there is a plateau of cynicism that can be reached where everything can be dismissed as " mere recuperation" ; in other words a purity league position where nothing is ever quite valid enough. it may be deplorable from a purist point of view that the gap between pointing to information and pointing to a commodity has more or less vanished but hey, that's the new info net for you...
I don't see Keith Sanborn's stance as purist. He's applying the techniques of media criticism and analysis to a media artefact: I think this is useful in expanding the frame of reference during such a discussion. Sanborn may be approaching the topic from a minority standpoint, but personally I think this is partly vindicated by the subsequent thread on nettime debating how top page ranking on Google might be acheived.
again it brings me to the main point of difficulty i have with web list web practice/net art; how many people professing views culled from assorted radicalisms are actually doing anything radical?
does the concept make sense in a virtual context or does it have to connect to real world effects?
I think there are numerous examples of radical practice in networked art: RTMark, Critical Art Ensemble, eToy, Bureau for Inverse Technology to name a few. I would argue that most of these artists/activists use electronic networks as a means towards an end, rather than an end in themselves. The social and economic aspects of technology are seen as crucial.
As to Keith Sanborn, whether his work is radical or not is open to question. One example of his own film-making that might help a judgement to be formed: http://www.freewaves.org/festival_2002/artists/sanborn_k.htm I believe at one point he also subtitled and distributed on video various Situationist films by Debord and others.
Where I agree with Sanborn is that the 'virtual' can be analysed using tools and grammar which other disciplines have developed. Film theory and television theory can be applied to screen-based networked media too, though there are of course many differences between the Internet and other media. At the risk of being accused of self-promotion, can I point the reader towards a text I wrote on this topic in 1998 for COIL, journal of the moving image: http://www.cryptic.demon.co.uk/cj_home/analog.html
That's my tuppence worth for now.
Chris
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Chris Byrne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------
New Media Scotland tel: +44 131 477 3774 P.O. Box 23434, Edinburgh EH7 5SZ fax: +44 131 477 3775
Scotland, UK http://www.mediascot.org
--------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
a m b i t : networking media arts in scotland
post: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
archive: http://www.mediascot.org/ambit
info: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and write "info ambit" in the message body
-------------------------------------------------
