revisiting what geert lovink wrote:
perhaps if we are to...
> start something beyond the level of
> the ordinairy conversation.
...then we could develop a process of working within this discussion that is
productive (it's too easy to get carried away on questioning rants like I did
in my last two posts!). If we are to make manifest then a manifesto can grow
from the process of discussion and contributions to that discussion. What we
will have is a 'document' formed from a series of indefinite number of
statements each responding to, diverging from, extending, reinforcing,
contradicting (or whatever) the previous statement. The list will be
producing a potentially ever-expanding list of statements exploiting the
nature of a discussion list itself (interestingly this suggests a kind of
linearity, but we'll have to wait and see if this is the case won't we?). The
statements do not demand a response of the usual
question/answer/advocate/adversary, etc discursive mode, but can just as well
be floating, unanswered, perhaps even poetical, haiku like... a sort of
Tractatus (like Wittgenstein's ??!). This could start using a different,
dedicated subject header so that it forms an identifiable thread; other
discussion can then go on alongside it with different subjects. Also when
adding a statement it's probably a good idea to only quote the previous
statement to keep the size of the posts managable.
OK I'll start one with my next post using Geert's statement as a starting
point. Hopefully others will join in. The Subject heading will be
'MANIFEST(O)'.
Steven
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
hothouse: media arts discussion and action at the threshold of
technology and the 21st Century
MANIFESTO 2nd - 12th November 1999 Experimenta Media Arts
www.experimenta.org
