Hi Rob (and all), Fun quotes (for the prose alone). Yes. stones, glass houses, logs in eyes and specks in eyes. The following quote is from the acknowledgements of Rita Raley's 2009 "Tactical Media" book (which I will teach this semester in a freshman "liberal studies introductory colloquium" course called "Tactical Media / D.I.Y. Anarchy"):
"It is my fervent wish that this book will become obsolete becaues the world will have changed so dramatically that this study of art-activism could only appar as a quaint historical artifact, its latent pessimism misguided, its failure to imagine otherwise indicative of the author's poverty of imagination. Until such a point, I will continue to look to tactical media artists for inspiration and guidance." (xii) Not that I myself look to "tactical media artists" for much inspiration or guidance, and probably by the end of the course we will have critiqued their approaches from contradictory perspectives -- the work is too didactic/hamfisted/pragmatic; the work is too disengaged/esoteric/impotent. (Throw a critical stone in the air and you will hit a tactical media artist.) It is always amusing to me when artists and/or educators try to out-ethicalize each other, as if any of us are all that directly, pragmatically, quantitatively, measurably changing anything. For me, art and teaching are a gamble -- a gamble that some kind of abstract affective agency will eventually modulate actual aspects of the world in some way that will "matter." Consequently, I admire others who are making similar wagers. But I don't ever fool myself into believing that I'm on the street feeding the poor. Because I've done that kind of work as well, and it's quite a different thing. Rock & Roll Ain't No Pollution, Curt >There's more irony to be had in the quotes, that's why I posted them. >That and, as Michael points out, they are funny. > >Art & Language are anti-academic but started and have often ended up in >academia. They are politically committed but show at a gentrifying, >market-leading gallery. Despite protests to the contrary they are >radical artists who have artworld careers. I like them. > >It's very easy to criticise academia, artistic careerism, the art >market, politically/socially committed art etc. from the security of >one's own, virtuous, position outside of them. But there's no point >outside the world where we can stand and point and laugh at it. > >We all need to be careful about glass houses, or at least work on >smashing our own windows, whether our teaching means we are objectively >in academia or our radical socially committed artistic practice means we >are objectively part of gentrification. > >The most important criticism is self-criticism, although this may >sometimes mean that we have to admit we are not criticising others >enough. ;-) I've taught, I've wired up abandoned warehouses, I've >attended private views, I write reviews for a techno-art-and-society web >community. We are all guilty... > >- Rob. >_______________________________________________ >NetBehaviour mailing list >[email protected] >http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
