Hi Curt, You're course sounds fascinating. I wish I could enroll! > > "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)
Good to read the Raley quote... Although I know her writing from other contexts, I didn't realize she'd written a book on tactical media. > > 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.) Since the mid nineties, I was involved in one way or another with the Next 5 Minutes, a tactical media conference which happened every few years Amsterdam. Through that event which was a convergence of art and activism, I met some pretty amazing artists/activists/tactical media practitioners (some known and others more obscure). While I understand your cynicism, it feels strange to generalize about these practices in that they are quite diverse. So can you talk a little more about the kind of work you're referring to? I'm thinking here of the difference between let's say the sanctioned practices of Superflex or maybe N55 versus the more "grass roots work" (not sure if this is right word) of RepoHistory, Paper Tiger or Deep Dish Television. Btw: I'm asking this out of curiosity, not in an adversarial "you-gotta- defend-yourself-way"... it's more that I think about these issues myself :-) > > 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. I agree with you that art and teaching are a gamble.... also it's a "slow cooking" process, the impact is often difficult to see, measure or register. > 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. I wonder if you're trying to make a distinction between direct and indirect action. Feeding the poor on the street is immediate; give someone food, and their belly is full. Education is very indirect; educate someone, and they will make of it what they will (or not). In other words, these are two types of digestion with different rates of ingestion. (btw: as I'm writing this, it strikes me that somewhere buried in here is that quote about teaching a man to fish ;-) all the best, Renee www.geuzen.org www.fudgethefacts.com > > 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 _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
