Dear all: i am glad that the DIWO issue seems to have been resolved:) i will be willing to share more of my experience with the playaround project, if such opportunity comes up. else i am sure pei herslef would be happy to present it more officially and hopefully open up more possibilities.
till next time. cheers chun marc garrett said : > Hi all, > > I have posted a response to Pei's very interesting post which he > originally sent to me personally. The group which Pei is part of, are > pasting copies of the discussion on their own site here so I thought I > might as well share the dialogue - > http://2010.playaround.cc/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=16 - you can > read other texts that may have been written by other collaborators from > their end, also I believe. > > Anyway comment and share in the dialogue if you wish, it's all very > interesting. > > wishing everyone well. > > marc > > ------------------------------ > > Here is their project. > > playaround 2010 Electronic Art and Digital Environment Workshop – DIWO > Culture (playaround10 – DIWO Culture). > > "playaround 2010 Electronic Art and Digital Environment Workshop – DIWO > Culture;PlayAround10 is the third edition of an intensely parallel and > collaborative workshop of mediating the creative use of FLOSS > (Free/Libre Open Source Software) and DIY practices to an audience of > young students and emerging artists of diverse backgrounds. It combines > the knowledge creation and open distribution of new media technologies > and contemporary art practices in a socially responsible and relevant > context." > > http://tinyurl.com/2ud73v6 (external link) > > > Hi Pei, > > Thank you for taking the time to discuss about 'DIWO'. > > Firstly, I would like to say that I think your project is excellent, it > offers much value and is shifting and moving in directions which are > incorporating agency and independent, creative thought and breaking > through traditional concepts of learning and knowing; much needed in our > world of over-mediated, mono-cultural dominated, top-down noise. > > >certainly I do not ask for your understanding > > Of course, this may not matter to yourself particularly, but it matters > to me. I feel it is essential, for the well being of our human psyches > that we, as imaginative beings engage in exploring beyond the given > protocols and mannerisms, that too often enslave our essential selves. I > am also, interested in how people share ideas and progress through the > activity of independent and scale free situations, in respect of how > they (or we) become more empowered through each other's crossing over of > different values and (socially constructed) cultures, or national > identities and beyond. Seeing others and respecting their context(s) is, > one of the most valuable gifts anyone can receive from another being, > whether this be from one or many. In fact, you could say that I have > made it my life's work to see other's and breath in, other people's > imaginative journeys and witness their engagements, explorations and > developments with (hopefully) an open mind. > > Like most of our projects, they come about through real experience. Not > from academia, even though to accommodate and appreciate intellectual > stimuli and contextual reasoning, it is important to read and understand > other people's minds and their own journeys. But, we have grown as an > independent arts, collective since 1997, and have not asked to be > referenced by academics who have been writing about certain aspects of > media art and technologically used, culture, because we have never been > part of an institution, like so many of these individuals were and still > are. We did this all off our own backs - with others - developing > gradually, without the support of the more 'official' art, technology > historians and theorists' recommendations. Even though, we have known > that we have answered many of the questions asked around art and > networked communities through the years, with our shared practice. For > instance, I taught myself technology in the late eighties/early nineties > - hacking phones, transmitting into car radios, exhibiting in subways, > running pirate radio stations etc, and running art, anarchist BBS > Systems before the Internet. So what I am saying here, is that my > decision in not going the traditional route is all part of what > furtherfield is now, along with others who have shared in building > something that we feel is special, it is not built on privilege but hard > work and critical learning, and it has been tough. Because unlike many > of our peers in the say 'net.art' world, we have never believed in the > notion of a singular, modernist conception of genius or have followed > the trappings of trying to be famous. We have always wanted something > more substantial and inclusive, rather than the trivial action of > getting known and shutting the door to others afterwards. It is only in > the recent years that we are beginning to recognized and respected for > our 'complex' engagement and different approaches towards, life, > communities, social contexts. > > >BTW, even tho furtherfield made a milestone exhibition back in 2007, > >i still think DIWO is a common phrase, just like Italo Calvino's great > >title "invisible city" ... has already became a common phrase by its > >often usages in many albums, art project world wide and transformed > >into a sharable concept, some projects did referred to Calvino's book, > >some doesn't. why? I do not think it is because of laziness or disregard, > >because it is a good title also a state of mind shared commonly !! You > >can't authorize a state of mind, that be crazy! should human society > >operate only on the credit of others credit? Has human history ever > >credit correctly? (those are the questions of confusion in me, > >certainly I do not ask for your understanding) > > Our mutual conversation is based around some sense of understanding (or > even some misunderstandings), and I would definitely want to understand > and appreciate your context and reasonings in some way. Our dialogue is > evidence that you may wish for some form of understanding, whether we > agree with each other or not. If you read any of our texts you will > notice that we never use the traditional terms that hegemonic art > culture uses, such as innovative or the best artist, or genius, or > milestone - for we feel that conforming to the 'Spectacle', of certain > forms of language as a group, does not offer authenticity, or at least > the potential of it. > > I agree that DIWO is now a common phrase, and I am proud that we have > played some part in making it happen. We have accomplished something of > value locally and internationally regarding the DIWO projects, and are > glad that we have contributed in our own small way in bringing about > DIWO as a term for alternative, creative practice for others to explore. > > D.I.W.O - (or Diwo's, or Diwo groups) Expanded from the original term > known as D.I.Y. (Do It Yourself). D.I.W.O 'Do It With Others'. Is more > representative of contemporary, collaborative - art practice which > explores through the creative process of using networks, in a collective > manner. marc garrett (2006-11-08) > http://www.furtherfield.org/rosalind/definitions.pl?id=127 > > We know John Hartley very well. One of the references you linked to is > by John, called - ‘The Future is an Open Future.’ Cultural Studies at > the End of the ‘Long Twentieth Century’ and the Beginning of the > ‘Chinese Century.’ We have been working with John Hartley on various > projects and discuss ideas regularly. I remember reading this article > when it was first put online, and wondered why, when using the term > DIWO, that he did not mentioning our own explorations on the > collaborative term? And I suspect, even though 'he knew' that we had > brought about the term DIWO, he also felt it should be a common phrase. > I do appreciate this. But, the issue here is not about the shallow need > of whether one is referenced by another, it is more about respecting a > grass-roots culture and recognizing its 'real' and active hard-worked > contribution, sharing this information with others, contextually. > Grass-roots groups do have the same frameworks and mechanisms in place > to protect their discovered identities, successes and failures. Writing > about all this stuff of course is, much easier than doing it in real > life. If certain academics actually new (in their hearts and souls) how > much of our lives is spent in making these valuable experiences and > shared realizations happen, I think we'd all be in a better place right now. > > >should human society operate only on the credit of others credit? Has > human history ever credit correctly? > > Very good questions. I feel that 'credit' as a word really does not > really get anywhere close in explaining the actual dichotomy and its > relational nuances, of what we are currently engaged with here. I think > that it is much more interesting and also very complex. > > Unlike, most 'creative industry' orientated endeavors. Instead of > falling into trad-art behaviours and neo-liberal banality, we have > chosen to take risks and spent much of our time in building on our own > shared contexts, bringing about social change, new or alternative > meanings which are not so processed. We have built this, through > constant communication from the bottom up. Spending many years so that > our lives are not shadows of other people's ideas - they are lived out > negotiations reflecting upon each others dialogues and creative spirits, > and not interested in something so vapid or corporate, as social > networking interfaces. But, from a position of engagement with 'real' > people online and off line, in order to re-hack our socially engineered > selves, mutually into something closer to what is worth more personally, > than mere product. This is what makes such a thing as what we are > discussing so important. We are not just discussing 'crediting' someone, > we are discussing part of a group's mutually shared exploration, > relating to actual community values. Yes, its messy, but that also makes > it special, rather than it being mechanistic and efficient. > > This is also why it is essential for us to share such a dialogue as we > are doing ourselves right now. Because, if I ignore your context and > your community's nuances and reasonings, and just take from you and not > acknowledge your message or imagination, then we as adventurous > explorers in a world dominated by corporations who exploit us as > resources themselves, will find it easier by 'default' to weaken our > resolve, whilst we weaken each other's presence in the world. And when > something is taken without the story of how it came about, we are merely > diluted and more easily packaged and pushed out of the picture. This > happens too much in history, we all know this. > > So, DIWO is not a product, it is not there for reasons such as > 'accreditation', but about something more authentic in its spirit. It's > a 'story' of how shared, mutual experiences have come about, which will > hopefully inspire others and help in making our engagement with others > more special in some way. > Have a great time with your project. I'm on your side - wishing you much > respect. > > marc > > > > Pei wrote: > > Dear Marc Garrett, cc playaround-dev list, > > > > greeting, > > > > I am one of the co-organiser of playaround 2010 Workshop, my name is > Liu, Pei-Wen or simply pei, your post on NetBehaviour mailing list > caught my attention, in which concerning playaround10 used the term DIWO > without contacting furtherfield because your post believed furtherfield > invented this term with a milestone exhibition back to 2007 in UK. > (which i knew about it much much later) and pls allowed me to skip > historical references in this post. > > > > Do not worry, you ain't a pain, but brought up some good points for > positive discussion, about the relationship of an co-operative concept, > or the forming of a collective concept one would say, in a broader > sense, if you agree, a contemporary concept is never a closest packed, > that's why playaround promoted CC shared-alike, DIY, DIWO, and an > approach of FLOSS. When we were in needs of composing the subtitle > earlier this year, the TERM "DIWO" was inspired from Zach Libermann's > preface for Japanese version of the book "Beyond Interaction" that > Escher Tsai (another co-organiser of playaround) translated into > Mandarin, and the following term "Culture" was inspired from another > co-organiser of playaround - Marc Dusseiller's last year workshop - > hackteria.org; DIY microscope taught me that the contents of petri dish > is also called "culture" in english, before and after my prompted idea > announced on playaround-dev list, I never thought of who is the inventor > of this term, i thought it should be a common phrase, just like FYI > ...BTW, even tho furtherfield made a milestone exhibition back in 2007, > i still think DIWO is a common phrase, just like Italo Calvino's great > title "invisible city" ... has already became a common phrase by its > often usages in many albums, art project world wide and transformed into > a sharable concept, some projects did referred to Calvino's book, some > doesn't. why? I do not think it is because of laziness or disregard, > because it is a good title also a state of mind shared commonly !! You > can't authorize a state of mind, that be crazy! should human society > operate only on the credit of others credit? Has human history ever > credit correctly? (those are the questions of confusion in me, certainly > I do not ask for your understanding) > > > > But I certainly agreed with you that playaround said very little > about "DIWO Culture" on our website, DIWO Culture is the English > subtitle, or 文化培養皿 in Mandarin, I did not use the term DIWO in our > mandarin subtitle after discussion with Escher, simply because it > doesn't mean anything in our language to be able to elaborate the > concept we tried to convey, so translating mandarin title back to > english would be " Culture Petri Dish", where an stimulating yet > experimenting environment shared by creatures within, where a culture is > cultivated that corresponding to the believes of DIWO as the method of > workshop. > > > > Here I pasted short paragraph i wrote about DIWO Culture / 文化培養皿 > to illustrate the theme of playaround10, which also could be found on > our website ... http://2010.playaround.cc/spirits > > > > 2010 Theme - DIWO culture, each module is a smaller circle of the > bigger circle of playaround workshop, each has it unique culture, > specific motifs and potential of reconnecting to other circle. From > Do-It-Yourself to Do-It-With-Others; digital culture and art offer > countless potentials to connect shared interests among groups, this > possibility has effecting how we deal with daily routing and later, our > needs. On the other hand, it restructures the meaning of needs, and its > by-product, twixt the communication, and reinforce a physical > realisation from an abstract concept. Nevertheless, the most interesting > emphasis of playaround workshop is how to co-operate with others. > > > > In fact, furtherfield's DIWO exhibition was never in my scope, i > enjoy this coincident and happy to cycle it with cc shared-alike, any > comments and suggestions are more than appreciated. > > > > have a brighter summer day, > (ya, cited from Taiwanese film - A > Brighter Summer Day 1991 - by Edwards Yang) > > > pei > > > > > > http://2010.playaround.cc > > www.little-object.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5 Jul 2010, at 17:27:000, Chun Lee wrote: > > > >> dear all: > >> > >> i have just read this message from the NetBehaviour list, which > mentioned playaround, but not in a very nice way. i can see their point, and > >> DO think that what ever influences we have drawn upon, they *needs* > to be credited properly. > >> > >> i would advice either pei or escher writing to them as soon as > possible. otherwise playaround would be at risk of been seen as something we > >> had not intend for it to be. > >> > >> cheers > >> > >> chun > >> > >> ----- Forwarded message from marc garrett > <[email protected]> ----- > >> > >> From: marc garrett <[email protected]> > >> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity > <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] early > >> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 15:36:11 +0100 > >> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100411) > >> > >> Hi Annie, > >> > >> yes, I will write to them. > >> > >> I do find it surprising that they have not contacted us, especially > >> knowing that they have been influenced in some way, to use DIWO in a > >> similar context. > >> > >> I am wondering if there is anyone on this list who know these people, or > >> are part of the project 'playaround 2010 Electronic Art and Digital > >> Environment Workshop – DIWO Culture (playaround10 – DIWO Culture).' > >> http://tinyurl.com/2ud73v6 ? > >> > >> Just typing diwo & furtherfield, or even 'DIWO' on its own in search > >> engines brings many results of DIWO's origins, their research is much to > >> be desired. > >> > >> marc > >> > >> > >> > >>> Hi Marc > >>> > >>> I agree > >>> it's ok but > >>> you could write them anyway > >>> > >>> kisses > >>> Annie > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 1:56 PM, marc garrett > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Another groups using DIWO Term... > >>> > >>> Hi everyone, > >>> > >>> This post will be especially interesting those who have taken part in > >>> our shared 'DIWO' (Do it with others) projects in the past. > >>> > >>> I have been noticing various groups/projects out there, who have been > >>> using 'DIWO', as a contemporary form of sharing, collaborative, > >>> collective practice for a little while now. > >>> > >>> This a recent project I have noticed, but no references to ourselves, > >>> the inventors of the term & practice itself - oh well. I suppose > >> it's ok... > >>> Marc > >>> > >>> wishing all well. > >>> > >>> > >>> playaround 2010 Electronic Art and Digital Environment Workshop – > >> DIWO > >>> Culture (playaround10 – DIWO Culture). > >>> > >>> "playaround 2010 Electronic Art and Digital Environment Workshop > >> – DIWO > >>> Culture;PlayAround10 is the third edition of an intensely > >> parallel and > >>> collaborative workshop of mediating the creative use of FLOSS > >>> (Free/Libre Open Source Software) and DIY practices to an audience of > >>> young students and emerging artists of diverse backgrounds. It > >> combines > >>> the knowledge creation and open distribution of new media > >> technologies > >>> and contemporary art practices in a socially responsible and relevant > >>> context." > >>> > >>> http://tinyurl.com/2ud73v6 > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> NetBehaviour mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Documentation of Huis Clos / No Exit - On Translation > >>> Video, reactions of the performers and the public, photos and the > >> performance protocol > >>> http://bram.org/huisclos/ontranslation/indexfr.html > >>> > >>> Article IF NOT YOU NOT ME, ANNIE ABRAHAMS AND LIFE IN NETWORKS, > >>> Maria Chatzichristodoulou in Digimag 54 May 2010 > >>> http://www.digicult.it/digimag/article.asp?id=1793 > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> NetBehaviour mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > >> _______________________________________________ > >> NetBehaviour mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > >> > >> > >> ----- End forwarded message ----- > > > > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
