Intermedia idealised to the point of probable non-existence? Higgins' examples in his seminal essay make clear the broad application of the term. Far from bordering on non-existence, it represents one way forward through the proliferation of media and the supposed demise of formal experimentation associated with the chute of the avant-garde.
Translation of the forms of one media into another is one aspect of intermedia. In this sense, Schwitters' Ursonate is intermedia, musical form imposed on the phonemes of the German language. Hippy lightshows and today's digital signal transcoding by VJs operate in the same spirit, without requiring the formalism. A great many artists, myself among them, work with more formal transcoding through computational language, where compositional forms may be encoded in such a way as to migrate freely from one sensory modality to another. But Higgins also anticipates metaphorical applications of intermedia. Methods of mapping one medium to another can be work in ways similar to ritual, where symbols operate in different sensory modalities and may change their significance midstream--an object is whatever the ritual (a context for creating meaning) declares it to be. "The Happening developed as intermedium, an uncharted land that lies between collage, music, and the theater. It is not governed by rules; each work determines its own medium and form according to its needs." (Dick Higgins, Intermedia, 1966) As an intermedia practitioner for many years, I'd be fascinated to know why my art is likely non-existent. Seriously, I think Higgins' definition of intermedia was broad enough (and some might say vague enough) to include a wide swath of contemporary art practices. You might even be practicing it yourself, without knowing it, like prose. cheers, -- Paul HIggins thought intermedia might be not simply an artistic movement, but the form the future art would take. On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Simon Biggs <[email protected]> wrote: > Intermedia is a specific area of artistic practice pioneered by Dick > Higgins. Its principle was that the artist could produce artworks that > existed between or distinct to media and therefore be translatable across > media. It is, in a sense, a universalist model of art and thus could be > considered modernist in its intent (although Higgins's work is usually > considered proto-postmodern). It is arguable whether such an idealised > artwork could ever exist. > > Multimedia is not an art form or style of art. It is the application or use > of more than one medium in the production and dissemination of something. > > Relational art is distinct again. It's concerns are with the social > relations around the reception and valuing of something. The intent is to > reveal the dynamics of social relations by evidencing the becoming of the > artefact at a nexus of social relations. It does this by revealing people's > interactions with things in the performative. > > Networked art may or may not engage with all or none of the above. Whether > it does or does not may or may not be a function of the artists intent. > Whether a work succeeds in its aims will depend on how it is received and > the artist has (at best) only partial responsibility for that. Networked art > does use networks which, in today's world, are generally run on and through > computing systems (which are mostly digital). Teasing apart the mediale > relations between all the elements involved in networked art is complex. > Some artists (and theorists) have made entire careers out of it. > > Best > > Simon > > > On 16/12/2010 06:12, "Heidi May" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Rob, >> >> Thanks for your input - I will have to reflect more on the links you >> provided and might email you back. >> >> A historically contextualised concept of "networks" will >>> >>> naturally dissolve the distinction between intermedia artists and >>> multimedia artists so I wouldn't worry about drawing it. I'd just >>> steer >>> well clear of Relationalism, which exists precisely to obscure the >>> structure of its networks. >> >> I wouldn't mind if you expanded on the distinction you see between >> intermedia and multimedia, and more about your thoughts on the >> relationship between Relationalism and networks. >> >> thanks again, >> Heidi >> >> On 15-Dec-10, at 4:00 AM, [email protected] wrote: >> >>> Message: 3 >>> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:47:58 +0000 >>> From: Rob Myers <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] defining "network/ed" in art >>> To: [email protected] >>> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed >>> >>> On 12/13/2010 10:48 PM, Heidi May wrote: >>>> >>>> Speaking as an artist who >>>> teaching art at universities and college, I feel that "networked >>>> art" is >>>> immediately associated with digital and new media. >>> >>> Well, the Internet is the defining communication network of the age. >>> But >>> there have been and will be other communication networks (the >>> telegraph, >>> television, and postal networks have all been used to create art). And >>> if we use "network" to mean "social network" (in the sociological >>> rather >>> than the Facebook sense): >>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network >>> >>> then art is almost always the product of networks. Projects like "The >>> Republic Of Letters" and "Unconcealed" use data to show those >>> networks. >>> >>> In distinguishing between network and networked art (on whatever >>> network) a little mis-applied mathematical terminology may help. >>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_%28mathematics%29 >>> >>> We can define network art as art that exists on the edges of the >>> network >>> graph, and networked art as art that exists at its vertices: >>> >>> http://www.mteww.com/nad.html >>> >>> I think there's lots of research and lots of useful thinking that >>> can be >>> done here. A historically contextualised concept of "networks" will >>> naturally dissolve the distinction between intermedia artists and >>> multimedia artists so I wouldn't worry about drawing it. I'd just >>> steer >>> well clear of Relationalism, which exists precisely to obscure the >>> structure of its networks. >>> >>> - Rob. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > > [email protected] > http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ > > [email protected] > http://www.elmcip.net/ > http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ > > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > -- ----- |(*,+,#,=)(#,=,*,+)(=,#,+,*)(+,*,=,#)| --- http://ignotus.com _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
