Hi Isabel and thanks for your interesting comments. To segue: I am now convinced that Karl Heinz Jeron's project is a conceptual work designed to, shall we say, throw its Shakespearean thumb in the face of Twitter & and collective forms of social media discourse. Here are the stats for his Twitter site:
Tweets: 24,600 Following: 0 Followers: 15 What is Karl saying with ³A Comedy of Errors²? Is our preoccupation with social media and collective, socially-engaged online forms in fact, a comedy of errors? I wanted to host this month of netartizen (or netartisan, they both work) because NetBehaviour is the discussion list produced by Furtherfield, one of the foremost alternative arts organizations in the world dedicated to social art. I was interested to see how this community would engage with the netartizens theme, a discussion about the art of the networked practice, and generally provoke some debate and conversation and artistic contributions concerning how the net has influenced our work, our thinking, the way we see the world. So when I see Karl Heinz Jeron¹s project, I am thinking that his generous outpouring of Tweets is in fact challenging the notion of networked space as a socially-engaged arena for collective narrative. It seems, as Eva and Franco Mattes have described, to be intended "for no one everyday.² Perhaps that is a condition we all need to address as daily media contributors to the FEED. I open it up for comments Randall Hello, I can't really agree: > When we sit in the theater, we are essentially a receiver of information that > is passed from the stage to the audience. But in the world of social media, we > are all actors on the stage: the fourth wall is erased, the proscenium > dissolves, there are no lights to turn down, the suspension of disbelief is > revised, as information (or lines) are passed not just from the one to many, > but from everyone to everyone. Most of us are audience most of the time, as actors need audience to be actors. And what's the difference between a screen and a stage? except that on a screen it is not always considered bad manners to join in the act. And some of us deliberately choose to be audience, others act occasionally, some act as a hobby and others professionally ( though I'm not sure that acting is a good analogy at all for social interaction - there should be a word for actor and audience all in one, and possibly for combinations of different amounts of one and the other). > how do we insert ourselves into this story, not as receivers, but as players > of equal measure, Tweet! Retweet! Respond! - Seriously, that account only has 14 followers. How can it act at all in the absence of audience? Is it a bad actor? If we're all actors then how many of us are bad actors and should consider a change of carreer? Oh and a funny thing: I followed the link above and it gave me an error. It's really @The_People_Came <https://twitter.com/The_People_Came> . Was that on purpose I wonder? Cheers Isabel - semi-professional lurker -- http://isabelbrison.com http://tellthemachines.com _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
