@Ruth & @Rob, some additional ruminations on the connection between Net practice, the Happenings & the 1960s in general:
With the Internet & social media, like the Happenings, there are opportunities for collective participation, distributed processes, real-time systems of performance, information sharing, and viewer interaction. Whereas process and documentation was essential to the shift away and dissolution of the object in Fluxus and later forms of performance & conceptual art, etc., the modern day database, content management system, and social media offer new ways to fully integrate the artistic process into a dynamically-shared, distributed network. On Thu, 5 Mar, 2015 at 5:26 AM, ruth catlow <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 04/03/15 16:19, Randall Packer wrote: > > >> >> >> It is my personal opinion that social media promises, at least in part a new >> look at the collective forms that emerged in the 1960s & 1970s. I don¹t want >> to go into a full-blown lecture here (my students get enough of that), but >> the link between the Happening and social media platforms such as Twitter, >> Facebook, Tumblr, the mailing lists, etc., suggest there is plenty of >> creative room for improvisation and audience engagement + interaction + remix >> in this form of participatory, collective narrative via the network. >> >> > > > I have heard eminent artists and theorists make this argument before and it > feels all wrong to me. > > Social medial platforms are designed by commercial companies to elicit very > particular types of normalising exchange between masses of people. People normalise themselves in any given environment, I think. One interesting thing about social media is the way each successive successful platform is colonized by a new generation of young people (a high school generation is 2-4 years...). This both makes platforms' claims to success less impressive (much of it is merely generational), and the problem of making free alternatives more difficult (if they become successful they will soon become uncool). > From the perspective of the platform providers, the purpose of the users > actions and interactions is to squirt lucrative data. > > The functioning of Happenings and Intermedial exchange was to detourn, > restructure, or re-make social relations- if only for a short duration. Temporary Autonomous Zones? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_Autonomous_Zone They were a very popular idea in some 90s net thought iirc. > I don't see any general connection with mass social media usage. There may be a negative connection. Both are social frames to elicit particular behaviours. > There have been media art projects that critique and expose the logic of the > platforms. Moddr_'s Web 2.0 Suicide Machine <http://suicidemachine.org/>, > Commodify Us <https://commodify.us/>,. Marc interviewed them here > http://www.furtherfield.org/features/reviews/commodify-us-our-data-our-terms There's also Naked on Pluto by Dave Griffiths, Aymeric Mansoux and Marloes de Valk: http://furtherfield.org/netbehaviour/naked-pluto-video And #Prisom by Andy Campbell and Mez Breeze: http://dreamingmethods.com/prisom/ > This is why Furtherfield bangs on about the importance of Free and Open > culture (in arts and software) > <http://p2pfoundation.net/World_of_Free_and_Open_Source_Art> +1 :-) - 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
