Michael, this is a good question and one I have been grappling with since we
began the Netartizens project. I have a long history of collaboration with
numerous artists in varied contexts: from theater to performance to
installation and social constructions. These projects have always involved a
highly structured premise, such as the John Cage Musicircus events I staged
in San Francisco, in which as many as 50 artists and performers worked
within an elaborately conceived and coordinate temporal / spatial plan to
carry out actions and events. I have taught the process of collaboration for
years, including the Intermedia Studio course at the Maryland Institute
College of art, in which MICA artists, Johns Hopkins University science
students, and Peabody Conservatory of Music composers would spend an entire
semester negotiating an interdisciplinary project that integrated their
respective disciplines.

So in terms of a DIWO-conceived process of work exchanged via the network, I
ask: does this process benefit from a form of structure? Do artists need to
express an ³idea² or ³plan" as a basis for collaboration, in other words,
how do you see the spontaneous creation of work, such as the wonderful
portraits you have made, activating a networked artistic response from
others? What is the collective modus operandi for ³encouraging the artistic
interchange?² And what is gained when the process is left entirely free and
open? 

From:  Michael Szpakowski <[email protected]>
Reply-To:  Michael Szpakowski <[email protected]>, NetBehaviour for networked
distributed creativity <[email protected]>
Date:  Friday, March 13, 2015 at 5:37 PM
To:  NetBehaviour for Networked Distributed Creativity
<[email protected]>
Subject:  [NetBehaviour] hmm..

I remember in the previous DIWO projects there being a whole slew of work
and interaction between people *as work*.
Maybe folk are just biding their time but I think its a pity there isn't
more of this this time around.
This *isn't* a nudge to remix my stuff ( although of course anyone is
welcome; the whole body of work is CC) but just to encourage more *artistic*
interchange. If that doesn't feel like it fits for people then I would be
interested to have a discussion about what has changed over the last few
years...because it always seemed to me that this kind of interchange was
*defining* in terms of some kind of human centred, anti-coroporate take on
the network...
Having said that I'm off out for the day to look at splodges of oil  &
pigment on wood and fabric supports in London so if anyone wants to chat
about this I probably won't reply until later...
warm wishes to all
m.

_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Reply via email to