Thanks Jonathan for sharing.
From: jk <[email protected]>
Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
<[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, March 15, 2015 at 7:23 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] DIWO Process
hi list
re. exquisite corpse/Burroughs
heres an example of DIWO + software process (7 writers, a bunch of python
scripts aed on cut-ups)
orchestrated by Brendan Howell in a London iteration of
a collective novel writing project strung out over 8hr/day for 5 days
producing a 'positive' book text of approx. 1/7th
text production, and a 6/7ths data dump from which some of the launch event
(sound, text) was produced.....
http://www.exquisite-code.com/
http://exquisite-code.com/?action=page&url=london
jonathan
>
> One need only look back at the history of the 20th century avant-garde: from
> the Surrealists to Fluxus to Chance to see the broad range of ways in which
> collaborative processes can be structured or not. There are no absolutes:
> rules or no rules, it depends on the context, the medium, the participants, a
> host of things, there are so many different ways to activate socially engaged
> DIWO systems of networked art-making. The Surrealists exquisite corpse is a
> case in point:
>
>
>
>
> Exquisite corpse, also known as exquisite cadaver (from the original French
> term cadavre exquis) or rotating corpse, is a method by which a collection of
> words or images is collectively assembled. Each collaborator adds to a
> composition in sequence, either by following a rule (e.g. "The adjective
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjective> noun
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noun> adverb
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverb> verb
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verb> the adjective noun", as in "The green
> duck sweetly sang the dreadful dirge") or by being allowed to see only the end
> of what the previous person contributed. Wikipedia
>
>
>
>
> The DIWO concept has rich precedence, including the cutup technique practiced
> by William Burroughs and Bryon Gysin; the scripted events composed by Fluxus
> artists Yoko Ono, Dick Higgins, Lamont Young; the chance operations of John
> Cage, etc. There are a myriad of approaches to draw from and no single one is
> right or wrong it just depends on the needs of the community and the context.
>
>
>
>
> I am curious to know how previous DIWO actions manifested on this list and
> what made them successful?
>
>
>
>
> From: dave miller <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <[email protected]>
> Date: Sunday, March 15, 2015 at 5:19 PM
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] DIWO Process
>
>
>
>
>
> I agree with these things, and I like the way last time we "ruined" each
> other's work. I found it quite shocking actually, when I spent ages carefully
> making a drawing then someone deliberately hacked it up. It took the
> preciousness out my work, which at the time was upsetting, but soon after I
> realised the new collaborative piece was often far more interesting and took
> on a new life. Richer in that others were part of it, and a privilege that
> they'd taken and used it. The shared energy and excitement creates much more
> than me sitting alone in a corner on a private creation.
>
>
>
> dave
>
>
>
>
> On 15 March 2015 at 09:12, isabel brison <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 15 March 2015 at 18:21, Randall Packer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> @Michael >>>>> "It also characterises much of my experience of lists from
>>> about 2000 onwards And to my dismay it doesn't seem to be happening here
>>> to anything like the extent I'd thought it might. And I wonder why.²
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So my conclusion here is that perhaps we need to propose new and evolving
>>> DIWO strategies if we really want to ³do it with others² via email lists in
>>> the age of overload.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I'd say hustling for paid work may be the issue here more than information
>> overload, as that overload was already happening at the time of the last DIWO
>> on this list and that didn't seem to affect participation (though I must
>> admit to having passively spectated through that one but I was fairly new on
>> the list and still trying to get a feel for the conversation).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That said, I'd still argue for no rules. Rules may be necessary in large
>> funded projects, as funding drives the need for results in our
>> productivity-obssessed age, but rules tend to bring hierarchical structure
>> with them. That goes against the best aspects of participatory work:
>> inclusiveness, the freedom to play when and if you want to, and the openness
>> and unpredictability of it all. Necessarily that means projects may fail to
>> deliver results, spin out of control or take unexpected turns, but surely
>> that's part of the fun of it?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Also I think more than ever it's important to have spaces where we feel free
>> to remix, appropriate and play with other people's work. When artists are
>> being prosecuted left, right and center for things like doing a painting
>> based on someone else's photograph, just keeping that space open is a
>> political statement. And Netbehaviour has been doing a great job of that :-)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> [email protected]http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netb
> ehaviour
>
--
Dr Jonathan Kemp
http://xxn.org.uk
http://crystalworld.org.uk/http://www.freshsent.info/crystal
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
