It just occurred to me that this artwork has already been suggested by Kurt Vonnegut in Rabo Karabekian's "Windsor Blue Number Seventeen".
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 2:18 PM Pall Thayer <pallt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Based on my understanding of Accelerationism, I would think that the ideal > "Accelerationist" artwork would be work that you get typical art-investors > to pay a shit-load of money for but that is inherently ephemeral so that no > portion of the original "investment" can ever grow or even be recouped. > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 1:24 PM ruth catlow <ruth.cat...@furtherfield.org> > wrote: > >> Yes Annie, >> >> > Ok let's discuss concrete art works, activities etc - let's leave for >> a moment the theorethical philipoli stuff >> >> More examples would be good. >> >> > In this discussion we have until now Ruth's work >> http://gtp.ruthcatlow.net/ on time: human time, life time, computertime, >> scientific time, stone time and Rob's examples in his article >> http://furtherfield.org/features/articles/accelerationist-art - what >> are these doing, what duscussion, thoughts they further ... >> > >> >> To answer your particular questions about my work.... >> >> > I just watched Ruth's work again, I like the reflexion it brings, how >> it articulates all these times. >> > I have a question: - What do the people who go to the installation >> get from this, is there a live video projection?, Can they understand >> how time is at stake in this work? (In the catalogue text I read Edward >> mentioned a projection, but so far I didn't see any photos of it)* >> > I admit I had difficulties understanding the complexity of the piece >> in the beginning but now, at the end I can enjoy it's beauty. >> > So probably what I want to know Ruth, is where was your focus on the >> final video object or on what happened in the installation ... >> >> I think/hope that the work is totally explicit for gallery visitors. >> But now I understand that the documentation needs more clarity for >> online viewers >> >> The plasma screen displays this webpage http://gtp.ruthcatlow.net/ which >> shows the most recent image taken by the web cam, along with the looping >> video to which images are added every 3 or 4 images. >> >> People can pose for the web cam, or might be caught looking at the video >> in which they are soon to be portrayed. >> >> Here is a photo which shows the set up. >> >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/60673926@N02/24540097322/in/album-72157663958436545/ >> Here you can scroll through a set of images showing selected stills from >> the video, as well as some installation shots >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/60673926@N02/albums/72157663958436545 >> >> >> > >> > What did I get out of the examples Rob gave in his article? They are >> almost all art, just art, as far as I can see. Objects, you can show and >> sell. They function mostly in the Artworld. Holly Herndon and probably >> also Morehshin Allahyari & Daniel Rourke seem to be a bit different in >> the sense that they also engage with other domains and feel "whole". >> They reach out. >> > As feel "whole" for me someone like Hito Steyerl whose work I like a >> lot. >> > >> >> http://www.e-flux.com/journal/a-sea-of-data-apophenia-and-pattern-mis-recognition/ >> > the dissappearance of an horizon - acceleration as stasis >> https://vimeo.com/81109235#t=99s >> > Does this have anything to do with accelerationism? I don't know and >> would that be important to know? >> >> Acceleration as stasis. Yes I think this is right Annie. >> >> Yes! more examples >> >> Thank you >> >> :) >> Ruth >> >> >> > >> > Please diversify examples ... >> > >> > Thanks for these discussions!!!!!! >> > Annie >> > >> > *I found a photo of a screen showing what? >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/szpako/24284339460/in/pool-wana2021/ a >> still, a looping video? >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Gretta Louw >> <gretta.elise.l...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > This makes so much sense to me, thank you Ruth. I see so much of >> this in Europe, North America and the western, urban mainstream; an >> utter inability (and, probably, unwillingness) to look outside our own >> narrowly defined cultural lens when purportedly studying/attempting to >> understand technology, media, digitalisation, and their impacts. It >> hampers real discussion and cross-fertilization of ideas. Preaching to >> the (mostly white, educated, urban, western, northern) choir - as most >> tech/ digital/ futurist and possibly accelerationist (I hope I'm wrong >> about the last one, still too early to tell) >> festivals/meetings/discussion do - is a futile endeavor and exhausting >> to watch. Diversification is essential, but the way the discourse has >> developed around diversity actually is counterproductive to achieving >> greater diversity. Just as an example, there are studies that have shown >> that reminding applicants of their 'diverse' (one must ask, according to >> whom, diverse from what??) background in a job ad by specifically >> stating that one is an equal opportunities employer etc, will in fact >> reduce the number of applicants from diverse backgrounds. >> > >> > I am rambling, but this issue is always tacked on to the >> sidelines of debates around the pressing issues of our time; an >> afterthought or a nod to political correctness. It needs to be at the >> core: we should not discuss these issues unless we have sufficiently >> broad input, otherwise we are just talking ourselves into >> insignificance. NB: I am talking generally and from some disappointing >> experiences at European 'digital futures'-type round tables and panels, >> not about netbehaviourists. I do think that we all need to take a much >> more radical approach to inclusivity though. Let's not participate in >> mutual back-slapping or hand-wringing with ppl only from our own >> sub-cultures... >> > >> > All the best to everyone, and thank you for sharing your thoughts. >> xx >> > >> > > On 23 Apr 2016, at 21:54, ruth catlow >> <ruth.cat...@furtherfield.org> wrote: >> > > >> > > Here Baruch Gottlieb reviews “Inventing the Future”by Srnicek & >> Williams (co-authors of the Accelerationst Manifesto) >> > > >> >> https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/inventing-future-beholden-present-review/2016/04/08 >> > > >> > > He says >> > > >> > > "visions or projects for teleportation, nano-surgery and >> socialist Mars colonies, are not going to convince capitalists to stop >> attacking socially produced value every way they can. We need more >> fundamental knowledge about how the present is reproduced in this first >> place, the legacy of colonialism, imperialism, patriarchy and slavery in >> the very devices we use to understand such things, and we need social >> and cultural technologies to integrate that consciousness into new >> behaviours, new sociabilities, new modes of exchange." >> > > >> > > >> > >> On 23/04/16 13:15, ruth catlow wrote: >> > >> So is this the accelerationist aesthetics question? >> > >> >> > >> Q. How can we as artists and people use the logics & tools of >> automation and markets as part of making better art and better life for >> us all? >> > >> >> > >> : ) >> > > Tom said >> > >> >> > >>>>> when it appeared that the prognostications of the first wave >> of >> > >> accelerationists had partly came true: namely, that the >> accelerations >> > >> inherent in capitalism, specifically the tendency to mobilize >> more >> > >> surplus labour and resources at greater rates of efficiency and >> > >> abstraction, would exacerbate the system's inherent >> contradictions to a >> > >> catastrophic point. Only partly came true though: the system >> did not >> > >> collapse but massively reorganized itself (all those would-be >> John Galts >> > >> suddenly all too happy to accept government bail-outs, massive >> > >> expropriation of assets from the poor). This required a >> recalibration of >> > >> the theses of that first wave of accelerationists, a >> recalibration that >> > >> perhaps either is reflected in art, or in which<<< >> > >> >> > >> The unfettered development of automation and market-forces is >> currently seen as the preserve of people on the political right (who >> seek to preserve the status quo or enhance their wealth and power). But >> who may at some points ask for time-out (and bail-outs) in order to >> re-set their position of advantage. >> > >> >> > >> Rob said >> > >> >> > >> If I was trolling I'd argue that if you're on the left you're >> either a >> > >> conscious or an unconscious accelerationist. But it's possible >> to do >> > >> things in an un-Accelerationist way - it's not an inescapable or >> > >> inevitable cultural condition. >> > >> >> > >> Yes, this is why I declared myself an Accelerationist- it was >> not a proud declamation (a la 'I'm a feminist and I'm proud') more an >> admission (a la, the declaration at meetings of people participating in >> the 12 step programme). >> > >> >> > >> What I think is worth reflecting on (even if only idly) in this >> > >> discussion is whether there is anything in one's own life or >> work that >> > >> this strategy would be productive for. What could each of us >> better >> > >> understand and reason about (in some sense) so as to be able >> to better >> > >> change it? >> > >> >> > >> Both these points indicate something that Left Accelerationism >> has been >> > >> criticised for from various angles - it is a *selective* >> acceleration. >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> Left Accelerationists are critiqued as these >> social-power-tools (of automation and market-forces) are seen as >> inherently dehumanising and destructive of solidarity and freedom? >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >>> On 23/04/16 02:49, Rob Myers wrote: >> > >>>> On 22/04/16 03:27 AM, ruth catlow wrote: >> > >>>> Not that we all need to be in an unending frenzy of >> communication and >> > >>>> exchange. More that we have ever-more nuanced ways to sense >> the >> > >>>> significance of different kinds of participation: in a loop >> of unwitting >> > >>>> participation and active collaboration and organisation. >> > >>> I think this (and Simon & Pall's conversation) raises two >> important >> > >>> points about "Accelerationism". >> > >>> >> > >>> The first is that contemporary society appears to have speeded >> up >> > >>> anyway. We can debate whether progress or the economy has >> stalled, but >> > >>> our experience of life seems to involve the compression of >> time by >> > >>> technology and by socioeconomic demands. >> > >>> >> > >>> The obvious critic of this kind of speed and acceleration, as >> Paul >> > >>> mentioned, is Virilio. Who I think relates speed to power in >> a way that >> > >>> makes sense of our experience of it as disenfranchising. >> > >>> >> > >>> Wanting to slow down from *this* kind of acceleration isn't a >> bad thing >> > >>> and is in fact the end point of MAP/Fixing The Future -style >> > >>> Accelerationism: let's get the machines to do the busy-work >> so we can do >> > >>> something actually useful with our time instead. >> > >>> >> > >>> The second is that Accelerationism isn't a historical epoch >> like >> > >>> postmodernism or globalisation. It's a *strategy*. >> > >>> >> > >>> If I was trolling I'd argue that if you're on the left you're >> either a >> > >>> conscious or an unconscious accelerationist. But it's >> possible to do >> > >>> things in an un-Accelerationist way - it's not an inescapable >> or >> > >>> inevitable cultural condition. >> > >>> >> > >>> What I think is worth reflecting on (even if only idly) in this >> > >>> discussion is whether there is anything in one's own life or >> work that >> > >>> this strategy would be productive for. What could each of us >> better >> > >>> understand and reason about (in some sense) so as to be able >> to better >> > >>> change it? >> > >>> >> > >>> Both these points indicate something that Left >> Accelerationism has been >> > >>> criticised for from various angles - it is a *selective* >> acceleration. >> > >>> >> > >>>> I am currently showing a live networked video piece, I >> created with >> > >>>> Gareth Foote, called /Time is Speeding Up/ at 20-21 Visual >> Arts Centre >> > >>>> up in Scunthorpe as part of the show We Are Not Alone. I >> have no idea >> > >>>> whether this is an Accelerationist artwork. >> > >>> It's increasing our ability to perceive and reason about our >> situation, >> > >>> so quite possibly. >> > >>> >> > >>>> I agonized about the aesthetics of the work- at first- so >> un-"cool", so >> > >>>> un-cyber - because the humans are so alive AND they make the >> work. >> > >>>> But now I'm really happy with it and would like to assert a >> place for >> > >>>> this almost folksy aesthetic (rather than a rush to slick, >> black >> > >>>> fluidity) in post-capitalist art. >> > >>> Bladerunner's lived-in street-culture future is >> paradigmatically cyber, >> > >>> but I do know what you mean. The work is qualitative (or has >> a strong >> > >>> qualitative element), and this is in contrast to the strong >> quantitative >> > >>> bias of shiny information graphics and *some* proposals for >> > >>> Accelerationist aesthetics. >> > >>> >> > >>> - Rob. >> > >>> >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > NetBehaviour mailing list >> > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> >> >> -- >> Co-founder Co-director >> Furtherfield >> >> www.furtherfield.org >> >> +44 (0) 77370 02879 >> Meeting calendar - http://bit.ly/1NgeLce >> Bitcoin Address 197BBaXa6M9PtHhhNTQkuHh1pVJA8RrJ2i >> >> Furtherfield is the UK's leading organisation for art shows, labs, & >> debates >> around critical questions in art and technology, since 1997 >> >> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee >> registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205. >> Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade, >> Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH. >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> > -- > P Thayer, Artist > http://pallthayer.dyndns.org > -- P Thayer, Artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
