[NetBehaviour] whatever
When we create “art”, we strive to do something new. We put all our energy into compiling our emotions, our feelings, our experiences into a comprehensive whole. However, that comprehension is always personal. We can not separate our creative expression from our creative compulsions or energies. The outcome is what it is. It is a personal reflection of our personal interpretation of our time. The notion of “timeless art” is a myth, perpetuated by who knows what (or who)... how can a work of art be timeless? It is always a product of its time. To perceive it otherwise would be absurd. If Les Demoiselles d'Avignon had never previously been produced, would we accept it today as a remarkable work of art? I don't think so. Its production was very much tied to its time. Its importance is equally tied to its time of production. It represents a break from its own contemporary tradition - but not even a drastic break. It falls within its own contemporary explorations into african art (which had already been pursued by Ingres, in his own manner and had also influenced the likes of Manet but we could go on forever). Picasso was not the only one exploring these avenues. But that is beyond my point. We live in a time. Yes, the period is supposed to be there. We live in a time. It is our time. As Lilly Allen stated, “No, you can't have my number 'cause I lost my phone.” Lost my phone? When I was her age, my phone never left my home! But times change. We live in an age where you may “lose your phone”. And what goes with losing your phone? You lose your identity! No... you don't. Your identity is as secure as you made it... what?... your username was the same as your password? You idio you dear, dear child. I reviewed the work of an “internet artist” recently. Oh... here we go... someone addressing his time, his culture! He uses the fact that contemporary culture has provided us a plethora of personal imagery. This is good. His website contains compelling images of his own manipulations of images. His own manipulations of images his own man... Excuse me, what are you doing to these images? How are you choosing these images. Yes, your end results are compelling but what is your process? That would be far more compelling. Please don't tell me that you lost your phone. The only thing that truly speakes to your time, is your method. And you choose to veil that behind the eye-candy of your output? Um... ok. As I drunkenly leave my seat to explore the opportunities provided me by a destructive cannon of highly inflammabale tobacco, I deplore you to consider the issues; what exactly defines our time? Our culture? I think Lily Allen hit the nail on the head for her target group. As you consider where we might be, I'll be out on the stoop, smoking a cigarette. I expect a coherent answer when I get back. -- * Pall Thayer artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org * ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] whatever
That's one (rather romantic) model for making art. The use of the word we here is problematic. Many do not make art for these kinds of reasons (to express themselves and/or be novel). I agree with you about timelessness though. Everything is in time, just as it is of stuff. best Simon On 17 Dec 2011, at 08:42, Pall Thayer wrote: When we create “art”, we strive to do something new. We put all our energy into compiling our emotions, our feelings, our experiences into a comprehensive whole. However, that comprehension is always personal. We can not separate our creative expression from our creative compulsions or energies. The outcome is what it is. It is a personal reflection of our personal interpretation of our time. The notion of “timeless art” is a myth, perpetuated by who knows what (or who)... how can a work of art be timeless? It is always a product of its time. To perceive it otherwise would be absurd. If Les Demoiselles d'Avignon had never previously been produced, would we accept it today as a remarkable work of art? I don't think so. Its production was very much tied to its time. Its importance is equally tied to its time of production. It represents a break from its own contemporary tradition - but not even a drastic break. It falls within its own contemporary explorations into african art (which had already been pursued by Ingres, in his own manner and had also influenced the likes of Manet but we could go on forever). Picasso was not the only one exploring these avenues. But that is beyond my point. We live in a time. Yes, the period is supposed to be there. We live in a time. It is our time. As Lilly Allen stated, “No, you can't have my number 'cause I lost my phone.” Lost my phone? When I was her age, my phone never left my home! But times change. We live in an age where you may “lose your phone”. And what goes with losing your phone? You lose your identity! No... you don't. Your identity is as secure as you made it... what?... your username was the same as your password? You idio you dear, dear child. I reviewed the work of an “internet artist” recently. Oh... here we go... someone addressing his time, his culture! He uses the fact that contemporary culture has provided us a plethora of personal imagery. This is good. His website contains compelling images of his own manipulations of images. His own manipulations of images his own man... Excuse me, what are you doing to these images? How are you choosing these images. Yes, your end results are compelling but what is your process? That would be far more compelling. Please don't tell me that you lost your phone. The only thing that truly speakes to your time, is your method. And you choose to veil that behind the eye-candy of your output? Um... ok. As I drunkenly leave my seat to explore the opportunities provided me by a destructive cannon of highly inflammabale tobacco, I deplore you to consider the issues; what exactly defines our time? Our culture? I think Lily Allen hit the nail on the head for her target group. As you consider where we might be, I'll be out on the stoop, smoking a cigarette. I expect a coherent answer when I get back. -- * Pall Thayer artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org * ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk s.bi...@ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] whatever
Thanks Pall for these thoughts. You are the only one that can give yourself a coherent answer. Best Annie My time is defined by delays. On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Pall Thayer pallt...@gmail.com wrote: When we create “art”, we strive to do something new. We put all our energy into compiling our emotions, our feelings, our experiences into a comprehensive whole. However, that comprehension is always personal. We can not separate our creative expression from our creative compulsions or energies. The outcome is what it is. It is a personal reflection of our personal interpretation of our time. The notion of “timeless art” is a myth, perpetuated by who knows what (or who)... how can a work of art be timeless? It is always a product of its time. To perceive it otherwise would be absurd. If Les Demoiselles d'Avignon had never previously been produced, would we accept it today as a remarkable work of art? I don't think so. Its production was very much tied to its time. Its importance is equally tied to its time of production. It represents a break from its own contemporary tradition - but not even a drastic break. It falls within its own contemporary explorations into african art (which had already been pursued by Ingres, in his own manner and had also influenced the likes of Manet but we could go on forever). Picasso was not the only one exploring these avenues. But that is beyond my point. We live in a time. Yes, the period is supposed to be there. We live in a time. It is our time. As Lilly Allen stated, “No, you can't have my number 'cause I lost my phone.” Lost my phone? When I was her age, my phone never left my home! But times change. We live in an age where you may “lose your phone”. And what goes with losing your phone? You lose your identity! No... you don't. Your identity is as secure as you made it... what?... your username was the same as your password? You idio you dear, dear child. I reviewed the work of an “internet artist” recently. Oh... here we go... someone addressing his time, his culture! He uses the fact that contemporary culture has provided us a plethora of personal imagery. This is good. His website contains compelling images of his own manipulations of images. His own manipulations of images his own man... Excuse me, what are you doing to these images? How are you choosing these images. Yes, your end results are compelling but what is your process? That would be far more compelling. Please don't tell me that you lost your phone. The only thing that truly speakes to your time, is your method. And you choose to veil that behind the eye-candy of your output? Um... ok. As I drunkenly leave my seat to explore the opportunities provided me by a destructive cannon of highly inflammabale tobacco, I deplore you to consider the issues; what exactly defines our time? Our culture? I think Lily Allen hit the nail on the head for her target group. As you consider where we might be, I'll be out on the stoop, smoking a cigarette. I expect a coherent answer when I get back. -- * Pall Thayer artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org * ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour -- Duet - Satz 1, 2, 3 et 4 - Conversations between Antye Greie (aka AGF) and Annie Abrahams II* December 14, 15 and 16 from 7 PM til 7.30 PM (Paris time)* 4 Domestic Streaming Performances http://aabrahams.wordpress.com/2011/12/08/duet-satz-1-2-3-et-4/* ** **Extrait en photo et son **de la performance* HUIS-CLOS / NO EXIT Training for a Better World http://www.documentary-art.net/tag/watch-now.php?ref=344 *Paris-art.com | Interview | Annie Abrahams |* http://www.paris-art.com/index.php?menu=interviewid_inter=453 ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] whatever
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:27:43 + Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk wrote: That's one (rather romantic) model for making art. The use of the word we here is problematic. Many do not make art for these kinds of reasons (to express themselves and/or be novel). I agree with you about timelessness though. Everything is in time, just as it is of stuff. But there are works which retain their power through the decades, and centuries, and works which loose it within a year. The former is what I currently assume works referred to as timeless have over other works. But also I think there is the magical sense also attached to this which the media will try to emphasise and exploit and place preference on in promotional material. James. best Simon On 17 Dec 2011, at 08:42, Pall Thayer wrote: When we create “art”, we strive to do something new. We put all our energy into compiling our emotions, our feelings, our experiences into a comprehensive whole. However, that comprehension is always personal. We can not separate our creative expression from our creative compulsions or energies. The outcome is what it is. It is a personal reflection of our personal interpretation of our time. The notion of “timeless art” is a myth, perpetuated by who knows what (or who)... how can a work of art be timeless? It is always a product of its time. To perceive it otherwise would be absurd. If Les Demoiselles d'Avignon had never previously been produced, would we accept it today as a remarkable work of art? I don't think so. Its production was very much tied to its time. Its importance is equally tied to its time of production. It represents a break from its own contemporary tradition - but not even a drastic break. It falls within its own contemporary explorations into african art (which had already been pursued by Ingres, in his own manner and had also influenced the likes of Manet but we could go on forever). Picasso was not the only one exploring these avenues. But that is beyond my point. We live in a time. Yes, the period is supposed to be there. We live in a time. It is our time. As Lilly Allen stated, “No, you can't have my number 'cause I lost my phone.” Lost my phone? When I was her age, my phone never left my home! But times change. We live in an age where you may “lose your phone”. And what goes with losing your phone? You lose your identity! No... you don't. Your identity is as secure as you made it... what?... your username was the same as your password? You idio you dear, dear child. I reviewed the work of an “internet artist” recently. Oh... here we go... someone addressing his time, his culture! He uses the fact that contemporary culture has provided us a plethora of personal imagery. This is good. His website contains compelling images of his own manipulations of images. His own manipulations of images his own man... Excuse me, what are you doing to these images? How are you choosing these images. Yes, your end results are compelling but what is your process? That would be far more compelling. Please don't tell me that you lost your phone. The only thing that truly speakes to your time, is your method. And you choose to veil that behind the eye-candy of your output? Um... ok. As I drunkenly leave my seat to explore the opportunities provided me by a destructive cannon of highly inflammabale tobacco, I deplore you to consider the issues; what exactly defines our time? Our culture? I think Lily Allen hit the nail on the head for her target group. As you consider where we might be, I'll be out on the stoop, smoking a cigarette. I expect a coherent answer when I get back. -- * Pall Thayer artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org * ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk s.bi...@ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour -- http://jwm-art.net/ image/audio/text/code/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] whatever
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 11:45:43 +0100 Annie Abrahams bram@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Pall for these thoughts. You are the only one that can give yourself a coherent answer. I won't be providing a coherent answer out of principle... The principle being not to meet the demands of terrorists... Based on the principle discussion is a foreign policy not to be entertaining. And so on. -- http://jwm-art.net/ image/audio/text/code/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] whatever
There is nothing to hold on Nothing but Heart, Low http://www.nictoglobe.com/new/room/New%20Room/ma201112.html Best A. On Dec 17, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Pall Thayer wrote: When we create “art”, we strive to do something new. We put all our energy into compiling our emotions, our feelings, our experiences into a comprehensive whole. However, that comprehension is always personal. We can not separate our creative expression from our creative compulsions or energies. The outcome is what it is. It is a personal reflection of our personal interpretation of our time. The notion of “timeless art” is a myth, perpetuated by who knows what (or who)... how can a work of art be timeless? It is always a product of its time. To perceive it otherwise would be absurd. If Les Demoiselles d'Avignon had never previously been produced, would we accept it today as a remarkable work of art? I don't think so. Its production was very much tied to its time. Its importance is equally tied to its time of production. It represents a break from its own contemporary tradition - but not even a drastic break. It falls within its own contemporary explorations into african art (which had already been pursued by Ingres, in his own manner and had also influenced the likes of Manet but we could go on forever). Picasso was not the only one exploring these avenues. But that is beyond my point. We live in a time. Yes, the period is supposed to be there. We live in a time. It is our time. As Lilly Allen stated, “No, you can't have my number 'cause I lost my phone.” Lost my phone? When I was her age, my phone never left my home! But times change. We live in an age where you may “lose your phone”. And what goes with losing your phone? You lose your identity! No... you don't. Your identity is as secure as you made it... what?... your username was the same as your password? You idio you dear, dear child. I reviewed the work of an “internet artist” recently. Oh... here we go... someone addressing his time, his culture! He uses the fact that contemporary culture has provided us a plethora of personal imagery. This is good. His website contains compelling images of his own manipulations of images. His own manipulations of images his own man... Excuse me, what are you doing to these images? How are you choosing these images. Yes, your end results are compelling but what is your process? That would be far more compelling. Please don't tell me that you lost your phone. The only thing that truly speakes to your time, is your method. And you choose to veil that behind the eye-candy of your output? Um... ok. As I drunkenly leave my seat to explore the opportunities provided me by a destructive cannon of highly inflammabale tobacco, I deplore you to consider the issues; what exactly defines our time? Our culture? I think Lily Allen hit the nail on the head for her target group. As you consider where we might be, I'll be out on the stoop, smoking a cigarette. I expect a coherent answer when I get back. -- * Pall Thayer artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org * ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
[NetBehaviour] don't take it personally, babe
don't take it personally, babe, it just ain't your story A spiritual sequel of sorts to Digital: A Love Story, set in a prestigious private high school, and on the social networks of 2027. Seven students, three endings, one eavesdropping teacher. A full length visual novel about the erosion of privacy, gay drama, young sexuality, and the perils of modern online life for a high school literature class. http://scoutshonour.com/donttakeitpersonallybabeitjustaintyourstory/ ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
[NetBehaviour] Multi-media performance at Eyebeam Open Studio, 12/16-17/11
Multi-media performance at Eyebeam Open Studio, 12/16-17/11 http://www.flickr.com/photos/asondheim/sets/72157628462154959/ very very very happy with this set; I was amazed at how easy it was - no equipment problems, great work from Azure and Mark, terrific setup with Jackson, Marko, Kyle, and Roddy - thanks, everyone! - Alan * * videos etc. later ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
