Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

I think basically we all need to meet up more often! On 30 Sep 2015 22:11, "Annie Abrahams" wrote: > hi Randall, > > I am not necesarrily asking for more, better media, for more livelyness, I > am not sure I want more ... > I would like a content re-de-placement, more of the

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

hi Randall, I am not necesarrily asking for more, better media, for more livelyness, I am not sure I want more ... I would like a content re-de-placement, more of the processes going on (artistic and organisational) and les about results and "look what I have done" I would like that there would

[NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

http://conversations.e-flux.com/t/geert-lovink-on-social-media-and-the-arts/2581 "The absence at the 2015 Venice Bienale of digital arts and internet works says it all. Curators are afraid to admit they are clueless and continue their ignorant attitude towards art that deals with the digital in a

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

I think Geert is probably correct though - seems to me the art "establishment" aren't interested in internet/ digital art, though maybe they have a different view of it from us on here. The art world remains a mystery to me, so I may well be wrong. Thank god for Furtherfield, and I would love to

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

Well, happy to post polemics, it's a kind of a hobby. :^}. I think there has been a tendency for mainstream curators to approach more recent digitally-mediated works as if they were in effect a sort of hybrid old media, while still neglecting both historical and current "pure" digital media. This

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

I see the relevance in this approach, allthough I have to say its allready to late for that criticism no? Moreover, is he really interested in art? If yes, as Marc says, where are the references and the names ? And why is Venice Biennial important?To whom 2015-09-30 15:36 GMT+03:00

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

I am one of those who isn't really waiting for curators to pick up digital art. The so-called art world is institutional, capitalistic, elitist - it thrives on money. In this article Geert says something very interesting to me : " We need to design new ‘stages’ where we can act out our collective

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

Hi Paul, Geert needs to be more specific and highlight the curators who are 'not' scared and who have been showing technical artwork such as Furtherifeld & others - his words are not grounded and are too absolute, they do not reflect reality... marc

[NetBehaviour] Turbulence.org Commission: "How to Look at Artist Networks" by Angie Waller

September 30, 2015 Turbulence.org Commission: "How to Look at Artist Networks" by Angie Waller, with Jonathan Butterick http://turbulence.org/commissions/howtolook "How to Look at Artist Networks" allows you to search 60,280 names in the Google Knowledge Graph to see if they are more closely

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

Answering my own question! This article talks about post internet art and how it's replaced net art... http://www.artspace.com/magazine/interviews_features/trend_report/post_internet_art-52138 "While Net Art refers to art that uses the Internet as its medium and cannot be experienced any other

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

Annie your description sounds completely sublime, I’m not really sure what it entails but I envision something that is more like chat and less like email, more spontaneous in its transmission and feedback, and less cluttered in our inboxes. A flow rather than discreet dispatches. From:

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

Hi Annie, Sorry if my writing may seem a little weird today -- it's to do with having an extremely painful tooth ache at the moment, whilst being pretty busy at the same time. Anyway, Regarding Netbehaviour being a 'semi-closed network', it's an interesting question because it's not like

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

Hi Paul, Dave, Annie & all, Regarding Geert's interview -- I actually agree with most of what he says. In fact, I tend to agree with most of his ideas and writings. I think as a group, we're in tune (usually coincidentally with his reflections) but, living through them within a grounded context,

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

hiyas, * The http://turbulence.org/commissions/howtolook post seems like a time quirk link here.. * I think its interesting that actually doing stuff linked to net/digital/code/etc. seems to render the context/institutional critique approach a bit disposable, I think.. Precisely because the

Re: [NetBehaviour] An interview with Geert Lovink

Fascinating read. On gallery and museum embrace of post-internet art, I think there are two things going on. First of all, it's new and it's acceptance in galleries and museums is probably not much greater than internet art's acceptance was when it was new. Second of all, most of it takes forms