Re: [-empyre-] influence
I think Stelarc is fully aware of the implications of his work; at least
in the discussions I've had with him, or listening to him at public
presentations, he's always placed it within a consideratino of the future
of the body and its problematic. This may not be political in the sense
you're concerned with, but it _is_ political in its consideration of
networking, technology, and issues of future embodiment or disembodiment.
I don't expect everything from everyone. For me, Stelarc is far more
important than Acconci - but then how is 'important' defined - it's like
an argument about who is a major artist and who isn't. Stelarc is clearly
concerned with 'issues' - he's always did his best to explain them (and
his explanations are eloquent); in a sense, I think he fulfill's JA's
concern for sci/tech/art bridgings to a greater extant than most others.
I must admist also a bit of jealousy - in my own work, I'm always 'on' the
screen (unless it's a live performance), whereas for Stelarc, the screen
always seems a residue.
As far as the romantic image of the artist, yes - but not nearly to the
extent of Beuys or Acconci. And I think that he, like Beuys (but not
Acconci), also universalizes the body in a way that it becomes a focal
point, not a negation or impediment of further discussion.
Trace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and