[-empyre-] The gestalt is just a mirror on your screen
rosa_menkman at hotmail.com
Thu Sep 3 23:00:33 EST 2009
Today I cannot print out my emails (I like reading on paper), read them, and keep up with my inbox.. You are on fire!
First, thank you Gabriel for your lovely introduction!
Julian, very nice project, I really like it. And I like the philosophy around mirrors even more... although I could see it is a very tricky one. If a photo camera is based on mirror technology (which I ... we could go anywhere with this discussion!)..
Just a recap before I am going to radicalize! or something..
When we describe the thickness of a particular screen (using thickness as a metaphor), we can (but do not need to) include the producers (artists) working process, the politics of the technology (in terms of hardware and software), different forms and levels of materiality (specificities: particularities and conventions), inputs (the message and the way this is encoded), outputs and the audience (that has to decode the message). The screen is thus a psychological, social and material assemblage (a dynamic process): indeed the screen (a medium?) is as thick as you let it be (or not let it be!), a great notion by Pall Thayer.
In the end, we can make new definitions, genres, subcategories to fit in every new medium (and its new importances) but this seems an endless and not very satisfying task. I think the discourse around media and what the medium is depends on the case at hand.
Artifacts (with artifact I refer to any break in transparency of transmission of information like glitches, compressions and feedback- obviously there is many other ways to define this but it is a choice of words) exist in any medium; from marble to software we can always distinguish a particular fingerprint. Error conditions are as complex as the definition of a medium, they also are assemblages (dynamic processes depending on multiple actors).
I think what is interesting about them is that there is a common attitude of exploitations of artifacts (sometimes understood as error conditions) recognizable between artists, from classics to now. In new media, we can recognize the dogma of glitch art.
I want to drop 5 thesis
1. The continuing search for a noiseless channel is no more then a regrettable, ill fated dogma. (The holodeck is a Holy grail!) Every medium has a fingerprint!
2. The audience is stuck in the membrane of knowledge governed by social acceptances. As an artist I strive to reposition this membrane.
3. I am a nomad of noise artifacts (glitches, compressions and feedback). Not stuck to any medium or contradictions like real vs virtual, digital vs analog. I surf the art of artifacts.
4. Failure is better than progress! Join the avant-garde of the unknown! Find catharsis in disintegration, ruptures and cracks: the exoskeleton of progress.
5. I create Critical Media Aesthetics: not post media aesthetics or medium-specific aesthetics but transmedia aesthetics. I bring any medium in a critical state or criticize its inherent dogmas!
Now. watch Radio Dada in HD!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRwkD6vTPjA
With Windows Live, you can organize, edit, and share your photos.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the empyre