Re: [-empyre-] psychogeographies - opening statement

[Christina McPhee <christinamcphee@yahoo.com>]

dera Melinda, loved this post.

i have a project going, slipstreamkonza that faces
these very issues.

think i will compose  aformal post about it later
today.

i really really hope to see you in Melbourne.  How can
i help?  if you want i coul d book a decent hotel
where we could share a suite.

if theat would help.

i t would be tragic not to meet you after all this.

i still have not heard from michael.  I ahve another
idea for may though   i could try to recruit latin
americans met at FILE 2002 last yera. somevery cool
people, thinkinf of a topic on electronic language and
poetry.
could do this with jim andrews and alan sondheim too
both of whom i think are superb writers.

what do you think, should i go into high gear to get
this organized.  will begin immediately if you think
so.

Chrisitna
--- Melinda Rackham <melinda@subtle.net> wrote:
> Brendan wrote:
> > stab a mammoth.  However, I think the creepy demon
> inside the machine
> > is the one that forces me to organize parts of my
> existence into clean
> > data sets and calculable results.  It's more of a
> structuralist utopia
> > of order and control.  There is a violence
> inherent in this agenda but
> 
>  I think this is interresting that we have a
> rationalisation system..
> i thought about bretts training post.  i looked at
> the numbers, and knew
> that it was data which I could have input in
> different ways to a number of
> different applications and gotten different
> outcomes, from colour values, to
> a  VRML terrain maps, to a soundcscape. i coudl have
>  not even used a
> computer , but a set of couloured crayons and
> assigned a colour  to each
> number and made a nice stripey drawing.. etc etc..
> it coudl have been wall
> paper design.. the numbers seem to have a life of
> thier own and they can
> mutate to different forms..
> 
> so any meaning  generated by context only exists in
> relation to our de- and
> recoding mechanisms and machines.. i keep coming
> back to a phrase of
> Ollivier Dyens in Metal and Flesh that " computers
> are just human beings
> fused to thier niches.."  (pardon my paraphrasing) 
> that we exist in an
> intelligent condition , and everything else that we
> see , touch, think , do
> is part of that intelligence.. that code crunching.
> so here we are folded into a big mandelbrot set..
> and the order and entropy
> of the universe get played out in a filing system..
> 
> m
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brendan Howell" <mute@netaxs.com>
> To: "soft_skinned_space"
> <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 4:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] psychogeographies - opening
> statement
> 
> 
> > guns into plowshares into guns into plowshares
> into guns...
> >
> > Gunpowder was invented for art.  I don't see the
> artistic agenda hidden
> > in cluster bombs.
> >
> > I know that the first real digital computers were
> built for military
> > uses but there were many precursors.  Pascal's
> tabulating machine, the
> > abacus, Babbage's experiments, mechanical
> tabulators, Jacquard's loom,
> > etc..  To me the oppression inherent in the
> computer is more in line
> > with the oppression of accountants and
> statisticians.  My mac does not
> > give me the urge to calculate artillery
> trajectories into my
> > neighboring building any more than a philips
> screwdriver compels one to
> 
> > it's more subtle and empyrean than military to me.
>  But I can see why
> > this technology was attractive to the military and
> so easily co-opted.
> >
> > I think the military is inherent in many parts of
> our culture just as
> > much as technology.  Just look at language, film
> and social structures.
> >   They all trade symbols and concepts back and
> forth with the military.
> > As artists we can use military derived technology
> to corrupt military
> > influence and I don't think it has to be ironic. 
> But we also have to
> > accept that our products may be hijacked for
> violent purposes and we
> > need to work on strategies against this.
> >
> > As a bit of an aside, the media overdose of the
> last month gives me the
> > feeling that this war seems like a video game the
> way it's presented:
> > quick cuts, lossy mpeg video footage, 3d missile
> simulations, zooming
> > maps, retired colonels drawing football coach
> style attack diagrams.
> > The narratives cut back and forth between
> different small scale stories
> > and overall pictures.  This contrasts the
> presentation of the last gulf
> > war, which was more filmic, serial and consistent
> in its point of view.
> >   It would be nice if the second gulf war did not
> exist either but I
> > think a lot of hungry, shell shocked people trying
> to eat their
> > "freedom" may beg to differ.
> >
> > -Brendan
> >
> > On Donnerstag, April 3, 2003, at 06:24  Uhr, Brett
> Stalbaum wrote:
> >
> > > I wish I had time this AM to give a more
> organized answer to Jim
> > > Andrew's
> > > valid question. There was a reason I indicated
> that I am not sure in my
> > > previous post. I'm a technological realist. I
> most often fall on the
> > > side
> > > of technology being neutral, and prefer to hold
> people responsible for
> > > how
> > > technology is used or abused.  I don't feel, at
> least very acutely, the
> > > (supposed) taint that some feel adheres to
> technology just because it
> > > was
> > > developed by the military. I am not convinced
> that the armed vision
> > > that
> > > Crandall correctly identifies is necessarily
> self-fulfilling because of
> > > its origins. The internet, electronic
> computation, database, GPS, maps
> > > all
> > > of these have civilian uses that are important
> and good making. Alan
> > > Turing may have been the single person most
> responsible for the allied
> > > victory in WWII, an accomplishment that I
> certainly celebrate. Our
> > > asses were saved from the Nazi's by a gay
> genius. History is rarely
> > > more beautiful than that.
> > >
> > > Further, I don't deny that the military has an
> important role to play
> > > in
> > > liberal democratic societies, as long as the
> influence of the military
> > > in
> > > democratic decision making is properly
> depoliticized. (Although in my
> > > country, the relation between the military and
> business/government is
> > > way
> > > too cozy. That is another conversation.) To
> shorten my thoughts on
> > > this, I
> > > appreciate meteorology, recognize the strong
> relation between a map
> > > and a
> > > satellite photo, and recognize (even celebrate)
> that GIS related
> > > technologies are a ubiquitous part of daily
> life. What is it like to
> > > live
> > > with these technologies and our embeddedness in
> them? How does GIS
> > > change
> > > the act of taking a hike, or our aesthetic
> appreciation of the
> > > landscape?
> > > How does GIS change narrative? Or how can it? Or
> how should it?
> > >
> > > So can software art deconstruct the war machine?
> I don't believe so, at
> > > least in the direct and powerful sense (or
> feeling) that post-modernist
> > > thought often intensely or intoxicatingly
> assumes. We are artists. We
> > > are
> > > not that powerful. (I'm interested in hubristic
> pursuits for artists,
> > > but
> > > not quixotic ones.) But do artists have a stake
> in the use,
> > > development,
> > > and ultimately an influence on the cultural
> manifestations of military
> > > derived technologies? Again, I am not sure, but
> I 
=== message truncated ===


=====
<http://www.naxsmash.net>

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com