Re: [-empyre-] what women

Yvonne Martinsson <yvonne@freewheelin.nu> · Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:19:50 +0100

Hi,

Any title that is supposed to speak for women is dubious. It's not only a
question of women in the 'rich' world and women in less developed countries.
It's a question of being a woman in a particular situation.

I haven't read your book. I doubt I will. I usually don't read books that
start with "Women and..." Not because they're bad, but I don't know how to
relate to them. I don't recognize myself at all. But they're sellable.

    yvonne 

    ---------------------------
    http://www.freewheelin.nu
    ---------------------------

> From: Judy Malloy <judymalloy@judymalloy.net>
> Reply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:25:48 -0800
> To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] what women
> 
> 
> Hi Diana,
> 
> As I noted in earlier responses, the book was put together beginning 10 years
> ago.   
> It was meant to be a resource, and I'm happy that all the work still stands
> up! 
> 
> Personally I think the book is very good and am happy that it includes not
> only the work of so many women whose work was formative in this field
> but also is reasonably diverse.
> 
> In addition to work by women based in the US, it includes three
> chapters by Canadian women; a chapter by Mexican Critic Martha
> Burkle Bonnechi; the work of  French composer Cecile Le Prado;
> German researchers/artists  Monika Fleishmann and Wolfgang Strauss;
> the FACES list and Face Settings in a chapter by Kathy Rae Huffman
> and Eva Wohlgemuth that traverses Europe and Russia;  Agnes Hegedus
> (Hungary/Germany); Zoe Sofia  (Australia) and Simone Osthoff (Brazil).
> 
> And of course Steina Vasulka  was born in Reykjavik,  Iceland. Her chapter
> with its
> wonderful progression from the the founding of the Kitchen to her multichannel
> installations is
> one of my favorite chapters in the book and also of interest in how artists in
> this
> field have developed their careers.
> 
> But the dialogue does need to be expanded.
> 
> I heard from an artist who tracks the source of hits
> to her site that the book's web site is bringing in traffic to her site,
> so the website is a good place to do this. Can you suggest any links
> to add to the site?
> 
> 
>> It looked to me like most of the texts did focus on works that are recognized
>> more in *technology* based art fields than in say, contemporary art, so that
>> to me it appeared that the line of technology being followed in the Women,
>> Art & Technology is closer to *media art* than to art. Sheila Pinkel's
>> introductory essay being the exception because she focused so much on art. It
>> means, more of the actual artworks in the book would be shown at say,
>> Transmediale than the Berlin Bienale (I live in Berlin).
> 
> 
> Hmm - you don't think media art is art?
> Most of the artists in the book have had their work
> shown in museums and galleries, etc.
> 
> New media audiences do need to not be afraid of or threatened by technology,
> willing to take the time
> to explore it. and able to look beyond a modernist mindset --  but then one
> needs an understanding of music or
> dance to fully enjoy these art forms.
> 
> Does anyone else on the list agree with Diana that media art is not art?
> 
> And here is a review of the book from Art Hub:
> 
> http://www.artshub.co.uk/ah1/news/news.asp?Id=52802
> 
> Best,
> Judy
> 
> 
> At 02:36 AM 12/10/03 +0100, you wrote:
> 
>> Hello List,
>> 
>> (apologies to the mods for my messy mails)
>> 
>> Thank you, Judy, for replying to my mail, though maybe my questions need to
>> be stated more clearly. Isabel, you raise excellent points, especially
>> geography and language!
>> 
>> Judy, one of the things that I found problematic about the book was that
>> nearly all of the texts came from authors living in rich countries, almost
>> exclusively North America. While you listed quite of few of them in your
>> response to me, the kinds of work that have just been mentioned here on
>> Empyre indicate an extensive practice outside of the US and Europe, even
>> inside of poor countries. And what about Asia! For me, this is not a comment
>> on the value of those texts or the work of the authors in the book- but it
>> does make me wonder how you selected the texts; what criteria did you use
>> when evaluating the collection as whole?  This also relates to the question I
>> posed about the categories of seminal and classic texts. After reading the
>> entire book, I still didn't understand how these terms were being applied,
>> and it seemed like an important point I wasn't getting.
>> 
>> This also reminds me of another point about technology and how it gets
>> discussed in general. If we just take the last 25 years, there have been
>> tremendous changes in what I'll call *media art* for the moment - and very
>> specific technologies that relate to bodies of work - Maggie Morse went into
>> this in her essay. It looked to me like most of the texts did focus on works
>> that are recognized more in *technology* based art fields than in say,
>> contemporary art, so that to me it appeared that the line of technology being
>> followed in the Women, Art & Technology is closer to *media art* than to art.
>> Sheila Pinkel's introductory essay being the exception because she focused so
>> much on art. It means, more of the actual artworks in the book would be shown
>> at say, Transmediale than the Berlin Bienale (I live in Berlin). Simone
>> Osthoff wrote about incredibly interesting projects by women in Brazil, and
>> these were technology based art - but I had the impression that she thought
>> they were not on the same level as whatever that fuzzy thing *media art* is.
>> Senors and the like. And then there is this nice artist paper by Valerie Soe
>> about low tech approaches. But if low tech approaches to art and technology
>> are valid, there shouldn't be a problem including women doing innovative work
>> from really poor countries because there are women artists doing really
>> exciting and innovative work. It seems like a pity to not have had more on
>> the artist papers level, from women like Simone Michelin. My question is how
>> are we defining the role of technology in our work? What kinds of
>> technological innovation count in which contexts?
>> 
>> Judy, in answer to your question about my plans for writing a book that
>> expands, I'd have to say no. Some colleagues and I are definitely making
>> plans to publish a collection of texts in the near future. More along the
>> lines of the nettime book (I co-edited that one) that looks at how
>> communication technology gets used in specific instances.
>> 
>> 
>> All the best,
>> 
>> Diana
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> 
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> 