[-empyre-] lost in the globalinterweb

["Melinda Rackham" <melt2@pacific.net.au>]

From: jon@selectall.org
Subject: Re: [-empyre-] A function of play: dada, discursivity, performance
and transgression in [liken]
Date: May 15, 2004 12:19:00 PM CDT
To: empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au

{{ posted yesterday // lost in the globalinterweb wormhole }}


  CM wrote:
  Looping back to the issue of transgression Barbara raised, and (of course)
  this threads into the question of politics: I have been looking for some
  time at dada antecedents to criticalartware and its precocious offspring,
  liken.


thanks for the loop_point()


  < http://www.fluxeuropa.com/kurt_schwitters.htm > for book details).
  Gamard articulates a context for the 'transgression' implicit in the
  form/meaning of Merz-- but I argue, also for such an entity as liken.


i agree that [liken/criticalartware] has similarities to [merz/dada]. in the
nodalized sense of likis as collage material in a system much like a dynamic
merzbau. instead of [hard/physical] materials {wood+plaster+glass} liken's
structure is malleable and changes buy use from the community involved which
contrasts to {what i understand} the individual nature of merz. the merzbau
contains nodes of personal+political importance to schwitters, liken
contains nodes of [cultural/historic/artistic/political] importance to the
criticalartware community.

i am glad you set a pointer for this note in the [discourse/discussion].


  "The art and architecture of [liken]... Resists representation. An
absolute
  art and architecture of objective forms, [liken], like nature, is
  conceptually transparent and therefore non-representational.


[---insert custom critical gui's here---]


  From this point of view any attempt at a linguistic analysis of [its]
architecture, an
  analysis that would imply a consistent grammar and thus 'proper use',
would
  be absurd. Accordingly, the citation or speculation of an artwork
proffered
  from outside the limits of its material and dimensional context, also
  constitutes a specious act.


abs, the discourse_path is determined through use. unlike the merzbau where
this path is covered up and built [over/on top of] liken has the ability to
transparently sidestep schwitter's structures and pull from the depths of
it's own [databse/history]. for example() something that has a liki and is
considered "artwork proffered from outside the limits of its material and
dimensional context" resides in liken and will bubble up in the case of any
[current/historica] [interest/practice] and then fuse w/ that particular
discourse.


  As Wittgenstein has shown, even language is not a fixed condition but a
mutable form of life that 'means' only in the sense of communicative
discourse: 'meaning' is conditioned through use.


exactly=100%


    On May 3, 2004, at 11:15 AM, Barbara Lattanzi wrote:

      ... and to what extent is it a
      mapped archive of the past?

    ben wrote :
    It is of course equal parts archive of the recent past (present) and
    past. If there is a map of this archive, it's in constant flux; its
    borders constantly changing, capital cities moving, and major highways
    erupting and disappearing before your eyes.


as stated b4, one of the major drives of criticalartware is to bring light
to the recursive history of early video [experimentation/art] by involving
ppl, such as dan sandin + sherry miller hocking + kate horsfield + others we
are in communication with, we are trying to archive the past in a way that
is distributed rather than a linear history that one often finds incomplete.
we may have holes in our [past/present] system // however if one is
involved, the [history/archive/map] is as complete as you make it.

[--- insert invitation 2 post likis---]



---> [*=*] jon.satrom
---> criticalartware coredeveloper
---> http://www.criticalartware.net





  (incidentally, for a cool online intro to Schwitters and his major work
the
  Merzbau, try this one:
  http://www.rochester.edu/in_visible_culture/Issue4-IVC/Mansoor.html



[--- --- --- --- ---]

Only one description of Kurt's studio dates explicitly to 1923, that of
Sophie Küppers. Her account is vague, but differs little from that of Kate
Steinitz: 'We gazed in astonishment at the first mysterious Merzbau. It was
as yet only made up of material from rubbish boxes of the war years and it
had indescribable secret compartments.' She confessed that 'for me the
border between originality and nonsense in Schwitters' creations, whether
artistic or literary, was not clear.' Kurt would certainly have taken this
as a compliment.