Re: [-empyre-] nu-retro

[Christina McPhee <christina112@earthlink.net>]

Dear Empyre,

Jonsatrom wrote recently,

> i agree with that sentiment : it is not to define any type of stylistic
>> attempt at the "nu-retro" or anything like that. for me, using the
>> oldskool graffix worx in tandem with our objective as criticalartware
>> to bring light to the systems of creating.
, it 
>> [points to/mouses over] the [techno/cultural] system in that timespace.
>> 
>> an interesting [blur/division] happens when ppl generate images that
>> relate to the early dayz, however, they are done using nu-technology
>> and therefore are not taken as [genuine/interesting/"real"/art].

Constant focus on 'what is' new media  rather than 'how does it work' or
'what influences and shapeshifts', or 'why is this happening' keeps us all
fidgiting in the Protestant Sunday School class while the teacher goes on
about how our doctrine is 'real' compared to the heresies and illusions and
backwardness of those messy Catholics (read, the old art world),  with their
saints and their hocus pocus.

But how about getting messy. !

Rather more interesting than these Protestant-oid disputes about the nature
of new media is  to 'bring light to the systems of creating' as jon.satrom
notes here.

The entire point of this month's discussion is to consider the scope of
'artware' as a cybernetic system, rather than as a bundle of discrete
morphs/shapes, and especially not, a bunch of bundles laid in a row moving
from 'old past' to 'new future', with video back there somewhere in the
charming seventies along with Bruce Lee and grunge.
 
The idea of progression towards something that is presumed New is one of the
most persistent elements of high modernist cliché (as in Greenberg, Mies van
der Rohe, etc).   Even some of the Dadaists, who might have known better,
were pissed off at Kurt Schwitters because he continued to make paintings
and drawings in/through the Merzbau. This was felt to be impure or retro.
  
The desire to come up with a 'new' material/form nexus and cause it to
dominate all previous modes of work harks back to the avantgarde psychology
to 'murder' the 'father'.

Of course, as soon as the 'new' is canonized as an ideological item or
'bundle' or bunch of bundles laid in a progression, then the hall monitors
and gate keepers get a whiff of power---finally, the chance to set limits on
what constitutes 'real' art! Control of image and presentation extends thus
into the gallery, the university, the museum, much as it does in the
political realm in the US.

Control of information and access allows an illusion of murdering the past.
Certain images ok, certain images bad.  Do we feel the chill wind of Orwell
here?  If they look like 'early dayz' they must be bad, or at any rate not
real: 'non-canonical' image content, like, for example, images that
>>> relate to the early dayz, however, they are done using nu-technology
>>>  therefore are not taken as [genuine/interesting/"real"/art]
 
Much of the work of contemporary art that addresses political realities
widely, and aggressively,  uses the visual tropes of the so-called past in
order to generate a challenge to the intellect, heart and values.  This is
the opposite of the iconoclastic mentality, that only wants to show certain
images as acceptable representations of the real.

Unless art deals with its own 'artware' and that includes everything even
what is made 'incorrectly' using photoshop or flash or whatever,  including
even the 'incorrect' use of  'real' code,  as a genre 'new media' becomes
kitsch.  And kitsch is a ruse for power over hearts and minds.


 
>> an interesting [blur/division] happens when ppl generate images that
>> relate to the early dayz, however, they are done using nu-technology
>> and therefore are not taken as [genuine/interesting/"real"/art]. i know
>> jC+bS+i have talked about this in person, however, it would be
>> interesting to get the feedback of other ppl...
>> 


Anarchically your moderator,

cm



> [-empyre-] nu-retro
> jon.satrom jon at selectall.org
> Tue May 4 05:00:53 EST 2004
> 
> 
> *    Previous message: [-empyre-] participants
> *    Next message: [-empyre-] archiving + preservation
> *    Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> On May 1, 2004, at 8:39 PM, jonCates wrote:
>>>> + then i mentioned that we were not interested in the past as
>>>> "retrofun"
> On May 1, 2004, at 11:01 PM, bensyverson wrote:
>>> + then we had a gr8 convo with josh kit clayton about retro. His idea
>>> (and I think we agreed) was that our occasional use of
>>> oldSkool/retrofied elements was more about playful exuberance, as
>>> opposed to being ironic or sarcastic. He used jS's awesome Flash
>>> presentation as an example, saying something along the lines of
>>> "sometimes, you just want to see an 8-bit bunny."
> 
> i agree with that sentiment : it is not to define any type of stylistic
> attempt at the "nu-retro" or anything like that. for me, using the
> oldskool graffix worx in tandem with our objective as criticalartware
> to bring light to the systems of creating.
> 
> the look of the graffix brings things out such as the limitations of
> the technology used at the time and the aspirations of the graffix
> creators. i find the idea of "wanting" the closest thing to a bunny to
> be displayed on the screen intriguing because in our current
> net.culture we normally don't consider it. we either take a picture of
> a bunny or google bunny for an image. the image of the 8-bit bunny has
> become over time more than a simple representation of an animal, it
> [points to/mouses over] the [techno/cultural] system in that timespace.
> 
> an interesting [blur/division] happens when ppl generate images that
> relate to the early dayz, however, they are done using nu-technology
> and therefore are not taken as [genuine/interesting/"real"/art]. i know
> jC+bS+i have talked about this in person, however, it would be
> interesting to get the feedback of other ppl...
> 
> [*=*]
> [jon.satrom]
> 
> 
>
-- 
 soundart performance videoinstallation multimedia painting theory


<www.christinamcphee.net>
<www.naxsmash.net>
<www.naxsmash.net/inscapes>