Re: netbehaviour : Re: [-empyre-] Who decides and what to preserve

[Alan Sondheim <sondheim@gmail.com>]

This has been brought up from time to time; it was discussed at the
Incubation conf. a few years ago. I agree - it _is_ an unarchival
world, and I think the emphasis on archiving is similar to the
emphasis on eternity & the fear of death - look at all those photo
departments years ago that insisted on 'archival prints' so they'd
stand the test of time - improvisational musicians, just about any,
know the value and general absence of those evenings when no one was
recording, it's whatever, in the moment. For my own work I upgrade
backup and when I can transfer protocols but after I'm gone that will
be it. When 'I hope not' and of course 'I hope not' I end up
questioning myself in this regard - what DNA juice is squeezing
endless labyrinths of time out of me? I'm frightened as hell about
death and my work revolves around that fright & yet I know rationally
no amount of archive will reconstitute anything, certainly not
presence. The Vietnam War was one of the most archived in history and
the radical re-rights are still doing what's being done to the
Holocaust - denial - two centuries from now Holocaust (of any sort)
studies will focus on 1939-45 or thereabouts as most likely mythical.
If we're going to archive, why not worry more about DNA - those
attempts which I support to resurrect literally the thylacine,
Tasmanian tiger? Other species to follow in time - we have to leave
something behind us beyond slaughter. Again in relation to archive - a
recent, in fact two days' ago, report indicates the onslaught of Iraqi
archaeological sites/museums etc. continues with increased fury -
nothing is protected but the national museum & that has the doors
welded shut. Our energy should, I think, be devoted far more to the
preservation of lifeforms on the planet, archiving the real, what's
left of the wilderness (I don't want to get into deconstruction here)
- we should be out there in preservation, some of us are I think. But
why, among digital artists and arts, isn't preservation itself
questioned to a greater extent? And what is the source of our fear in
this regard? - Alan


On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 20:41:32 +1300, The Paul Annears
<the.paul.annears@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There is another related question: why preserve anything (of the
> internet) at all?
> 
> I recently looked for archived versions of The Concise Model and found
> some pages and some broken links. Not an accurate or complete or even
> indicative sampling of The Model.  There were cute baby photos that I
> had forgotten, and a few hints of what was to come.
> 
> Yes, the curatorial classes like to conserve and to archive, and an
> admirable impulse it is. Otherwise, for example, we would not know
> that 'New Zealand' and 'Australia' (to name just two of many examples)
> were thriving orgies of peoples and cultures well before the Euro-led
> holocausts.
> 
> To archive, to conserve, and to chose this rather than that is an
> unavoidable urge, not just of the conservator, not only of the human,
> not only of what we understand to be 'the living'.  It is an clearly a
> primitive urge of matter.
> 
> However the unarchiveable Sun rises and sets on an essentially
> unarchiveable world and I  think that it would be wonderful if the web
> was not archived except sporadically and imperfectly with unconscious
> bias and that it became, in that way, a virtual parallel to and
> acknowledgement of the real world.
> 
> A transient part-world, dimly apprehended by its inhabitants, awash
> with propagandist history and of course hugely defective of memory.
> 
> Paul Annear
> 
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 16:57:41 +1000, Sharmin Choudhury
> <sharminc@dstc.edu.au> wrote:
> > I am not sure if anyone has brought this up but this is something I think is
> > important. PANIC does not specify what to preserve and does not rate digital
> > objects by content. We leave it to the curatorial organisation to make that
> > decision. Yet how a curatorial organisation would come to a decision
> > fascinates me, because often what we consider not worth saving is exactly
> > what the future generations might consider as being important. As a case in
> > point, the ancient Egyptians did not think it very important to record the
> > lives of the ordinary folk, the workers who built the pyramids and so worth.
> > Yet one of most important discoveries in recent times have been camps for
> > the said workers where the workers have left their mark and bits and pieces
> > from their daily lives. Anyone have any comment in this regard?
> >
> > Sharmin Tinni Choudhury
> > Research Engineer
> > DSTC PTY LTD
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
> 
> --
> The Paul Annears
> www.xxos.net
> 
> --
> 
> netbehaviour is an open email list community for sharing ideas,
> platforming art and net projects and facilitating collaborations.
> let's explore the potentials of this global network.
> this is just the beginning.
> 
> to unsubscribe send mail to majordomo@netbehaviour.org
> with "unsubscribe list_netbehaviour" in the body of the message
> 
> http://www.netbehaviour.org
> 
>