Re: [-empyre-] Modern Antiques


----- Original Message ----- From: "Dirk Vekemans" <dv@vilt.net>
To: <aliette@criticalsecret.org>; "'soft_skinned_space'" <empyre@gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 12:46 PM
Subject: RE: [-empyre-] Modern Antiques



Dear Aliette,
I don't see any reason why you should apologise. I did not perceive any
judgement in your writings and i can assure you you didn't hurt any of my
feelings. Everybody i think respects and even admires the position you hold,
especially since you're being very critical of a past that is dear to you.
Perhaps only misunderstandings due to the language problems inhibit people
to formulate answers to your valuable contributions, i'm sure this is the
case for me because i find myself very confused, not due to language
problems or unclarity from your part but due to the inevitable stupid
mistakes in reasoning i make when trying to tackle difficult problems with
the feeble mind that is running me. So if anyone should apologise it is me,
for there might be some sensibility of use in the poorly constructed
generative system that i am, but hardly much sense. I'm but a sponge, full
fathom five, you and the others are swimming in the ocean on top of me. 



Dear Dirk, dear all,

Of course from my part I probably did not understand any pieces of your answers more from your part concerning mine, that giving a possible "skizo" dialog: so what? That is the marvelous Empyre where it is disappointed by the part of contradicted ideas or misunderstanding: that call critical imagination -for example coming from monophonic subscribers- even any messages can be lost by several of us. Not only it does not matter but more it is a "rare" situation to experiment collectively ( I know only of two famous lists allowing Multilanguage for the best positive issue: Spectre and Empyre ). BUT anyway here being the special vocation of the list to thematic debates. In this disjunctions and other disjunctions of ideas coming from these different conceptual cultures, there is a REAL cognitive disposition of the differences that give a feeling of knowledge to subtle ideas of each part -inprogress- even they will possibly work self-apart.

To be young ( I mean as well young in age as reaching unknown ideas being youth through the works ( my self eternal youth -not that one of my body:) is not a pity, but to be old is not more a pity. Please to read the following words:

Without allowing conflict there would not exist true debate of the dialectical/ trans-dialectical differences. It is fatal but welcome risk. It is an object learning itself of/ with the environment, while in the former days we could abuse ourselves being subjects learning as center of the center. Life is not the fake social mode even we know that the social mode and more the fake itself as mode ( as disparities of reflection more as active misunderstanding ) are really a materialist real or virtual emergent part of human life ( and of concrete evolution ).

In certain but several ways we are all researchers here in meeting. But in my point of view ( political and art political even without project ) that I guess not being my exclusive one but that self-one of others: nobody is deprived to use his proper life as object of experiment and of research; so as to tribute by this personal means to available writing theory that does not need reading ( even yes ) but does certainly need active critical autonomy, that appears to be too your own choice;-) Fortunately hope we cannot miss the meeting from the point of view of different autonomies.

Autonomy is not an impeachment to tribute with others for the time of common marches, that are collectively inprogress moments but not eternal moments. In my sight it is precarious but very important that in any moment we can pass from individual to collective and back to individual, and so on, in rhythmic alternative process corresponding to singular creative events, or usefully to special social or politic moments to safe rights.

Changing the times, nowadays from my part I am exactly reasoning from self experiments and direct or indirect knowledge being both political/ artistically time, but at all and for all obviously a collective poetic time (for the worst for the best) adcoming through singularity: to the predictable but unknown future of contemporaneity. Future in my sight is not Utopia, it is not a project, it is adcoming from predictable / unpredictable acts and arrangement of the things learning or not learning from the past; but learning from the past of course it is of our "job", being a predictable information from the signs of true or fake events repetitions in the difference ( depending of the appearance but not a quote of Deleuze from my part ). That was/ is never teach at school, because of the historical interest of ideology by the actuality of powers. So we have to do it by our own work in active critical consciousness. That is of the voice of poets from the antique times to actual attribution otherwise to the next freedom...

Any things which can agree with Henry's remarks of creative enjoyment.

For example : if you regard the actual move of semiotics of the war ( Montanari, Alonso whose works I follow the progress as well as I can since ten years ), it shows how the language of the war is a persistent mode of media recovering all realities since any years, and more how the real wars are predicted in the terms of the medias - and their sense - before they happen. It is a lesson of knowledge from languages of the medias -not the events they report but the means of the words and of the sentences under which they report of anything. Here is a strategy which interests me to any other objects of critical reflection and to cognitive critical art works processes.

But from my part in my direct/indirect memory of our times I could not forgot Philip K Dick or Orwell premonitions even they were not notorious revolutionary activists;-)

So yet I'm old,( that signify can be a lot of critical social and personal experiments? :)

From my part I was/ am always near theory, but always in a criticism of
theory from the point of view of real critical events as upturning consensus basing the meeting of diverse.

Specially I am coming from the glorious endies of dialectical materialist modernity just as consummation appeared still a social progress, in same time that commodity was a predictable announcement such as the end of society of class that was not the means to fight to the life by people who would not become rich inthe same time, and it was the final question of West revolution ( Weathermen in USA were the last political avant garde: precisely on this subject of revolution ) -but which one? This one holding people front of the activist guns as people turned stupid from the commodity ( Ice -self criticism by Robert Kramer from his weathermen experiment state )? This one making the ultimate proletarian revolutionary cause into ideological ultimate suicide? This one with the dictatorship for the first step ( USSR ) or for the final step ( China ), or crazy event of any step ( Cambodia ) that means organically in all the steps since the first one to the abolition by force of the property -or telling of the contrary means of the ideal project for a moment against the self property process? The question is that we know just now that appropriation is from another disposition than the real object of property. So what stays exactly from property quote in all the human rights since 1989 - event the French one of 1793 where the obligation of insubordination is written, ad that was more vital than the abolition. So what to say of post property?

Here was the beginning of activism hard terrorism with which I personally disagreed and there was my own rupture. But both I understood the matter of terrorism of the minority in these times ( Germany, France, Italy, USA ). Their singular activism is passed: actually I ask -with others among whom a lot of well-known personalities- for their freedom without delay ( France, Italy -where those staying in in prison, someones as 5000 -really- persons for the most of them not being terrorists but merely suspected to be in revolutionnar or activist organizations -from the part of " repented " of them or by abusive lawsuits ).

Of actual terrorism I think that it is not only that one of the minority but more a new mode of certain majorities as a politic representation of the perpetual war -adcoming from the lost dialectic of the war- ( Susan Sontag ), more an integrated critical mass used as objective mercenaries force by intelligence of the imperialist powers against their own democracies to remove the fundamental rights. Special no thanks to the millenaries visions of neoliberalism to realize ( by the few anonymous autocracy using the way of unreasonable oligarchy ) the gestation of the human park after these new powers have realized the mark of the scarcity of natural resources.

But yet, it is probably not our own last word in matter of invention of our means; our resources are numerous and strangely means through Peace to front the global war to no more modern humanity:)

Capitalists they have sacrificed their own project of modernity -same time of their properties of production- to realize the global and vectoral power of the virtual money (financial and money) as real power of the earth ( Baudrillard telling in private to friends during the last EU referendum : " Capitalists have sacrificed all: what stays of our proper own being possibly sacrificed by ourselves? Here is exactly the revolutionary question of nowadays - if a concept of Revolution would be still available " he said ).

Towards historical materialism and dialectic materialism ( in a vision of the evil part as gift and conter-gift ) can be that for the beginning if we do not sacrificed our own modernity -as project- ( our own part of the dialectical social and mode of modernities ) we never can invent the trans-dialectical means of our desire to face the new powers which realize the abolition of our fundamental individual and communal modern reights and the same of private personnal and public rights on earth, right now ?

Perhaps we have to rewrite all the fundamental rights of nowadays as an active Art work to people -among whom we are?

And I am absolutely convinced that this time it is not the part of expert economical critical analysis but the question of the lost symbol of the equivalence of the value to be restarted first through the symbolic return by Poets as really actual -this risk or never more.

I think that for the first time since I can observe the question of the opinion and of the conviction, that right now without double bind of the radical analysis of the historical situation there is no hope for any chance...

That is the first the tribute of any singularity of Art or Poetic acts into the new world. Can be Pataphysics but more Hölderlin times as politics otherwise after Hegelian then Marxist-Leninist times:)

So we have to "do it" from several could be ourselves postmarxist or postanarchist ways... But with pleasure out of deadly mortification and out of preachers of the truth -who are always wrong, we know that:)

All my best and repeated apologizes ( at least of bad Anglophonic woman ).

Aliette


Sincerely,
dv


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: empyre-bounces@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
[mailto:empyre-bounces@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] Namens Aliette
Verzonden: zondag 5 maart 2006 18:08
Aan: soft_skinned_space
Onderwerp: Re: [-empyre-] Modern Antiques

Just to say that I have not judge of any art work in my argumentation.
Christophe asked me why "à peu près d'accord" so I have answered.

I have not told of the singular quality of art works, that is
important otherwise, but I have told of antiquity and
modernity both in the real materialist historical vision and
in a personal conceptual idea of it.

I apologize if Dirk or Christina could understand that I was
searching any discriminant qualities to appreciate or not
appreciate the thematic debate from their idea or their own Art works.

I apologize too if any one could be hurt coming from the
difference between a lot of several critical ideas and choice
- even career. I was not judging anyone.

More: it would be contradictory with my personal criticism of
avant-gardes.

I am not reductionist in matter of modernity but all the
contrary : I think that their is no more value attached to
modernity nowadays.. Or a new paradigm or pact of change
after 2 millenaries, but I do not hold a new
truth:)

Sincerely hope that any  of my notes could be useful but
knowing that overpass them with more explanations would not
be positive in the actual moment of the debate.

All my best

A.




On 5/03/06 16:08, "Christophe Bruno"
<christophe.bruno@unbehagen.com> probably wrote:

> and by the way: double irony (or double hack) cancels !!! so it's
> normal nobody sees the irony ;-)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "G.H.Hovagimyan" <ghh@thing.net>
> To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>;
"Christophe Bruno"
> <christophe.bruno@unbehagen.com>
> Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 3:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Modern Antiques
>
>
> gh replies:
> As I said, the most important trend in "Modernism" is performance.
> Especially mediated performance.  Christophe's piece the
human browser
> is that type of performance. I don't think that irony plays a major
> role in the piece. Although the notion of a person functioning or
> being directed by web information is amusing, I think that
the emotion
> of surprise and disjunction is more important.  I also liked
> Christophe's piece about the European elections. It's
interesting that
> he was able to point out the dissaffection of the voters. That's a
> much larger issue. How we as artist explore this new
information world
> and how we see the world and/or transform it is rather
exciting.  It's
> also hopeful, sincere, curious and a bit comic. Both
Charles Chaplin
> and Jacques Tati  look at human/machine interface. Yes it's
funny but
> it's also humanizing.  I also love what Christina Mcphee does. She
> uses digital tools and scientific data to get to a deeply human
> emotion. She does performances on the earthquake fault lines. She's
> doing an investigative work on a California village that's
been cutoff
> by a landslide. If we follow what the philosophers say; all digital
> media is alienating. Both Christina and Christophe use
those tools to humanize.
>
> On Mar 5, 2006, at 8:48 AM, Christophe Bruno wrote:
>
>> I¹d like to react to both G.H. and Millie¹s posts. I agree
with G.H.
>> when he says we should focus on art instead of philosophy.
Still, I
>> have a comment to that:
>>
>> As a French Bourgeois Postmodern artist :-(  I consider
philosophical
>> concepts as furniture in my house, I can repaint them or
trade them
>> as  I whish. Indeed, as there has been a transition from market
>> capitalism  to network capitalism, from manufactured objects to
>> delocalized  conceptual commodities, we now have to consider the
>> inverse trend:  going back to older media, plain objects,
>> furniture... but, hopefully,  without dropping what we
learned from net.art.
>>
>> This was the original intuition by Blank & Jeron or by Valery
>> Grancher when he made his first webpainting in 1998 (he refers to
>> Picabia,  Jasper Johns etc.), or Miltos Manetas with his
internet paintings...
>>
>> I¹m very much influenced by this ironical idea of the ³retour des
>> choses² as we would say in french. What is the most stupid
thing you
>> can do when you are a net.artist: the answer is: painting
a website
>> on  a canvas. What was the most stupid thing I could do, with my
>> epiphanies: replacing the computer with a human being.
>>
>> I think this provides interesting conceptual loops at the age of
>> globalization:
>> 0) Human beings speak
>> 1) Google hacks all the speeches of mankind
>> 2) I hack Google in return
>> 3) From this double hack, a human being speaks (the human browser)
>> and  we are back to 0), but we made a very big loop ;-)
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "G.H.Hovagimyan" <ghh@thing.net>
>> To: <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
>> Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 3:02 PM
>> Subject: [-empyre-] Modern Antiques
>>
>>
>> So we¹re supposed to riff off whether Modernism is our
Classicism.  I
>> need to figure out which Modernism we are talking about and from
>> whose view point?
>>
>> As an American I generally think of the modern world as
starting with
>> the French and American revolutions. Both are Bourgeois
revolutions.
>> OK, that means the end of Medieval social structures ( you know,
>> kings,
>> serfs)  and the establishment of the Bourgeoisie ideals of science
>> and business and private property.
>> Personally I don¹t think the Modern world has ended.  If anything,
>> the ideals of Science and Business keep spreading.
>> Anyway , I¹m an artist so I think about art, art history
and what I¹m
>> doing as an artist. I believe that Christiane pointed out
that there
>> are different definitions of Modernity.
>>
>> Modern Art it seems to me has three main threads that
distinguish it
>> from earlier forms; 1. Deconstruction or a ³Scientistic²
approach to
>> art making that involves applying scientific principals to
art. This
>> includes a dissection of the elements of art and the
investigation of
>> it¹s components.
>> 2. The game of art or art as a language game. People often
talk about
>> this as ³art for arts sake² or art that is about other art.  An
>> amusing project is to read some of the 10,000 plus manifestos
>> produced by artists in the 20th century.  This list is
part of that tradition.
>> 3. Perhaps the most interesting thread and the most telling is
>> performance art. This is a creative process that is not tied to
>> theater and depends on media tools (cameras, recorders,
computers) to
>> verify or document its¹ existence.
>>
>> Obviously, this may be overly simple but I¹d rather
discuss art than
>> philosophy. I also believe in elevating art rather than
debasing it
>> or subsuming it to some other discipline such as philosophy or
>> science or politics.
>> As for art and politics, I really believe that being an
artist is a
>> political act in and of itself. It is an engagement is a
high level
>> discourse with the political/social arena. It is similar to the
>> dialog/discourse between sculpture and archtecture.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> ----------------
>> Wanadoo vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par
l'anti-virus
>> mail.
>> Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> ---------
> Wanadoo vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par
l'anti-virus mail.
> Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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







This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.