Re: [-empyre-] volume zero: expanding the circle: generative inquiry

"G.H. Hovagimyan" <ghh@thing.net> · Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:17:35 -0500

On Mar 14, 2006, at 3:02 PM, Christina McPhee wrote:
Does art simulate, or stimulate, a zone of return -- moving across  
the site’s chain link fences? Performing its own

becoming, and at a remove?  Is shooting the evidence like the  
hanging of a thing onto another thing, like a prayer flag

with a heart onto a chain link fence at La Conchita?
 Compulsive, futile, and generative all the same, this is the process
of performing a site as you study it.

gh responds:
Christophe and Christina work with some ideas that first gained  
currency in the 1970's.  The public sphere is one arena. Another is  
the media-logos that Regis Debray talks about in Mediology. These are  
used as both subject matters (subject) and in a quick turnabout the  
(object) of the artists' gaze. There is also a slipperiness of the  
central narrative or point of view. This is a relatively new  
occurence in art discourse. It has some of the randomness of Dada and  
the multiple viewpoints of Cubism. I think this is because of the  
hypertextual nature of  digital media. I too work with these ideas.  
It's a notion of assembling and reassembling reality to find meaning  
and form. This then is the anticipated change. It is hard to  
recognize and quantify. It can be overlooked or can be dismissed as  
derivative. This is a key issue which I've always had problems with.  
If you are continually pushing at the boundaries of any intellectual  
discourse you are often not included. The theoreticians have not  
caught up with you and therefore can't quantify what you are doing.

G.H. Hovagimyan
http://nujus.net/gh/
http://post.thing.net/gh/
http://spaghetti.nujus.net/rantapod
http://spaghetti.nujus.net/artDirt