Re: [-empyre-] Re: empyre Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9

[Christiane Robbins <cpr@mindspring.com>]

Thanks for clarifying that statement.

Just a quick response to your latter comment about the issue of  
ownership of Second Life .... and whether it be corporate or  
government controlled ( those venues possessing the economic means  
and mechanisms to construct, operate and sustain such an  
environment.)  I found myself struggling to come up with for a model  
which would offer a more, arguably, neutral territory /environment  
for "public space/s."  The only forum/mechanism I could easily think  
might be one offered by a foundation  - such as the Rockefeller  Ford  
or MacArthur Foundation.  Such a long-term initiative might take a  
form of something akin to the Media Fellowships that have had a  
legacy for the past 30-35 years.

But, of course, this may serve as fodder for another discussion  
topic, as I'm certain others would have salient views on this subject.


Thanks again,

Chris




On Apr 12, 2007, at 9:19 PM, Alan Sondheim wrote:

> > Dear Alan,
> >
> > I'm uncertain as to whether or not I entirely followed your meaning
> > in this statement:
> >
> > " To use the technology as entertainment doesn't negate the other
> > uses, or do injustice to their injustices. In other words, does all
> > art have to reflect its political-sociological- militarist-etc.
> > origins?"
> >
> > Would you mind expanding upon this a bit more - thanks -
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Chris
> This is probably poorly phrased - what I meant was, if one uses the  
> tech for infotainment, this doesn't mean that a. the militarism  
> goes away or b. that others might well take a different,  
> politicized stance, towards the technology. And if someone uses the  
> tech for entertainment, this isn't an injustice, i.e. necessarily  
> unethical position in relation to the injus- tice of the originary  
> moment or use. The second sentence questions whether art must  
> necessarily 'be political' in a conscious sense (obviously all art  
> embodies politics, etc.) - whether politics must be addressed. And  
> I think not; I fear any 'should' or 'must' or 'have to' in relation  
> to art, which is one of the (inauthentically to be sure) 'free'  
> fields that remain - in the sense that hopefully one does what one  
> wants, with whatever tech one wants. I remember arguments about  
> Second Life - how can you partici-
> pate in such a corporate/controlled environment? - but for me, it's  
> useful, I'm not naive about the software-economic parameters  
> involved, but within the 'space' I can do work I literally couldn't  
> do otherwise, neither in real life nor through video/audio files/ 
> documentation.
>
> Again, hope this makes some sort of sense.
>
> - Alan
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre

Christiane Robbins


- JETZTZEIT -
... the space between zero and one  ...
Walter Benjamin


LOS ANGELES    I    SAN FRANCISCO


The present age prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy to  
the original, fancy to reality, the appearance to the essence for in  
these days illusion only is sacred, truth profane.

Ludwig Feuerbach, 1804-1872,
German Philosopher