[-empyre-] Nake and the Notion of "Public"

[Aliette Guibert-Certhoux]

This appears very important at my view. Because ii is round the proper
question of curating and publishing or playing online as responsible
attitude (ethics); as well concerning the authors and artists, as well the
publishers -- as publishers being the authors and the artists themselves, as
well publishers curators.

And concerning Live and Living arts even as Arts of Galleries: which social
situation can be noted to design the public statement in it? Interactivity?
Urban installation? Outside? Inside? For example the statement of hapenning
(from Beuys to Yesmen crossing Hank Bull in the ninetees) what is it? Is it
"spectacle" in the sense from Debord, or renewal catharsis in the sense of
the early situationnism and dadaist proposing? and so on.

On narration and dramaturgy nowadays: what public statement can overpass the
representation?

Personnally I think that in the chaos society of the vectoral world there is
a deep misunderstanding from independents on what happens from Internet
nowadays, live acts are now in a double disposition of the life that cannot
be denied, which is asynchronistically linked to power in matter of critical
installation to tribute the criticism of the society by critical attitudes.

Just being independent whith powerful tools of communication is a danger to
let play in the flow (unpredictable effects of the Web2 linked to RSS
possibilities -- publishing and podcasts -- tthat is what will lbe stopped
very soon with a lot of tech arguments --as well from our part! --. The
tools are to become unappropriate to the the development of self
organization in the critical environment which contain all the people today.

Or for example the impact which has just happened to my little acts and part
of live or virtual acts from artists and authors who have contributed by
unpublished creations: it could not happen but from crazy or mad people or
in the name of a tallion rule (that is always the appearence of strategic
attacks online between us).

In fact what is affected is specially a content which just evoques the
cleaning of black money by tributing to arts from the most critical society
in South America since a deceny (I quote a piece of the radio which brings a
testimony of it) from a part, and a tribute to Baudrillard unconformist and
critical archive from another part -- but both impacts in the same time. He
says "as the world is a gift of out understanding disposition, I think from
my part out of History that the critical role of philosophy nowadays can be
an answering in the objective to make it much more out of understanding".

That makes  the very trouble you know? As well the trouble from any power,
can be post capitalist power, can be egocentrist power between us in
opposite disposition of the critical thought.

The beginning of the attack was marked by an impact to Mckenzie Wark podcast
which knew its rewriting adresses returning to the no wewriting disposition
(imagine the impact in the search engines) just à the moment I had to
present in Brussels his print acts in French. the theft of the common view
of the referer under a return through xml into html4 to prrivatize it. Just
see the abusive argue as technical means: html4 is as much transitional than
xml;-) but by this way all your interactive admin becomes so much light that
you have lost  your independence under the strength of manipulation through
the "updates" of the high technician that you thought far away because its
code source was free!: to whom credit? But one unsigned interest...

The hand of it can be your friend. All depends of your success online from
the point of view of local interest of unpredictable post capitalist vector
playing the dark as its proper line of "art" regarding its market of power,
able to the pound of interest in counted money to help some dependent
projects front of your independent unpredicatble dispositive, from your
other little field of activity online and live, Stooling your work online
and its powerful tools: that is one of the new practices in something
unsignificant among the large market as your individual acts of creation and
of publication! We underestimate our independent's acts.

Actually I do not make the difference between impacts online and impacts out
of line, they are linked. And at the bottom your proper life can be the
object of the impact as well trhough what happens to you online; may be a
day someone is wating for you with a contract at the crossing road towards
your daily baker (sorry i'm French adept of the cliché --exactly
old-fashioned --of the bicycle with the beret and the baguette of bread):
just because you make trouble in the flow, you know? That is the event of a
Mafia world of which we cannot anticipate the reasons nor the causes in our
proper fields.

That is a real impact to public communication even virtual public as
necessary relay of naturalist or abstract narrations and virtual simulations
of the living social fights. Because multimedia is interfering the bare life
from here to there. Our memory of the opened life and opened societies are
in real time --just a bit differred what installs the minimalist distance of
the new critical view --the gift of the public virtuality as conscousness of
ithe  unpredictable part of reality of our fast acts. That is not aesthetic,
that is ethics understood as an increase of the conditions of collective
risk through our common or individual independent practices of the risk
(even the laugh) --as in all symoblic dispositions.

In my next post I shalll only copy the English version (not from my pen:) of
the radio podcast from Mafia_Pierre Bongiovanni on South America nineties
evocation

2008/5/8 Patrick Lichty <voyd at voyd.com>:

> Just as a clarification, when Julian began from my missive and started
> talking about "the public". from the my 1st person anecdote from Nake, a
> taxonomic difference arose.
>
> What I meant when I invoked the quote "The Work is not Art until is is
> made Public" does not mean that it is aimed at "the public" (the masses),
> but placed "in public", i.e. in the commons or open space where "the/a
> public" might see it.
>
> Then, the issue of what constitutes "the public" become an issue.  But for
> me, that is another, however important, issue that I did not address in my
> earlier statement, or this one.  Maybe that's a discussion that might open
> up.
>
> Thanks!
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20080508/8adabfcb/attachment.html