[-empyre-] Creativity as a social ontology

Tue Jul 6 20:24:58 EST 2010

Dear Eugenio,
Thanks for your reply. I am very interested in the creative community you
talked about, however, it is actually related to politics as well. I think
Censorship should be paid close attention to when we discuss cyberformance.
For some countries like China, facebook is forbidden. Political and
Commercial censorship would make a difference.
Don't you think so?
Melody

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Eugenio Tisselli <cubo23 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Helen, I find that UpStage is a very interesting example of an online
> community, since it states its scope (and thus its borders) quite clearly
> from the beginning. Networks like this make a lot of sense, as they can
> really help people with common and specific interests come together and
> collaborate. The fact that people in UpStage all relate to cyberformance may
> create a basis of familiarity, in which trust can be built from the bottom
> up. Do you agree? This may also happen within other networks where a common
> interest is made explicit right from the start. However, in "bigger"
> networks (ie. Facebook, MySpace) there is a tendency towards dispersiveness:
> there are myriads of groups, but they don't seem to be strong enough to
> generate a sense of community.
>
> In order to find out how networks can facilitate the emergence of creative
> communities, maybe we could start by proposing a taxonomy of networks. We
> would certainly find that some types of networks favor the cohesion of
> focused, collaborative communities more than others. I am not aware if such
> a taxonomy already exists... I will look into this. However, let me propose
> an initial set of traits which may help kick start a general
> characterization of networks:
>
> - Entry threshold: Can anyone join? Do new users have to be invited? Is
> there any kind of filtering?
> - Openness towards emergent topics: Does the network allow its participants
> to create new topics, or is there a set of pre-existent ones which can't be
> modified?
> - Openness towards group forming: Does the network allow the formation of
> groups of people with common interests?
>
> Would you like to add to this list?
>
> Melody: Although I haven't read "After Babel", I can imagine that Steiner
> maintains a certain coherence throughout his books. In that case, it might
> be interesting to study the relation of his ideas of "translation" in
> communication and "invention" in the arts. The concepts you mention do point
> towards an idea of creativity which is quite close to Steiner's "invention".
>
> G.H. Hovagimyan: The points you make are very interesting. Can you
> elaborate a little bit more on the relation between art and language? I find
> that artworks can also arise from the sense of an impotence in language.
>
>
> Eugenio Tisselli Vélez
> cubo23 at yahoo.com
> http://www.motorhueso.net
>
>
> --- El lun, 7/5/10, helen varley jamieson <helen at creative-catalyst.com>
> escribió:
>
> > De: helen varley jamieson <helen at creative-catalyst.com>
> > Asunto: Re: [-empyre-] Creativity as a social ontology
> > A: empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > Fecha: lunes, 5 de julio de 2010, 06:26 pm
>  > hi everyone,
> > thank you simon & renate for the invitation to be part
> > of this discussion, & thanks eugenio for starting things
> > off : )
> >
> > speaking as a live performance/theatre artist, i'm also of
> > the opinion that creativity doesn't happen in isolation or
> > on our own; we are always building on what has gone before.
> > in this sense, creativity can be understood as interaction
> > & conversation, or even a translation (interpretation)
> > ... my work is pretty much always dialogic, it is a creative
> > exchange between performer(s) & audience in a shared
> > moment (whether we are physically or virtually present, the
> > time is shared).
> >
> > to begin to respond to simon's questions, in particular
> > "Does the internet facilitate the creation of communities
> > where new modalities of creativity, authorship and exchange
> > emerge?", i'll give as an example one of the projects that
> > i've been involved with since 2003: the online cyberformance
> > platform UpStage (http://www.upstage.org.nz/). the project
> > began with the practical needs/desires of four artists,
> > & over the years a thriving community has evolved around
> > it. there are about 50 artists currently working with
> > UpStage to create performances for the annual festival
> > (& there might well be others using UpStage who i don't
> > know about), around 300 on the mailing list, & it's used
> > in educational situations from primary school through to
> > universities. there is a small ongoing developer community
> > as well.
> >
> > one aspect of the UpStage community that particularly
> > delights me is the emergence of cross-collaboration between
> > the artists; four of the 19 performances selected for this
> > year's festival involve collaborations between artists who
> > have met through UpStage (& mostly have not met in the
> > flesh). this is similar to my experience with Avatar Body
> > Collision - we came together through online networks &
> > still have not all met, 8 years & 10 performances later.
> > this kind of remote collaboration is not so unusual today,
> > but what's different with UpStage is the wider context - the
> > ongoing interaction is not only between collaborating
> > artists but also between artists, developers & audience
> > - there is the sense that we are all cross-pollinating at
> > several levels of creation - the performances, the software,
> > & the community. each of these three things is being
> > created by, & contributing to the creation of, the other
> > two in a very organic (ontological?) way.
> >
> > to pick up on eugenio's reference to trust - trust is
> > central/essential both to communities and to
> > theatre/performance. establishing trust is something that
> > proximal (i.e. not online) theatre ensembles usually do at
> > the start of a project if the members don't already know
> > each other - playing games to build familiarity & a
> > sense of connection between the individuals (i.e.,
> > community). any sort of live performance requires trust
> > between the players - from trusting that your co-actor will
> > remember their lines, to the confidence that your trapeze
> > partner will catch you & not let you fall to the ground.
> > online, trust takes on a new signficance. working remotely
> > with people you've never met & know little about can
> > require a risky leap of trust, but one that has to be taken.
> > we also have to place enormous trust in technologies, at the
> > same time as knowing that the internet is an unstable
> > environment ...
> >
> > hmm; i'm not quite sure how to tie that all back into the
> > original questions, but i'll send this now anyway as i've
> > just been handed 5 bamboo stakes which are desperately
> > needed by some rampant tomato plants on the balcony ...
> >
> > h : )
> >
> > On 5/07/10 12:30 AM, Eugenio Tisselli wrote:
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > First, let me thank Simon and Renate for inviting me,
> > I'm very excited to be part of this month's discussion at
> > empyre.
> > >
> > > Please allow me to be straightforward: lately I have
> > grown quite wary of the idea of creativity itself. If I look
> > at it in its traditional sense, as the act of producing
> > something from out of nothing, I find that there is too much
> > theological "background noise" in it. My suspicion
> > surrounding creativity stronlgy developed after reading
> > George Steiner's book "Grammars of creation" (2001), which
> > starts out in an amazing way by saying that "we have no more
> > beginnings left". Throughout the book, Steiner argues that
> > our western vision of the act of creation is deeply rooted
> > in religion; in the idea of the Platonic demiurge, who
> > fashions the material world out of chaos. Seen from a
> > contemporary perspective, this original idea seems almost
> > unsustainable. At some point, Steiner proposes that instead
> > of considering our acts as being creative, we should see
> > them as being inventive, suggesting that we actually make
> > new things only by assembling and manipulating
> > >   their constituent elements, which
> > already existed before. Of course, Steiner was not the first
> > one to question the idea of the artist as a creator: we only
> > need to turn towards the well-known "objet trouvé". So, the
> > artist as inventor may cause the solitary artist that Simon
> > mentions in his introduction to crumble under his/her own
> > weight, for an artist is never solitary even if working in
> > isolation. The artefacts produced will necessarily be
> > polyphonic, and will contain the echo of those who came
> > before and provided the raw materials, however hidden they
> > may be: the multiple beats within the singular.
> > >
> > > Nevertheless, I am willing to accept a contemporary
> > idea of creativity that is detached from its Greek-Latin
> > roots, and which necessarily implies the interweaving of
> > collective threads in innovative ways. I would like to
> > address one of Simon's questions, "How might we understand
> > creativity as interaction, as sets of discursive
> > relations?", by refering to Bruno Latour's book,
> > "Reassembling the social". In his book, Latour points out
> > that we should not view "the social" as a given entity which
> > exists per se, but rather as something that is continuously
> > re-created (or re-invented) through the multiple
> > interactions of its actors. I largely agree with this
> > vision, but I find that this continuous re-making of the
> > social is not necessarily a creative act. Everywhere we may
> > find groups of people immersed in an array of constant
> > interrelations, from which all sorts of destructive actions
> > can emerge. I believe that creativity emerges from
> > individuals and their
> > >   social relations (physical or
> > virtual) only when the interaction among them is focused
> > constructively, and is based on the idea of a common good,
> > mutual trust and shared engagement. Emergent communities
> > whose relations are mediated by digital networks may find
> > their creative potential increased quantitatively, in terms
> > of number of individuals, and qualitatively because of their
> > diversity, but I think that building and maintaining trust
> > and engagement within them becomes particularly important,
> > as these networks tend to promote rather detached/ephemeral
> > ("just a click away") modes of interrelation.
> > >
> > > Just a few general thoughts to start off...
> > >
> > > Looking forward to hearing from you!
> > >
> > > Eugenio.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Eugenio Tisselli Vélez
> > > cubo23 at yahoo.com
> > > http://www.motorhueso.net
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > ____________________________________________________________
> >
> > helen varley jamieson: creative catalyst
> > helen at creative-catalyst.com
> > http://www.creative-catalyst.com
> > http://www.avatarbodycollision.org
> > http://www.upstage.org.nz
> > ____________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100706/86f79c8c/attachment.html>