[-empyre-] Creativity as a social ontology

Wed Jul 7 03:18:43 EST 2010

Hello all. one of the curious problems that arise in the notion of community,
democratic, creative modes, is whether the artists primary function is not in
fact cultural critique, and not cultural celebration. The notion of trust, here
in some ways implies that no one will be challenged, all players welcome.
does this lead to a kind of feel good art, that avoids tough questions.

I have found this to be true in New Media, cyberculture, as the question of
whether it is physically, mentally healthy to spend so much time in front of a
screen and not in front of humans, is dismissed very quickly, as a topic of
discussion.

How do retain a critical voice, in self selected, communal minds.

 Chris

Quoting helen varley jamieson <helen at creative-catalyst.com>:

> hi eugenio & all,
> 
> yes, i definitely agree that community (& trust) needs to be built on 
> common interest or connection; with UpStage it is the 
> technology/platform that is the specific common thing - otherwise it's 
> quite diverse, in terms of individual approach, themes, ideas, & 
> backgrounds. the word "community" presupposes at least one point of 
> commonality, whether it's geographic or political or social. online 
> networks allow us on the one hand to be even more specific in our 
> commonalities, such as the UpStage community or another example would be 
> Furtherfield, because we can connect with likeminded people across 
> geographical & other distances; and at the same time it becomes general 
> to the extreme, such as facebook etc.
> 
> the point of commonality can be subtle. i remember being shown MOOs & 
> text-based role-playing environments in the early 90s by a friend who 
> was really excited by it, but it didn't interest me at all at the time. 
> it wasn't until the late 90s when i encountered Desktop Theatre & their 
> work in the Palace that something clicked & the creative/imaginative 
> potential was suddenly obvious to me. the difference was that i had 
> connected with others who wanted to create theatrical interventions & 
> performances in this environment, not just role-play for our own 
> amusement; in some senses that is a fine line, but for me it was two 
> completely different situations. now of course i look back on the early 
> MOO/IRC performances & recognise the roots of my cyberformance practice.
> 
> this maybe is connected to what simon has just posted about the 
> distinction between art & creativity ... altho it is a minefield to 
> enter into ;) we could say that facebook is a creative community, but 
> are people making art there? (& i mean making, not 
> promoting/distributing). i am sure that some people are ...
> 
> i am a bit wary of taxonomies, my thinking is more along the lines of 
> axel bruns & pierre levy - that taxonomic structures are no longer 
> appropriate for the new "knowledge space" which is fluid, ad hoc & 
> unfinished. networked communities are also in a constant state of flux, 
> with evolving technologies & emerging codes of behaviour.
> 
> h : )
> 
> On 6/07/10 9:26 AM, Eugenio Tisselli 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
> >
> >    
> >>      
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
> >    
> 
> 
> -- 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 
> 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
> 

Christopher Sullivan
Dept. of Film/Video/New Media
School of the Art Institute of Chicago
112 so michigan
Chicago Ill 60603
csulli at saic.edu
312-345-3802