[-empyre-] Process as Paradigm: Thanks

[Lucas Evers]

Dear list members, dear participants in the Process as Paradigm discussion,

Thank you Warren for the interesting recap and wrap of the discussion.
In fact it took Susanne and me quite some time to decide between Process is Paradigm and Process as Paradigm as exhibition title. We have chosen the latter because it softens the title as punchline slightly; takes away its firm Kuhnian edge and indeed leaves room for other approaches and opinions. Nevertheless and notwithstanding the rich discussion that took place on this list and that has addressed the paradigmatic by sidestepping it so diversely, i am very curious about the shift to process and how far in that sense the interaction between art and its Umfelt will reach in the (near) future.

Apart from all of you who participated intensely and shared thoughts, we also want to thank empyre initiator Melinda Rackham for introducing us to Renate and Tim, who in turn gave us the opportunity to moderate this fruitful discussion on this outstanding list.

Lucas
-
-
lucas evers II waag society  II  www.waag.org  II  nieuwmarkt 4  II  1012 cr amsterdam  II  netherlands  II  +31 20 5579898


>>
The fields of science studies and the history of science have largely moved on from Kuhn's work exactly because the phrase "paradigm shift" leaves little room for alternatives, little space for other approaches to a given field.  "Process as Foucaultian Épistémè" may have many of the same connotations and fewer pifalls, but it hardly has the rhetorical punch of "Process as Paradigm." Nevertheless, I can't help thinking that we might want to side step the Kuhnian "paradigm."  And, perhaps that is what has been done in the catalog and this discussion -- purely through the term's notable exclusion -- until I went and stepped right in it.

Depending upon how momentous the paradigmatic shift to process is, we might already have entered a new era in art"
>>


On Jun 1, 2010, at 3:57 PM, susanne jaschko wrote:

> Dear list members,

> this has been an intense month of discussion on the list. The broad subject of Process as Paradigm and the processual nature of contemporary art and culture has revealed numerous interesting and controverse views that you were so generously sharing with us. I was particularly surprised about the debate about form vs agency (eg. generativity vs art with social and political impact) -- a quite familiar debate on principles which we did not expect in this vehemence, but with which we were happy since it brought up some truly passionate, authentic and sharp statements.

> As mentioned before, I was teaching on the subject at Bauhaus University in Weimar, Germany, and the class observed the discussion with a lot of interest. The topics that we discussed in the class were as diverse as the ones on the list, maybe even more diverse since we also visited art history/process art– which might speak for the problematic indeterminacy of both the subject and the terms process and processual on the one hand, on the other hand we were conscious and curious about offering a proposal for looking at contemporary art and culture from the perspective of the processual.

> In a way it is a pity that the discussion will now come to an end, at a moment in which Warren Sack perfectly explained that we have not even started to discuss the paradigmatic shift...

> We want to thank each of you for sharing your thoughts with us and the list. And even if the active debate on the subject will now come to a hold, the archive of the debate is going to be a valuable source for everybody who is teaching, thinking and working on the subject.
> Thanks for being an active agent in the process! It was a great experience to have so many great minds thinking out loud.
> Susanne
> www.sujaschko.de
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100601/1600686b/attachment.html>