[-empyre-] Layers of ISEA2011: Corporate/Financial

[Renate Ferro]

Dear Cinzia,Yes that is the point for this month of empyre.  We will use the soft skinned space to let others know both herein Istanbul and on the list what is happening in this incredibly large city and expansive site/non-site of ISEA's venues.  However,we also invite from all of you some critical postings about the things you are doing in the conference and the city.  If you have been to the biennial we would love you to post. 

Also, if you meet Turkish orMiddle Eastern artists we would love to hear about what they are thinking and creating both within the context of ISEA and greater Istanbul. 

Please invite all to the Nuru.Zyia Lounge Sunday from 6 to 9... Address is in the 
ISEA program.  I posted the map link this morning but will do so again later tonight.

Renate

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 17, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Cinzia Cremona <cinziacremona at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I don't know many of you in person, and the panel are so varied that it's hard to follow the programme. Would it be ok to let the list know when we are all presenting?
> 
> I'll be on this panel on Sunday 1-2.30:
> 
> Intimate TV: Webcamming & Social Life-logging In the Surveillant-Sousveillant Space
> 
> Dates: 
> Sun day, 18 Sep tem ber, 2011 - 13:00 - 14:30
> Chair Per son: 
> Paula Roush
> Maria Lusi tano
> Pre sen ters: 
> Annie Abra hams
> Mar garida Car valho
> Cinzia Cre mona
> Eu nice Gonçalves Duarte
> Helen Var ley Jamieson
> 
> Lo ca tion:Sa banci Cen ter Room 3
> 
> Chair: Paula Roush
> 2nd Chair: Maria Lusitano
> 
> For this panel we propose to reflect upon the practice of digital performance with the use of webcams, addressing issues of intimacy in the network. Webcamming refers to the use of webcams to stream live from personal environments to the internet, and develop life-logs that archive such practices as online documentations of the everyday. Webcamming practices have been theorised with different results from within the areas of digital performance /cyberformance. On the one hand, an historical account of digital performance equates the use of webcams in the hands of artists with the “subversion of surveillance,” and an ironic questioning of webcam’s myths of authenticity and immediacy. The field of cyberformance, on the other hand, theorises webcamming in the context of increasing online participation, and the types of collaborations it facilitates within web 2.0 environments. However, none of these analyses addresses the increasing intimacy facilitated by the mainstream use of surveillance/communicational  technologies for personal video streaming and archiving, or the particular aesthetic  and subversive spectatorial  positions that inform such intimate video practices.  Our proposal for this panel attempts to fill in such gap by looking at the genealogy of personal video-streaming and its place within art research on webcamming and the surveillant-sousveillant space.
> 
> 1.What are the characteristics of cyberformance in the context of networks of intimacy? What defines  its particular aesthetics and the spectatorial positions that inform such intimate video practices?
> 
> 2. Now that people’s lives are performed for the Internet and distributed across multiple social networks as chunks of self-authored content, is it still possible to separate or distinguish performance art from the performative stream of everyone else’s lives?
> 
> 3.How is online performance conceptualised from a contemporary art and media surveillance-sousveillance perspective?
> 
> I hope we'll meet!
> Chair: Paula Roush
> 2nd Chair: Maria Lusitano
> 
> For this panel we propose to reflect upon the practice of digital performance with the use of webcams, addressing issues of intimacy in the network. Webcamming refers to the use of webcams to stream live from personal environments to the internet, and develop life-logs that archive such practices as online documentations of the everyday. Webcamming practices have been theorised with different results from within the areas of digital performance /cyberformance. On the one hand, an historical account of digital performance equates the use of webcams in the hands of artists with the “subversion of surveillance,” and an ironic questioning of webcam’s myths of authenticity and immediacy. The field of cyberformance, on the other hand, theorises webcamming in the context of increasing online participation, and the types of collaborations it facilitates within web 2.0 environments. However, none of these analyses addresses the increasing intimacy facilitated by the mainstream use of surveillance/communicational  technologies for personal video streaming and archiving, or the particular aesthetic  and subversive spectatorial  positions that inform such intimate video practices.  Our proposal for this panel attempts to fill in such gap by looking at the genealogy of personal video-streaming and its place within art research on webcamming and the surveillant-sousveillant space.
> 
> 1.What are the characteristics of cyberformance in the context of networks of intimacy? What defines  its particular aesthetics and the spectatorial positions that inform such intimate video practices?
> 
> 2. Now that people’s lives are performed for the Internet and distributed across multiple social networks as chunks of self-authored content, is it still possible to separate or distinguish performance art from the performative stream of everyone else’s lives?
> 
> 3.How is online performance conceptualised from a contemporary art and media surveillance-sousveillance perspective?
> 
> Chair: Paula Roush
> 2nd Chair: Maria Lusitano
> 
> For this panel we propose to reflect upon the practice of digital performance with the use of webcams, addressing issues of intimacy in the network. Webcamming refers to the use of webcams to stream live from personal environments to the internet, and develop life-logs that archive such practices as online documentations of the everyday. Webcamming practices have been theorised with different results from within the areas of digital performance /cyberformance. On the one hand, an historical account of digital performance equates the use of webcams in the hands of artists with the “subversion of surveillance,” and an ironic questioning of webcam’s myths of authenticity and immediacy. The field of cyberformance, on the other hand, theorises webcamming in the context of increasing online participation, and the types of collaborations it facilitates within web 2.0 environments. However, none of these analyses addresses the increasing intimacy facilitated by the mainstream use of surveillance/communicational  technologies for personal video streaming and archiving, or the particular aesthetic  and subversive spectatorial  positions that inform such intimate video practices.  Our proposal for this panel attempts to fill in such gap by looking at the genealogy of personal video-streaming and its place within art research on webcamming and the surveillant-sousveillant space.
> 
> 1.What are the characteristics of cyberformance in the context of networks of intimacy? What defines  its particular aesthetics and the spectatorial positions that inform such intimate video practices?
> 
> 2. Now that people’s lives are performed for the Internet and distributed across multiple social networks as chunks of self-authored content, is it still possible to separate or distinguish performance art from the performative stream of everyone else’s lives?
> 
> 3.How is online performance conceptualised from a contemporary art and media surveillance-sousveillance perspective?
> 
> Chair: Paula Roush
> 2nd Chair: Maria Lusitano
> 
> For this panel we propose to reflect upon the practice of digital performance with the use of webcams, addressing issues of intimacy in the network. Webcamming refers to the use of webcams to stream live from personal environments to the internet, and develop life-logs that archive such practices as online documentations of the everyday. Webcamming practices have been theorised with different results from within the areas of digital performance /cyberformance. On the one hand, an historical account of digital performance equates the use of webcams in the hands of artists with the “subversion of surveillance,” and an ironic questioning of webcam’s myths of authenticity and immediacy. The field of cyberformance, on the other hand, theorises webcamming in the context of increasing online participation, and the types of collaborations it facilitates within web 2.0 environments. However, none of these analyses addresses the increasing intimacy facilitated by the mainstream use of surveillance/communicational  technologies for personal video streaming and archiving, or the particular aesthetic  and subversive spectatorial  positions that inform such intimate video practices.  Our proposal for this panel attempts to fill in such gap by looking at the genealogy of personal video-streaming and its place within art research on webcamming and the surveillant-sousveillant space.
> 
> 1.What are the characteristics of cyberformance in the context of networks of intimacy? What defines  its particular aesthetics and the spectatorial positions that inform such intimate video practices?
> 
> 2. Now that people’s lives are performed for the Internet and distributed across multiple social networks as chunks of self-authored content, is it still possible to separate or distinguish performance art from the performative stream of everyone else’s lives?
> 
> 3.How is online performance conceptualised from a contemporary art and media surveillance-sousveillance perspective?
> 
> 
> All the best,
> 
> Cinzia
> 
> 
> 
> On 17 September 2011 10:25, Simon Biggs <simon at littlepig.org.uk> wrote:
> ;)
> 
> I'm on my way. Be there midnight tonight and staying at the Ferman in the old town (near the Blue Mosque).
> 
> best
> 
> Simon
> 
> 
> On 17 Sep 2011, at 05:29, Renate Ferro wrote:
> 
> > No don' t do that Simon, it is still pretty amazing to be in Istanbul and to see many friends who otherwise we communicate via list serve.
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Sep 16, 2011, at 6:36 PM, Simon Biggs <simon at littlepig.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Great. I'm flying in tomorrow. I think I'll cancel.
> >>
> >> best
> >>
> >> Simon
> >>
> >>
> >> On 16 Sep 2011, at 16:04, Nicholas Knouf wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello -empyre-,
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to add another layer to the list: the corporate/financial one.
> >>>
> >>> I want to write about the experience of entering into the main location
> >>> for the conference, Sabanci Towers.  This requires being checked off of
> >>> a list and then traveling through a metal detector with your belongings
> >>> x-rayed.  You find yourself in front of two gleaming towers of uncountable
> >>> numbers of floors that reflect
> >>> the blue sky.  You realize that this is
> >>> not the university, but rather the headquarters for Sabanci Holding
> >>> (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Sabanci_Group), which
> >>> appears to be the largest industrial and financial conglomerate in
> >>> Turkey, while also the organization behind the founding of Sabanci
> >>> University.  Once you make your way through men and women in perfectly
> >>> tailored business suits and executives being escorted into Mercedes to be
> >>> driven to power lunches, you find yourself in front of another metal
> >>> detector and x-ray machine which may or may not be used (I didn't have
> >>> to go through it when I entered).  Inside is bland corporate decor not
> >>> unlike anything else in the globalized world.  Hacker or DIY space this
> >>> certainly is not, and the internet seems to block anything that doesn't
> >>> travel on ports 80 or 443 (meaning any local e-mail clients on computers
> >>> or smartphones won't work; Blackberries won't work; and seemingly only web traffic will go through).  For your
> >>> 400EURO fee you are still required to pay for pastries.
> >>>
> >>> I find the totality of this environment rather problematic for an ostensibly academic
> >>> and artistic conference and could write much more about it, but will
> >>> refrain for the moment.  But I did want to describe this for those of
> >>> you who are not in Istanbul.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>>
> >>> nick knouf
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> empyre forum
> >>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Simon Biggs
> >> simon at littlepig.org.uk www.littlepig.org.uk @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk
> >>
> >> s.biggs at ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art University of Edinburgh
> >> www.eca.ac.uk/circle www.elmcip.net www.movingtargets.co.uk
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> 
> 
> Simon Biggs
> simon at littlepig.org.uk www.littlepig.org.uk @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk
> 
> s.biggs at ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art University of Edinburgh
> www.eca.ac.uk/circle www.elmcip.net www.movingtargets.co.uk
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20110917/3825fa37/attachment.htm>