| Terrence Kosick on 9 Nov 2000 08:20:52 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| [Nettime-bold] Re: RHIZOME_RAW: [ot] [!nt] \n2+0\ |
Terrence writes; Be brave try to forget the filters. Logos 80% and the filters 20%... no mind = empty Take a jorney and bring a boon to all. ARTNATURAL + LOGOS integer@www.god-emil.dk wrote: > >cage > > nn haz releaszd 173 cdz dzat = !nfr!nge upon [cage.z] 2.3 [z!lansz] > > >>> but the gimmick-art thing going on today, has no soul, > >>> no emotion, no depth, no communication. > > = prez!zl!. = !t dzat makez !t .be au+au t!fl++ > > >>> but the gimmick-art thing going on today, has no soul, > >>> no emotion, no depth, no communication. > > when humans listen to one person speaking. > read one page of print - much of what humans think they see or hear > is supplied from personal memory. > > whatever the brain looks at is really about 20% > of signals from the outside world and 80% of old templates, filters, memories and beliefs > about the world. > > konztataz!e +? fr!endl!. > > nn > > > pre.konssept!*n > meeTz ver!f1kat!*n. > > > > - > > Netochka Nezvanova - i d r e a m > f3.MASCHIN3NKUNST > @www.eusocial.com > 17.hzV.tRL.478 > e > | > | +---------- > | | < > \\----------------+ | n2t > | > > e > > > > pre.konssept!*n > meeTz ver!f1kat!*n. > > > > - > > Netochka Nezvanova - i z k r ! ! m > f3.MASCHIN3NKUNST > @www.eusocial.com > 17.hzV.tRL.478 > e > | > | +---------- > | | < > \\----------------+ | n2t > | > > e > > > pre.konssept!*n > meeTz ver!f1kat!*n. > > > > - > > Netochka Nezvanova - nothing : strength through diversity > f3.MASCHIN3NKUNST > @www.eusocial.com > 17.hzV.tRL.478 > e > | > | +---------- > | | < > \\----------------+ | n2t^P > | > > e > > > >Terrence; > > > >Really, An empty communication is as pure as the concept gets. I posted it in > >seriousness. There is true meaning to what i did, I consider it a very small > >but important gesture. I will contextualize further at a future site . > > > >Since ((o)) has posted his www.emptywebsite.com and is making agressive > >unprovoked attacks on my work I will parlay IMO ((o)) s approach is merely > >echoing other great works and is perhaps "the original webart empty gimmick". I > >mean he goes as far as even registering the site and putting a registered mark > >on it. How long did he wait so he could slip it on Rhizome? It is hilarious > >really. His big mistake was dissing my truly serious empty e-mail art work on > >this list serve. > > > >Teo did ask for all forms of empty net art. ((o)) behaviour here is > >unprofessional and his invalidating is really creepy. > > > >ARTNATURAL > > > > > > > > > >Gustavo Barbosa wrote: > > > >> I agree... > >> Besides in Cage's, for instance, there was the whole issue about silence, is > >> there such thing and all that... probably not, so it still can be considered > >> a piece... > >> The digital media/world is much colder so yep, it's empty and that's it... > >> nothing more, nothing less, nothing else... > >> Well, that's what I think... at least now... > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: (((o))) <leegte@xs4all.nl> > >> To: <list@rhizome.org> > >> Sent: 08 November 2000 19:15 > >> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: empty net.art > >> > >> i'm afraid i'm not in favor of this approach. > >> > >> empty work is not just some rational gimmick, > >> "who can think of something to do with empty" kind of stuff. > >> you could maybe end at a minimal style of work as the only way out of > >> expressing your thoughts or feelings you've been gardening. > >> that's worth something. > >> but the gimmick-art thing going on today, has no soul, > >> no emotion, no depth, no communication. > >> and it's precisely that what makes good minimal work so beautifull. > >> it frightens you out of your wits, slams you on the floor, to let you start > >> crying, > >> or you walk out pissed off because some artist tried to wedge you out of > >> your > >> precious projected world, and apparently did a good job at it. > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Terrence Kosick > >> To: (((o))) ; teo@teo-spiller.org > >> Cc: list@rhizome.org > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 6:36 PM > >> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: empty net.art > >> > >> empty mail art example; > >> _________________________________________________________ > >> Subject: > >> EMPTY > >> Date: > >> Wed, 06 Sep 2000 20:48:49 -0700 > >> From: > >> Terrence Kosick <kosick@sprint.ca> > >> To: > >> list <list@rhizome.org> > >> > >> _________________________________________________________ > >> > >> "(((o)))" wrote: > >> > >> http://www.emptywebsite.com > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "teo spiller" <teo.spiller@rzs-hm.si> > >> To: "Rhizome" <list@rhizome.org> > >> Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 1:27 PM > >> Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: empty net.art > >> > >> > We knew some practices of "empty" art pieces in 20 th century: > >> > > >> > the Cage's composition of 2 minutes and 53 seconds silence, the > >> exhibition > >> > of empty canvases, the empty gallery instead of sculptures, the empty > >> sheet > >> > of paper instead of a poem, the book of empty sheets, etc, etc. > >> > > >> > but how would the "empty" net.art look like? > >> > > >> > Here are three examples (which is the right one): > >> > > >> > http://www.teo-spiller.org/empty1/ > >> > http://www.teo-spiller.org/empty2/ > >> > http://www.teo-spiller.org/empty3/ > >> > > >> > You are welcome to find out more "empty" pieces and send the link of > >> it to > >> > teo@teo-spiller.org > > > + vote buchanan > -> Rhizome.org > -> post: list@rhizome.org > -> questions: info@rhizome.org > -> unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/unsubscribe/ > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support > + > Subscribers to Rhizome Raw are subject to the terms set out in the > Subscriber Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/subscribe/ _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold