| PROPAGANDA on Wed, 5 Dec 2001 02:10:02 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| [Nettime-bold] /// 0100101110101101.ORG /// FTPermutations_1.2 |
/// FTPermutations /// http://www.webartery.com /// # From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim@p...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:05 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] Korea Web Art Festival Just one point - in general I love hacking, altering, etc. - all these things you're talking about. And I think there should be sites, shows, etc. for all of this - I'm absolutely convinced. I also like hacking etc. for political reasons. I show some simple stuff (if I can do it it IS simple) in class, etc. But this is different to me - this clearly was a very different form of intervention. You either treat the audience/viewer/artist with respect or you don't. I wouldn't see this so much as a problem - except that there is a resurgence of the idea of tough, male, aggressive, etc., art online (without the usual deconstructions), whereas at least in the so-called artworlds, these very terms are problematized. As if making the work carries its own context - and the context is very old, oldfashioned, tiring, etc. etc. I'm just not in a good mood. I actually nominated 01etc. for a show and would do it again immediately. But I think more than ever it can be hypocritical to, on one hand decry the hideousness of US/Israeli foreign policy for its unsolicited and violent attacks - with explanation - and on the other, to support the same online - with explanation. If Talan's or others' works were compromised - if he were foreclosed with the old Lyotardian differend, I don't care so much for the explanation - unless it was a mistake, and 01etc. doesn't make many of them. Apologies again to everyone, including 01etc.; as you can see I'm of mixed feeling here, but I've been thinking a lot of the violence online, my own included, and how to mitatigate this, work through, if not consensus, at least a certain grace. Alan |||||||||||||||||||| # From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim@p...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:09 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] Korea Web Art Festival And who the fuck cares where net.art has moved? THERE ARE AUDIENCES/ VIEWERS. The "action" was important as was the bombing of Afghanistan - which shows just how far Afghanistan has come from its roots. These kinds of wars happen quite often and these reactions "SIMPLY" confirm etc. etc. Ah well - I do think the parallel is apt, precisely because of its violence and violation - why not? There's also LABOR involved, which is where the left comes in - if I was invited and put up absolute crap that took several hundred hours to do - let the viewers decide, not 01etc. Grrr... Alan |||||||||||||||||||| # From: Jennifer Ley <jtley@h...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:10 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] Korea Web Art Festival "][D(NA).fence][" wrote: > > > i c yr point alan, but u could rewire this 2 read "wot if > hackers/alterators had no viable spaces in which 2 perform their > interventions?"......... I'm not sure why we're defining hacking other peoples' files as interventions. An intervention does not have to physically destroy the thing on which it seeks to comment. > > > >And what does the PUBLIC or VIEWER get out of this, except for a lot of > >agro male crap? There's enough of that on the rest of the Net - thank you Alan for saying that. Read my mind. Jen |||||||||||||||||||| # From: "Talan Memmott" <talan@m...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:12 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] found the 0100101110101101.ORG n.terview > talan, just wanted 2 ask if they actually _hacked_ the main korean web.fest > site [as in manifested control ova the main n.terface], or whether they > restricted themselves 2 alterations via their section only.. They 'attacked' Mark Amerika Beth Stryker and Sawad Brooks YOUNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY_INDUSTRIES Entropy8Zuper Not their own.... ..if they only > re.wurked the site & had it linked from their project section, then this > makes the world of difference in terms of their n.tent][ions][........also, > where u familar with their wurk b4 agreeing 2 enter the festival? I did not enter the festival... The work was solicited... I am familiar with 0100101110101101.ORG... And, really whether I had or not is NOT the issue... At some level though, I think the curator made an error in selecting them without some condition that they would not attack a show they had agreed to be in.... |||||||||||||||||||| # From: "][D(NA).fence][" <netwurker@h...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:23 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] Korea Web Art Festival At 04:04 PM 12/3/2001 -0800, you wrote: >No files were destroyed.... Just moved, renamed, added to... ..via the main site, or via their section? >In general, yes, I have liked what they have been doing.... On the other >hand this strikes me as severely misguided in context.... And, I truly feel >for the curator in this regard..... It seems. that the Korean Ministry of >Culture thinks of this whole thing -- the exhibition, the 'action' -- as a >rip-off.... rip-off of wot though? >Here is the 0100101110101101.ORG statement -- post facto -- to the >artists... >""""" thx 4 providing this.......... >the reactions of some of the involved artists show by themselves the >importance of this action, if nothing more even just to show how far from >its roots is net.culture going -- and net.art in particular --. if anybody >of you have ever had a website in a do-it-yourselfe-server you'd know that >this kind of pranks happens quite often, and these reactions simply confirm >a complete lack of sense of humour and irony, which is something that has >always let the net being such a funny place. these reaciton reminds me the >one of traditional painters arguing at the Biennials because their painting >has been hanged a couple of centimeters too right, or the lights are too >strong, or the water is not cold enough and all this shit that have always >characterised the traditional art world. renaming some directories is >nothing serious nor dangerous. taking yourselves too seriously can get >dangerous. >""""" hmm. so many s.sues here...in terms of this b.ing a protest against the di][e][lution of the roots of net.culture, i'd agree with their n.tent but not the concrete exe.cution..........the pranks & humour angle seems 2 act 2 trivialise their action...... ..then again, this hinges on whether 0100101110101101.ORG hacked the site or offered their take from their own area........... >I guess this was done to save the soul of the likes of me.....[?] heh. >OK...... But really, the action in this context seems rather adolescent.... >And, in another regard one that seizes power in the name of some nostalgic >political ideal... again, hinges on how they carried it out........ >Yes, agreed net.culture has moved from its roots.... What does fucking up >peoples work have to do with that... everything, i terms of x.posing the growing trend 2 isolate & clinically isolate, remove & recode terminology, facets & core l.ements of net.wurked art & mish-mash them in2 a representational system d.void of any contextual loading..........again, i'll wait till i find out the logistics of the fucking up_ b4 i go on with this line....... >Mez's point: > >"""" >in terms of it _corrupting_ a show d.signed 2 run in][tandem][side a >gallery/museum >frame.wurk ][in terms of .wav ramifications][, then 0100101110101101.ORG >has succeeded...... >"""" >Suceeded in really doing what, pointing to what, proving what.....? That >servers are vulnerable....? That they can get someone in the real world >fired...? talam , again will wait till i find out the specifics then will answer this.......i realise this must be a sensitive point at the mo, 7 don't mean 2 aggrevate the situaion, but do feel this n.tervention raises important s.sues...... cheers, mez |||||||||||||||||||| # From: "][D(NA).fence][" <netwurker@h...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:43 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] Korea Web Art Festival At 07:10 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, you wrote: >I'm not sure why we're defining hacking other peoples' files as >interventions. An >intervention does not have to physically destroy the thing on which it >seeks to >comment. absolutely, jen, which is y i'm trying 2 ascertain the parameters of wot took place...... cheers, mez |||||||||||||||||||| # From: "][D(NA).fence][" <netwurker@h...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:48 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] found the 0100101110101101.ORG n.terview At 04:12 PM 12/3/2001 -0800, you wrote: >They 'attacked' >Mark Amerika >Beth Stryker and Sawad Brooks >YOUNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY_INDUSTRIES >Entropy8Zuper > >Not their own.... right, so this means that when a user typed in http://www.koreawebart.org/ they were confronted with a web n.terface that mixed up the links, directory/file structures in terms of the artists presented? or did a user have to click on 0100101110101101.ORG in order 2 get 2 the altered version? sorry 2 b.labour this, but this is a crucial point for me....... >I did not enter the festival... The work was solicited... ok. >I am familiar with 0100101110101101.ORG... And, really whether I had or not >is NOT the issue... ok, was just curious!! >At some level though, I think the curator made an error in selecting them >without some condition that they would not attack a show they had agreed to >be in.... d.pends on the nature of the 'attack'...is the interface still messed up? cheers, mez |||||||||||||||||||| # From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim@p...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:51 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] found the 0100101110101101.ORG n.terview Was thinking more about this. There's also the fact that Korea is barely a developed nation - this is early on for them. So we are angered by the US closure of internet ISPs in the Sudan - but we put up with this - because this is "art" and the other is "violation." Grrr... Alan |||||||||||||||||||| # From: "][D(NA).fence][" <netwurker@h...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 12:57 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] found the 0100101110101101.ORG n.terview At 07:51 PM 12/3/2001 -0500, you wrote: >Was thinking more about this. There's also the fact that Korea is barely a >developed nation - this is early on for them. So we are angered by the US >closure of internet ISPs in the Sudan - but we put up with this - because >this is "art" and the other is "violation." > >Grrr... > >Alan ...i'm waiting talan's answer regarding how the n.tervention was carried out be making judgements...... cheers, mez |||||||||||||||||||| # From: "][D(NA).fence][" <netwurker@h...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 1:15 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] found the 0100101110101101.ORG n.terview oops, that should have read "b4 making judgements'........ |||||||||||||||||||| # From: "Talan Memmott" <talan@m...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 1:36 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] found the 0100101110101101.ORG n.terview I think most all has been straightened out..... ANSWRZ >>No files were destroyed.... Just moved, renamed, added to... > ..via the main site, or via their section? FROM their directory into the directories of OTHERS... Does not affect the entire site -- but specific pieces... > right, so this means that when a user typed in > http://www.koreawebart.org/ > > they were confronted with a web n.terface that mixed up the links, > directory/file structures in terms of the artists presented? or did a user > have to click on 0100101110101101.ORG in order 2 get 2 the altered version? > > sorry 2 b.labour this, but this is a crucial point for me....... Not from the home page... But when you went to the OTHER artist's works... The User did NOT have to go to the 01etc.org site to see this... Essentially making the work of others not work or look like crap. > >At some level though, I think the curator made an error in selecting them > >without some condition that they would not attack a show they had agreed to > >be in.... > > d.pends on the nature of the 'attack'...is the interface still messed up? I don't think it depends on how this went down... Though I do understand your distinction between their own directory and those of the other artists... >> Suceeded in really doing what, pointing to what, proving what.....? That >> servers are vulnerable....? That they can get someone in the real world >> fired...? > talam , again will wait till i find out the specifics then will answer > this.......i realise this must be a sensitive point at the mo, 7 don't mean > 2 aggrevate the situaion, but do feel this n.tervention raises important s.sues...... How does the intent make it valid that someone is getting fired? As well, the issue of destroying the work of another, holding it hostage, altering it without some level of understanding is just plain disrespectful of the other participating artists. >> At some level though, I think the curator made an error in selecting them >> without some condition that they would not attack a show they had agreed to >> be in.... > d.pends on the nature of the 'attack'...is the interface still messed up? In consideration of the issues they claim to be addressing by doing this... And, that the curator and artists had no knowledge of this beforehand... I find it difficult to validate this 'action' [as it were].... This, to me, is a misguided 'action' that doesn't represent much beyond a prank... However with real implication that have nothing to do with the network and much to do with the perception of web/net art in Korea [at least]... The Korean Ministry of Culture is asking the curator to pay back all the money for the development of the site, infra-structure, the festival and such.... And, will be out of a job... Kicked out Korea if he cannot pay... |||||||||||||||||||| # From: "][D(NA).fence][" <netwurker@h...> # Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 2:07 am # Subject: Re: [webartery] found the 0100101110101101.ORG n.terview At 05:36 PM 12/3/2001 -0800, you wrote: >FROM their directory into the directories of OTHERS... Does not affect the >entire site -- but specific pieces... ah, ok. this does make a difference in terms of ][negative][m.pact......... > > right, so this means that when a user typed in > > http://www.koreawebart.org/ > > > > they were confronted with a web n.terface that mixed up the links, > > directory/file structures in terms of the artists presented? or did a user > > have to click on 0100101110101101.ORG in order 2 get 2 the altered version? > > > > sorry 2 b.labour this, but this is a crucial point for me....... > >Not from the home page... But when you went to the OTHER artist's works... >The User did NOT have to go to the 01etc.org site to see this... >Essentially making the work of others not work or look like crap. ok......... > > >At some level though, I think the curator made an error in selecting them > > >without some condition that they would not attack a show they had agreed >to > > >be in.... > > > > d.pends on the nature of the 'attack'...is the interface still messed up? > >I don't think it depends on how this went down... Though I do understand >your distinction between their own directory and those of the other >artists... yes, this is m.portant. i'd like 2 make it clear here that i'm not trying 2 d.fend 0100101110101101.ORG's actions, but rather open up room 4 discussion regarding this action/n.tervention/attack, & the idea of co-opting a medium to reflect aspects that d.fine it......woteva u term it. i term it n.tervention. interference would probably b a more accurate term. > >> Suceeded in really doing what, pointing to what, proving what.....? That > >> servers are vulnerable....? That they can get someone in the real world > >> fired...? > > > talam , again will wait till i find out the specifics then will answer > > this.......i realise this must be a sensitive point at the mo, 7 don't >mean > > 2 aggrevate the situaion, but do feel this n.tervention raises important >s.sues...... > >How does the intent make it valid that someone is getting fired? talan, i was in no way trying 2 assert that 0100101110101101.ORG's n.tent made it valid 2 make some1 redundant. wot i was trying 2 x.amine [from my own perspective, not from an absolutist POV] was the mechanism & result of this n.tervention.......... >As well, >the issue of destroying the work of another, holding it hostage, altering it >without some level of understanding is just plain disrespectful of the other >participating artists. yes, i can c how wood c it this way, & again, i don't think 0100101110101101.ORG polished their n.tervention in terms of presenting a piece that had obvious ramification in terms of other's wurk [& employment]. > >> At some level though, I think the curator made an error in selecting them > >> without some condition that they would not attack a show they had agreed >to > >> be in.... > > > d.pends on the nature of the 'attack'...is the interface still messed up? > >In consideration of the issues they claim to be addressing by doing this... >And, that the curator and artists had no knowledge of this beforehand... I >find it difficult to validate this 'action' [as it were].... ok! i can understand y u would find it difficult 2 validate, of course, again, i'm not trying 2 validate 0100101110101101.ORG actions, but rather look @ the idea of re.n.venting & stylising traditional presentation mechanism & realigning them in2 another ][net.reflected][ di.mension. [ i must use terminology that comes across as absolutist. i'll try and wurk on that]. >This, to me, is a misguided 'action' that doesn't represent much beyond a >prank... However with real implication that have nothing to do with the >network and much to do with the perception of web/net art in Korea [at >least]... ok. >The Korean Ministry of Culture is asking the curator to pay back all the >money for the development of the site, infra-structure, the festival and >such.... And, will be out of a job... Kicked out Korea if he cannot pay... wow, that's very rough...there isn't anyway of switching the responsibility on2 0100101110101101.ORG's shoulders? chunks, mez /// FTPermutations /// http://www.webartery.com /// _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold