Sally Jane Norman on Mon, 15 Mar 1999 19:44:14 +0100 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Syndicate: aesthetics of structure/ organisation |
Aesthetics of structure/ aesthetics of organisation (borrowed from Pit Schulz) Emerging from a series of events tightly back-to-backed in the space of the past fortnight is like crawling out of a very specific and very heavy kind of jetlag, i.e. the kind that corresponds to going somewhere really weird, requiring 24 hours on a plane followed by 8 hours on a train, a few hours on a boat then a few more on a bus, and a last unquantifiable trek on foot. That more or less corresponds to the trip from a West European airport to somewhere like Kumara Junction, down in the West Coast rain forest region of Aotearoa, New Zealand. A bit of neo-romantic local focus for good measure, after this discussion about "where are you native of/ from?" Feeling homesick for Te Kotuku, the white heron, that you can only see if you go through the travellerâ??s initiation rites just described. Itâ??s strange to do a pilgrimage to Kumara or Okarito lagoon just to see some unearthly white bird take off from some elevated roosting point, wing out over the ocean, take to the skies. All that journeying to witness the fleeting grace of a sky-bound animal. OK, back to the point because so many people â?? me included â?? donâ??t have the time or energy to deal with the mail they get. Please sign off now if youâ??re pressured coz I tend to ramble. Thatâ??s what happens when you write your email in trains, which is where I spend most of my time these days. And this is likely to be a particularly dissolute, uncoordinated ramble because thereâ??s still a fair bit of track-time ahead and the last extremely pleasant Amsterdam evening at Geertâ??s place with the Mongrels and a few other Martians left me in a state bordering on the catatonic. A day after letter. Many thanks for the hospitality Geert, and sorry about not being more communicative and just basking lazily in the warm and colourful company, but all this stuff was/is buzzing round in my brain and occluding the output channel. Probably a blessing for anybody except me. Three sites/ events providing their own takes on media, their own visions and versions of how and whether infocommunications tools are going to save the world. Much to be perplexed about â?? some of the criticism voiced yesterday at the N5M closing session struck me as being unfounded, quite simply and sadly because obviously everyone hadnâ??t been able to attend the same sessions. Conclusion : parallel sessions do this. e.g. I went to several panels where there was an explicit, well articulated querying of the usefulness of new media per se in community-building, community-consolidating activity, in efforts towards social change, towards the creation of more participatory communities in our machinic age. None of this idly swallowing, co-opting, condoning, wholesale and indiscriminate picking up of new media, that one observer seemed to have observed and felt distressed about. On the contrary: Anna Har Mei-Yoke (Kuala Lumpur) talked about the problems of spending time online at the expense of time engaged in interaction with the local communities which constitute the centre of her work. This reflection was endorsed by those present â?? local, face-to-face, immediate, work in oneâ??s grass-roots context is the prerequisite for building a sense of identity and community that can THEN reach out. Like the old Tamla Motown "Reach out" â?? remember the other wordsâ?¦ "for me", followed by "Iâ??ll be there". In simple terms, networks require nodes. The channels need to be going to and from somewhere. We are sometimes so mesmerised by the bandwidth and vehicle hype that we forget simple communication theory principles and get lost in the buzz. Emission and reception. You and me. Has "identity" become politically incorrect, like "individuality"? Can we usefully revalorise the notion of NODE (Nexus Of Daily Experience) in all this rhetoric about the NET? (the acronyms are DIY). Steve Kurtz had a nice provocative statement along these lines in his "art after activism" contribution when he said that the way community was being discussed as a warm fuzzy term amongst left wing activists was becoming an uncanny counterpart to the way family values are discussed amongst conservatives. He said it better but it seems to be a good point. In another context, there was James Wallbankâ??s (Redundant Technology Initiative) perfectly clear vindication of strategies to employ and optimise existing equipment and infrastructures, of recognising appropriate technologies for oneâ??s purposes and refusing to get caught up in the gigarace and gigadollar development track. And of course thereâ??s the "Linux debate" that polarises many of these questions â?? the operating system philosophies that were evoked and that hopefully will be rediscussed in depth at Mikro events later this year. David Garcia also raised the hot issue of the desirability of accessing, showing, exhibiting oneself and oneâ??s cause â?? the implications of mediatisation / mediasensation on the local context, individual. An issue that deserves much further debate â?? the Australian aboriginal groups working on notions of cultural property, like the Maori people of the South Pacific, have strong, thought provoking views on notions of self-portrayal and appropriate use of media technologies. We can learn much from them. And one thing that I found really positive about the Amsterdam meetings was that spokespersons from far away, totally implicated in different cultures, were present to listen to and talk with, as opposed to the (sometimes unwittingly) neo-colonialist, often self-designated representatives that weâ??ve all seen in media debates speaking for The Other. The new age heralds of indigenous cultures, those who pretend to have miraculously picked up the subtleties of foreign mores in the space of just a few weeks or months or years, as easy as getting a tattoo or buying a Club Med holiday package, and who come back to spread the good tidings of noble savages and ride the crest of identifying with Exotica. So it was really refreshing to hear people speaking with everyday knowledge and deep Be-Longing about their own realms of existence and activity. Answering with disarming frankness when asked whether this type of conference participation was not detrimental to work "in the field" : "Of course". Like all of us who try and do our work, i.e. work that is not in itself the conference circuit frontsman stuff, but the core activity that makes it worthwhile and justified to come to such places to meet kindred spirits likewise anchored in their work, and interested in a confrontation of practice, experience. This presence I found immensely important, the more so knowing how much sheer gut effort had gone into ensuring it on the part of David, Eric, Geert, many of you. Itâ??s a bit irritating how some people uninformed about the way an event like this is put together conclude that the organisers are all extremely well-paid, comfortable cultural workers thanks to â?? indeed in many ways enlightened â?? Dutch cultural policy, and proceed to hammer their difference as underdog volunteers and unrecognised militants to be praised for their dedication and perseverance. But I suppose thatâ??s normal; weâ??re all uninformed and informed in different contexts. Hope your follow-up work goes well, Eric; what it procured in advance for the N5M event was invaluable. Other issues like (how much) do we ignore our own immediate peripheries when searching for communications/ media/ community experiencesâ?¦We all know this problem â?? which doesnâ??t mean that we all work to solve it â?? in France, for example the organisation of humanitarian convoys to and from desolate parts of the world, the official, often embarrassingly overstated hosting of groups from underprivileged geographic areas, these events sometimes take on strange connotations when burning questions of local inequality are glossed over; when humanitarianism at a distance becomes the easy alibi, the smoke screen that veils tiresome, unromantic home truths that are harder to deal with and that donâ??t pull such a big crowd on the Audimat. In French television practices, thereâ??s a weird relationship, doubtless quantifiable in programme time terms, between the extremely high PR value attached to the (e.g.) annual, thoroughly programmed and highly organised Telethon â?? a spectacular media event to raise money for myopathy â?? and that attached to occasional unforeseeable offshore disasters â?? an earthquake here, a volcanic eruption there, a hurricane elsewhere. To the extent that even though one doesnâ??t know where nature will strike, there seems to be advance allocated media time for a certain number of "outside" events. Like some kind of quota. The front-page miscellanea from beyond that will balance out the local save-our-souls tear-jerking and ensure that weâ??re in touch both in immediate circles and beyond. That way, the plight of the sick little child up the road, Monsieur Dupontâ??s daughter, can be played off against that of some other innocent victim being rescued from some distant catastrophe. War zones often being politically "indelicate" subjects â?? it seems far safer for national media to appease our planetary sentiments by focussing on collective effort to rectify Mother Natureâ??s malice. Any discourse on this subject is riddled with ideological pitfalls and contradictions and so is often avoided : in its extreme forms, e.g. in international settings where humanitarian policies are discussed, where assistance between nation-states is negotiated, we often hear one of the painfully "logical" developments of this question, which is to simply bluntly cease giving beyond oneâ??s own borders, pretexting that priorities are on the home front. Doesnâ??t mean that they really will be dealt with in any way, but justifies big cuts in budgets, popular with certain voting groups, for "non-solvent" humanitarian activities. So itâ??s hard, as always with the real questions, to strike some kind of balance between attitudes likely to further debate on local versus translocal, close-to-home versus beyond the hearth, prioritisation, etc., and those that are perniciously likely to close the debate, to fuel the reactionary thinking that one is trying to counter. Graham Harwood last night talked simply about two types of people/ ideologies, irrespective of political colour or setting : those who try to open things up, and those who try to keep things closed. Two types encountered "right across the board". In the thick of current discussion about local/ translocal, and closer to network issues, another strange tendency on the rise seems to be claims or attempts to represent, to universalise, to stand for - all. The everything and nothing reps. We discussed this vigorously in Vienna : we who were lucky enough to meet there (though it was bloody hard work â?? for those who are jealous!) â?? were quite clear about the fact that we can only speak for our own, highly specific places of activity, our sites of practice. Although we wish to enhance connections between them, to act as facilitators and as useful connection points for activities that can somehow usefully (i.e. usefully for all) relate to our own â?? the "open things up" philosophy â?? we cannot pretend to represent some larger, universalisable entity. None of this bigger and holier than anybody else bullshit. Just our basic grass-roots practice, activity, connected and made open enough to hopefully learn from and draw on. No more, no less. In this time of universal servers and centres, of netevangelist structures suddenly jumping onto the "we represent all", "we connect all" bandwagon, we badly need to stay simple and honest. Heterotopes of practice. One of Pit Schulzâ??s remarks during the InterFund meeting wonâ??t go away (fortunately). He talked about the aesthetics of structure, the aesthetics of organisation. Expounding on that, it implies that our modalities of action and interaction, the ways we meet up and connect and interrelate, are aesthetically loaded. Just as everybody knows that infocommunications technologies are not neutral, nor are our "techniques" (arts) of encounter. Thinking this way gives our encounters a peculiar vivacity, a non-mechanistic feel : weâ??re all wary of structure and organisation that is too closed, too systematic and exclusive. So we drift the other way to the sometimes opposite extreme, to myths of absolutely open, open-ended communication structures and activities that end up losing their nodes and that function like some ungraspable beatific mantra. The buzz in the wires. The identity/ recognisability question again. The aesthetics of structure/ organisation residing in the tension between these? How unstructured, how disorganised can an encounter be, for it still to be a real encounter? Off the train, switching to the metro, a guy on the stairs carrying a bag studded with the yellow star Euro motto, with the words "Mobility, Sustainability, and Intermodality" on it. (actually an FP5 Info Day slogan). Eurospeak for looking after oneâ??s friendships? Damn. Forgot to buy tomorrowâ??s train ticket. Need to see Te Kotukuâ??s white wings flashing in the Pacific sky. Somehow I think that they will be visible in Belgrade next month. The aesthetics of encounter in that locus can only be unique. For those who wrote off lack of content at N5M, were you not hit between the eyes and in the gut by B92? And other things? Where is aesthetics, where is content? Isnâ??t the organisation/structuring of dissemination mechanisms â?? e.g. content that does acrobatic transits via London to get back to Yugoslavia â?? in itself revelatory of tactical art? A choreography of media mobility? What are these new channels of _expression_? There are strange new things about movement and reach in much of todayâ??s info-streaming, tortuous data itineraries which alone can guarantee near-immediacy of delivery, that seem to bear a special poignancy. I was touched - then again, often am. Many thanks to a helluva lot of people for the past days. Apologies for the off-the-cuff delirium. Kia Ora SJN Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â