Haha, Alan there is no imperative in what I said, there is a plea, a hope, a wish. The imperative comes from outside and above - the imperative to “make a living”, the imperative to pay taxes, the imperative to write reports with quantitative analysis of why funding you received was well spent etc. What I said is the opposite of all that. And while I agree that categorising specific works or sometimes even specific genres is usually a waste of time, we also can’t just remove all categorisation and say "art is art is art" and allow ourselves to just indulge in whatever creative pursuit is most fun (by that obviously I also mean, potentially, intellectually stimulating etc) at that particular time in our specific creative sandbox. I am saying, we should urge ourselves to look outside of the art worlds, look at our context, our neighbours, our community, society, world, and try to make work that engages with that in the most meaningful ways we can. I am reading a lot of artists online at the moment lamenting that they don’t feel that their work is relevant in these Trumpland/Aleppo/Brexit/Refugee Crisis days, and I think some of them are right, they’ve let themselves drift to far into self-reflexiveness. Let this be a time where they reassess and redirect.
> On 13 Dec 2016, at 5:15 AM, Alan Sondheim <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Is there a mainstream art world? "The mainstream art world waited to utter > the term "Internet art" until they could safely add the prefix "post-" to it" > Jon Ippolito I think these reifications might be too simple, as are internet > art, net art, post digital, digital, and so forth. I'm not interested in art > about art in any sort of self-reflexive way, but I haven't anything against > artists who explore that; for me while I agree completely with " We need to > make work about things that matter more and are more grounded in the body, > the land, in depth and real experience." - I worry about the underlying > imperative here. There's depth in art about art, there's real experience > there as well. All of these categories limit and limit ourselves, I think - > for me, issues of communality, exploration, philosophy, the commons, diwo, > diy, all of these are interrelated. I keep thinking of how Amerikkka at this > point is all about drawing boundaries, and art history itself is one of those > boundaries - canons, genera, media, new media, etc., etc. Just expressing a > worry here, too many categories, maybe too many dismissals by virtue of the > categories - Also, again where Marc says "- as in, take full control of its > once grass roots identity, and own its history and future; and turn it all > into its own pliable set of products." - as it was pointed out to me last > night, a great deal of media-oriented art never was grass-roots for example. > I can use myself here - I began in a terak mini-computer in the 70s creating > drawing program w/ pascal etc. I had help - not course-wise, but academic > help on the side; I used equipment that at that time would have cost tens and > tens of thousands of USD - and a whole world opened up - in dialog with the > institution that gave me freedom to work with the equipment. And I think > there's a problem also with " but only so that all the typical top-down > defaults of the mainstream can take it apart and force it to reflect its own > intentions and belief systems" - I do understand what is meant by > "mainstream," but after looking again at Atlanta art for example - ranging > from the Printed Matter zinefest to an auction where artist exchange work > among themselves to the current highly charged Atlanta Biennale at the > Atlanta Contemporary, to Agnes Scott showing work dealing with southern > identity and narrative, including an intense piece by Bessie Harvey etc. - > I'm not sure where the "mainstream" actually is, or whether it serves any > purpose to personify it. I'd like to see all these categories exploded so > that we might proceed w/ looking and listening to everyone and anyone, > finding our own paths through the creative debris ranging from monetary > systems to zines to vr to the future of perception itself etc. > > We just got in to Washington DC, discussing policy with one of the heads of a > critical ngo, my head is reeling more than realing here. I bring this up > because I feel more than ever the need for concrete politics and a breakdown > of any barriers, aesthetic and otherise, at this point. Too many walls... > > Hope this makes some sense - Alan > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
