• about ada
• discussion archives
• media library
• subscribe to ada
•  
• also:
• ada korawiki
• electrosmog programme
• the ada reader (book)
• ada cloudland exhibition
• ada symposium 09 site

Hello Everybody,

So we are now just 2 short weeks away from our international guests
arriving, a welcoming party and performance evening in Auckland, the
residency beginning in New Plymouth, and a month from the Ada mini- symposium in mid-July. Whew. So all very exciting & for all of which
information will be following shortly. But first, it is a very nice
tie-in, as we launch into these many SCANZ-related social occasions &
opportunities, to introduce our last set of SCANZ artists, who have a
common interest in working with the social dynamics of our world and
the ways in which we interface with them. ...

Hi Trudy and all!,

Sorry I have taken a while to respond: ------------------8<----------------------------------------------- ...

-----Original Message----- From: josh at theyrule.net [mailto:josh at theyrule.net] Sent: Thu 6/22/2006 5:18 PM To: Aotearoa Digital Arts Cc: Subject: Re: [Ada_list] SCANZ Introductions: SOCIAL INTERFACE - Caro McCaw,Raewyn Turner, Josh On, Norie Neumark & Maria Miranda (Out-of-Sync)

Hi Trudy and all!, Sorry I have taken a while to respond: ------------------8<----------------------------------------------- Josh in an interview on artificial.dk you stated that you were not convinced that projects such as They Rule were effective in creating change or for getting people involved politically, and stated that good old-fashioned organizing and standing on a street corner selling socialist newspapers was much more fruitful. Same story for artprank work such as The Yes Men's tactics. Do you see any examples of effective use of art-making as mobilizing political awareness and change? ------------------8<----------------------------------------------- >First up, I am a big fan of the Yes Men! I am big fan of the Yes Men as well. However in light of being a devil's advocate, why is their work "art"? Why aren't Michael Moore's political stunts or the spectacularly creative documentaries of Mark Achbar ("The Corporation" and "Managing Consent") called "art"? As far as I know their work is not defined as such by the major art institutions, who fundamentally define the word "art". Or is their work, in fact, art? I have wondered myself having spent a majority of my spare time in the last 15 years working on political issues and strategies both anonymously on the internet, as part of groups, and as an individual writing endless letters to the media. However, in spite of some creative solutions, I, and others whom I work with, have not called the political writings, or related activities "art"; or expected the institutions that define art, to call such activities "art". However, the political poetry of Neruda or the novels and films of Gabriel Garcia Marquez (who are dealing with the poetic not rational) most certainly are; at least as defined by conventional wisdom and the Nobel judges. Would Howard Zinn consider himself an artist? Certainly Abbie Hoffamn, the prankster, was. Would he...or even or the political lawyer William Kunstler be shown at the Guggenheim? If nor perhaps he should have? Do the boundaries of art stretch to rational discourse, as with law and logic? I suppose that these were questions running through the Guggenheim trustees when Hans Haacke had his show tragically cancelled in 1971 during the first round of "conceptual art". I have tied to explain this dilemma (when is it defined as "art", and when it is a wacky documentary?) to students and colleagues quite recently. They are almost universally at a loss on how such documentaries are called art. I am feeling a bit beyond my depth here on defining the ever expanding field of what is called "art", perhaps others could help? >I think we can evaluate political art under many create; its artistic value, its political value (both agitational and propagandistic), or even its entertainment value, not to mention its revenue making potential - which is sometimes a criterion artists are forced to consider - right!? I think that I was trying to be a bit provocative. There is a tendency for artists to see their work as transformational... whether it be spiritually transforming or politically. If we are to evaluate the political potential of an artwork, or even movement what sort of things should we be asking? "How many people became revolutionaries after experiencing it?"... I am not sure how you could do it. Testing political strategies in general is difficult - but you can say - we sold x number of papers and recruited x number of people. Perhaps this is an unfair comparison though. Perhaps Art works in mysterious ways. I would agree that it does, and that is its joy and a problem. Because how can you construct a political movement around mystery? In some ways I see Art as the antithesis to such a project. Imagine starting a painting with the goal of converting the viewers to be opposed to genetic engineering. It seems like a bad starting point for a painting - so crass and goal oriented - yet as a political task this seems completely reasonable to me. Nevertheless, plenty of art contributes to and is an integral part of political change. I recently saw the film Amandla! - about the role of music in the Anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. And then there is the poetry in the middle east, and Bob Dylan, Woody Guthrie, punk etc etc. Yes Men are part of this fine tradition. Where this art is most successful though - there is a movement top make sense of it, inspire it, shape and be shaped by it. Recently, a friend showed some of Martha Rosler's feminist artwork to some grad students. It fell flat for them - it seemed over wrought - but at the time there was an organized women's rights movement - today there really isn't one to speak of. We need a new women's rights movement - and then we will see better art! But of course we need a new women's rights movement, and anti-racism, anti-war movements etc - for many other reasons too!!!! And the most honest direct, and effective way to build them is with straight talking, and collective acting and evaluation. I encourage artists to take inspirations from artists like Howard Zinn, Sartre, Boots Riley, Araundhati Roy, Wallace Shawn etc - artists who may well make political art but also act politically outside of the framework of art. China Meiville - a British socialist and fantasy author once said - a 6000 page novel is a rather clumsy way to convince someone of socialism. I agree. Although some great novels - like Sinclair's work or The Grapes of Wrath have been valuable contributions! I hope that makes some sense. In a nutshell I am not trying to crap on Art, or be holier than thou - I just think that if your aim is to help make a revolution then you should say so and be up for debating the methods with artists and non artists alike. Excuse the exclamation marks and typos. It is late - I have been on a plane all day! best Josh _______________________________________________ Ada_list mailing list Ada_list at list.waikato.ac.nz http://aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz/

Learn real skills for the real world - Apply online at http://www.ucol.ac.nz or call 0800 GO UCOL (0800 46 8265) or txt free 3388 for more information and make a good move to UCOL ? Universal College of Learning. ...

-----Original Message----- From: Brit Bunkley (Staff WG) Sent: Thu 6/22/2006 8:43 PM To: josh at theyrule.net; Aotearoa Digital Arts Cc: Subject: RE: [Ada_list] SCANZ Introductions: SOCIAL INTERFACE - Caro McCaw,Raewyn Turner, Josh On, Norie Neumark & Maria Miranda (Out-of-Sync)

I hope you don't take this wrong. I think what you are doing is great!! -----Original Message----- From: josh at theyrule.net [mailto:josh at theyrule.net] Sent: Thu 6/22/2006 5:18 PM To: Aotearoa Digital Arts Cc: Subject: Re: [Ada_list] SCANZ Introductions: SOCIAL INTERFACE - Caro McCaw,Raewyn Turner, Josh On, Norie Neumark & Maria Miranda (Out-of-Sync) Hi Trudy and all!, Sorry I have taken a while to respond: ------------------8<----------------------------------------------- Josh in an interview on artificial.dk you stated that you were not convinced that projects such as They Rule were effective in creating change or for getting people involved politically, and stated that good old-fashioned organizing and standing on a street corner selling socialist newspapers was much more fruitful. Same story for artprank work such as The Yes Men's tactics. Do you see any examples of effective use of art-making as mobilizing political awareness and change? ------------------8<----------------------------------------------- >First up, I am a big fan of the Yes Men! I am big fan of the Yes Men as well. However in light of being a devil's advocate, why is their work "art"? Why aren't Michael Moore's political stunts or the spectacularly creative documentaries of Mark Achbar ("The Corporation" and "Managing Consent") called "art"? As far as I know their work is not defined as such by the major art institutions, who fundamentally define the word "art". Or is their work, in fact, art? I have wondered myself having spent a majority of my spare time in the last 15 years working on political issues and strategies both anonymously on the internet, as part of groups, and as an individual writing endless letters to the media. However, in spite of some creative solutions, I, and others whom I work with, have not called the political writings, or related activities "art"; or expected the institutions that define art, to call such activities "art". However, the political poetry of Neruda or the novels and films of Gabriel Garcia Marquez (who are dealing with the poetic not rational) most certainly are; at least as defined by conventional wisdom and the Nobel judges. Would Howard Zinn consider himself an artist? Certainly Abbie Hoffamn, the prankster, was. Would he...or even or the political lawyer William Kunstler be shown at the Guggenheim? If nor perhaps he should have? Do the boundaries of art stretch to rational discourse, as with law and logic? I suppose that these were questions running through the Guggenheim trustees when Hans Haacke had his show tragically cancelled in 1971 during the first round of "conceptual art". I have tied to explain this dilemma (when is it defined as "art", and when it is a wacky documentary?) to students and colleagues quite recently. They are almost universally at a loss on how such documentaries are called art. I am feeling a bit beyond my depth here on defining the ever expanding field of what is called "art", perhaps others could help? >I think we can evaluate political art under many create; its artistic value, its political value (both agitational and propagandistic), or even its entertainment value, not to mention its revenue making potential - which is sometimes a criterion artists are forced to consider - right!? I think that I was trying to be a bit provocative. There is a tendency for artists to see their work as transformational... whether it be spiritually transforming or politically. If we are to evaluate the political potential of an artwork, or even movement what sort of things should we be asking? "How many people became revolutionaries after experiencing it?"... I am not sure how you could do it. Testing political strategies in general is difficult - but you can say - we sold x number of papers and recruited x number of people. Perhaps this is an unfair comparison though. Perhaps Art works in mysterious ways. I would agree that it does, and that is its joy and a problem. Because how can you construct a political movement around mystery? In some ways I see Art as the antithesis to such a project. Imagine starting a painting with the goal of converting the viewers to be opposed to genetic engineering. It seems like a bad starting point for a painting - so crass and goal oriented - yet as a political task this seems completely reasonable to me. Nevertheless, plenty of art contributes to and is an integral part of political change. I recently saw the film Amandla! - about the role of music in the Anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. And then there is the poetry in the middle east, and Bob Dylan, Woody Guthrie, punk etc etc. Yes Men are part of this fine tradition. Where this art is most successful though - there is a movement top make sense of it, inspire it, shape and be shaped by it. Recently, a friend showed some of Martha Rosler's feminist artwork to some grad students. It fell flat for them - it seemed over wrought - but at the time there was an organized women's rights movement - today there really isn't one to speak of. We need a new women's rights movement - and then we will see better art! But of course we need a new women's rights movement, and anti-racism, anti-war movements etc - for many other reasons too!!!! And the most honest direct, and effective way to build them is with straight talking, and collective acting and evaluation. I encourage artists to take inspirations from artists like Howard Zinn, Sartre, Boots Riley, Araundhati Roy, Wallace Shawn etc - artists who may well make political art but also act politically outside of the framework of art. China Meiville - a British socialist and fantasy author once said - a 6000 page novel is a rather clumsy way to convince someone of socialism. I agree. Although some great novels - like Sinclair's work or The Grapes of Wrath have been valuable contributions! I hope that makes some sense. In a nutshell I am not trying to crap on Art, or be holier than thou - I just think that if your aim is to help make a revolution then you should say so and be up for debating the methods with artists and non artists alike. Excuse the exclamation marks and typos. It is late - I have been on a plane all day! best Josh _______________________________________________ Ada_list mailing list Ada_list at list.waikato.ac.nz http://aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz/

Learn real skills for the real world - Apply online ...

I just came back from to the Sydney Biennale (that we take every two years with students). Like the previous Documenta, it was filed with many art pieces that were political documentaries ??? ranging from the poetic to fairly linear observations. Some, including myself, though it was the best Biennale in years. (The Kiwi and Australian contingent certainly stood out??? as always.) ...