[iDC] shelf life

Sat Nov 17 14:33:45 UTC 2007

One might add:

axiom 3: ease of distribution is in inverse proportion to longevity  
(the spoken word is easiest, but lasts only the instant it is  
communicated; stone carvings last for millenia, but are difficult to  
lug around)

On 15 Nov 2007, at 21:59, Sean Cubitt wrote:

> axiom 1: every new medium has a shorter shelf life than the  
> previous one (stone lasts longer than paper lasts longer than film  
> lasts longer than magnetic lasts longer than optical)
>
> axiom 2: with each step, recording media come closer to becoming  
> erasing media
>
> Sean Cubitt
> scubitt at unimelb.edu.au
> Director
> Media and Communications Program
> Faculty of Arts
> Room 127 John Medley East
> The University of Melbourne
> Parkville VIC 3010
> Australia
>
> Tel: + 61 3 8344 3667
> Fax:+ 61 3 8344 5494
> M: 0448 304 004
> Skype: seancubitt
> Web: www.mediacomm.unimelb.edu.au
>
> Editor-in-Chief Leonardo Book Series
> http://leonardo.info
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: idc-bounces at mailman.thing.net on behalf of Danny Butt
> Sent: Thu 11/15/2007 8:35 PM
> To: idc at mailman.thing.net
> Subject: Re: [iDC] shelf life
>
> Interesting topic and much in Annette's analysis that resonated, but
> let me pick out a tension related to the question of performance
> which is on my mind a lot right now probably because I know so little
> about it:
>
> I've recently looked to artists with a performance orientation to
> help understand new media practices, and I think the question of
> documentation is understood in a much more sophisticated way in that
> field than it is in new media practice, so an engagement with that
> history could be a great opportunity (of course, many artists are
> already working that thoroughly). We get sucked in by the short term
> stability of a digital object (or platform/algorithm) and generally,
> new media is interested in what's new, so archival practices are not
> only de-emphasised, but there are few models around to discuss.
> Personally, when I look at some works I was involved with more than
> ten years ago, I'm grateful to be able to just describe the ones that
> don't work, as the ones that do seem pretty dated. But then maybe I
> should have been producing "better work" lol.
>
> I'd describe the idea that
>
> "Barring physical destruction, but acknowledging cultural difference,
> contextual change, and continuous reinterpretation, the [traditional]
> art object has a kind of inner stability/integrity that defies time.
> This is often irrespective of judgments of quality or fashion, but
> something that resides in the object itself, an indissoluble
> lamination of medium and idea"
>
> as more to be a statement of modernism than of art generally, and the
> persistence of that ideology within the new media sphere has always
> been a source of great discomfort to me, because it's not really true
> from my pov. Here is a further, heavily politicised link to
> performance: performance is a medium which found very little space in
> the modernist aesthetic (Michael Fried), or we might even follow
> Amelia Jones in suggesting that performance art can be read as an
> often deliberate displacement of the modernist subject.
>
> To add to this, I'm not sure I agree with the statement that "There
> seems to be an odd paradox of 'long gestation, short lifespan' that
> seems very particular to new media", or the characterisation of
> performance art as "spontaneous, gestural, open-ended and casual".
> Yes, there is a tradition of improvisation in the performance sphere,
> but  I see performance generally as being similar in its long
> gestation period, and with often even shorter lifespans.
>
> So a tension between the temporality of media practice and that of
> institutional (or subjective) demands for stability could be an
> opportunity to forge stronger alliances with other fields that have
> failed to be "real enough" for the institutions - performance, video,
> storytelling, "craft", etc... and perhaps media art is less unique
> than we might think in this respect.
>
> On this whole question, I've really enjoyed the work of Caroline Rye
> and others in University of Bristol's PARIP (Practice as Research in
> Performance) project which, while dated (2001-2006) raised some of
> these questions for me initially <http://www.bris.ac.uk/parip/
> index.htm>. I'd really appreciate hearing from anyone doing further
> work in this area.
>
> Regards,
>
> Danny
>
> --
> http://www.dannybutt.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity  
> (distributedcreativity.org)
> iDC at mailman.thing.net
> https://mailman.thing.net/mailman/listinfo/idc
>
> List Archive:
> http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/
>
> iDC Photo Stream:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/
>
> RSS feed:
> http://rss.gmane.org/gmane.culture.media.idc
>
> iDC Chat on Facebook:
> http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2457237647
>
> Share relevant URLs on Del.icio.us by adding the tag iDCref
>
> _______________________________________________
> iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity  
> (distributedcreativity.org)
> iDC at mailman.thing.net
> https://mailman.thing.net/mailman/listinfo/idc
>
> List Archive:
> http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/
>
> iDC Photo Stream:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/
>
> RSS feed:
> http://rss.gmane.org/gmane.culture.media.idc
>
> iDC Chat on Facebook:
> http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2457237647
>
> Share relevant URLs on Del.icio.us by adding the tag iDCref