Steve Dietz on Mon, 31 Mar 2003 20:10:05 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Translocations - 3 of 3 |
Translocations: A Conversation – part 3 of 3 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ A Conversation http://latitudes.walkerart.org/texts/texts.wac?id=295 March 11–22, 2002, Steve Dietz (Minneapolis), Guna Nadarajan (Singapore), Jeebesh Bagchi, Monica Narula, and Shuddhabrata Sengupta of Raqs Media Collective (Delhi), and Yukiko Shikata (Tokyo) engaged in an online conversation that started from the idea of translocations and ranged widely across the terrain of global net art practice and philosophy. Following is an edited version of our conversation. An online exhibition of network-based art from Brazil, China, Croatia, India, Japan, Mexico, Phillipines, Singapore, South Africa, Turkey, and the United States by Danger Museum, entropy8zuper! with Julie Mehretu (launches April 6), Fran Ilich, Takuji KOGO, Andreja Kuluncic (launches May 1, Fatima Lasay, Raqs Media Collective, Re:combo, Warren Sack + Sawad Brooks, Sarai Media Lab, The Thing, Trinity Session, and tsunamii.net (launches March 31). http://translocations.walkerart.org ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From: Steve Dietz <steve.dietz@walkerart.org> Date: Thu Mar 14, 2002 5:52am Subject: RE: nomadism and routes translocations, I am interested in the "asymmetry of ignorance" and how it maps "a model of globality [that] need not be in any one direction." When Raqs first raised this asymmetry, it was, of course, very recognizable. The model I would like to make more explicit, however, is that of the network. As has been pointed out, the nodes of a network are nondirectional, providing, potentially, a different way of mapping relationships that does not rely on notions of center and periphery. The network is also an amplifier that can invert the asymmetry of power (and ignorance?) and allow for the conventionally unempowered to act with great effect, for the localized (wherever they are geographically) to have global impact. This network can be used to try to close down borders or to hack them, to encrypt or to decrypt, to be an "old boys network" or to become else. It, like technology, is not good or bad, but I do think it models a way to affect practice. Finally, Yukiko made a very important point about the 10_dencies project when she said that no one person had or could have the overall view of the various flows. There could be no master narrative. This is a commonplace observation by now, but nevertheless there remains this “drive to understand," and it is always difficult to retain a sense of this understanding as contingent and incomplete yet adequate and compelling. From: yukiko shikata <sica@dasein-design.com> Date: Tue Mar 19, 2002 3:40am Subject: RE: nomadism and routes dear translocators, Actually, the difference of center and periphery, the "asymmetry of ignorance," is everywhere. >From a distance, it seems possible that we see the world based on geography (including latitude and longitude), and see centers and peripheries depending on that; but actually, when we get closer to them, we realize that it is not so simple. In each city (so-called global cities especially), small centers and peripheries are intermingled, and "asymmetry of ignorance" abounds. The locations that seem peripheral are not necessarily vulnerable. Rather, those locations could be connected translocally and might reveal alternative directions, not dependent on the existing scale of center and periphery; and for this strategy, the network (in a rather broader meaning, not only the Internet) becomes the key point. It means that each area or node can strengthen the others, can show new possibilities. One short comment on info-geography. Information has intentionality, so when we call it "information,” it automatically implies a receiver, which reveals how this information is intended for the survival of the one (or the group) in the world. I refer here to the notion of Umwelt by biologist Jakob Johann von Uexküll. I am also impressed by what Raqs wrote in their last posting, raising the important issue of the "archaeology of translocality.” It is necessary to insert the time-aspect to see how information, people, and cultures influence one another—as dynamic exchanges of information and changing tendencies. Through the exchange of codes, or through the process of translation (and sometimes misunderstanding, misuse), those kinds of differences of understanding can bring about a new phase of emergence for a new expression of culture. Translation of translocation, or translocation of translation. Maybe I am playing with words. It makes nonsense but sometimes might make some sense, and at least nonsense has some sense. And translatitude. "Sense" means meaning; also feeling (in a way connected to phenomenology). How to feel the world; how to feel the other, and oneself. I agree with Raqs’ notion of nomadism requiring regularities and returns, repeating but always with slight differences. Translocality is always in motion, and inserting some "otherness" every time and being renewed/reterritorialized, it is like an autopoietic process, defining the border by moving itself. There is no substantial or fixed border, but an ever-changing process that generates borders at every second of movement. Whereby the location. Translocality derives from chaos and order, or in other words, info-nodes and dispersion, appearance and disappearance, and globality and locality. To Guna: On the issue of the global curator, I also work as a so-called curator, but I believe that people working with/in new media think and act rather borderlessly. Artists, engineers, curators, etc. collaborate to make a discursive public space for the participants, not for one-way expressions. That's why I always call myself a mediator (rather than a curator), which is a kind of interface for the new connective nodes. In my understanding, latitude is based on the earth’s surface, but it is also used in the air, for airplanes (and there are national borders and time zones applied to the sky). How about applying latitudes deep into the earth? Is there a point at which the latitudes disappear, become one? Do we have any scale for the region deep inside the earth? Reflexive + flexible = reflexible. I coin the term reflexible for all translocators, also for the digital commons. all the best, yukiko From: Steve Dietz <steve.dietz@walkerart.org> Date: Tue Mar 19, 2002 8:29pm Subject: RE: race and the translocal Dear reflexors, I like this term reflexible. It also reminds me of the term rescension. Raqs, perhaps you could share that definition from your cyber glossary? The urge for new terminologies—translocal, reflexible, rescension—and the reinvestment of old terminologies—sarai, commons—must reflect a certain inadequacy of current terminology (current understanding?) in regard to what we know to be the contemporary context. I would argue that to some extent the terminologies are not important. Of what import is "new media" versus "cyber art" or "information works"? On the one hand, they are just labels. On the other hand, I think they can open up new territories for our thinking, to help create new old spaces like the digital commons. From: Raqs Media Collective <raqs@sarai.net> Date: Tue Mar 19, 2002 6:36am Subject: Re: race and the translocal Dear Translocators, We think that Yukiko's evocation of the network (and a network can always be a network of networks) as a conscious remapping strategy is an interesting way of destabilizing the notion of both center and margin. A form of cultural practice that is located at the intersection of many networks finds itself placed simultaneously in different maps of the world. We think that this should be considered the general condition of the information arts and new media practices. By being made of data, and by being immaterial, and by being transportable, and by not being the kind of works that need to stand alone, information artworks and new media works can take to networks and to networked exhibition contexts in the same way that archaeological artifacts gravitate toward museums of antiquity. This (the network)—the decentered profusion of maps—is the natural habitus of the new media work. Perhaps we are witnessing for the first time a culture that is global, not only in its dispersal, but also in its production, as practitioners form networks to make work happen. For instance, the possibility of our work (the Global Village Health Manual) being included in the Kingdom of Piracy show, and being accessed through its decidedly Sino-Japanese interface, places our work within a “(syn)aesthetic” map quite different from it being seen in a curatorial context that frames new media work in terms that are, lets say, “deep” Central European, or “far” North American, or even “thick” South Asian. This leads to shows of shows, networked iterations of works in which flexible and fluid curatorial contexts are themselves up for consideration along with the works that they present. Thus, the figure of the global curator, which Guna evoked earlier, becomes the norm rather than the exception. What this means is that no matter where you place your work, it will be read differently, depending on the context and on the works that are its neighbors. That’s obvious, and not very profound, but let’s complicate this picture a bit. Let’s speak of neighbors both in spatial and temporal terms. What is the neighborhood of a work? This questions a canonical understanding of what one’s territory is, where one’s neighborhood lies, and which cultural materials one can be intimately self-reflective and playful with. We think that it is high time that those of us in the so called non-West (which latitude is that?) lay claim to all that is called Western, just as naturally as we lay claim to more proximate forms of cultural material. Because, what may be close in spatial terms may be far away temporally, and there may be many permutations of this tension between space and time in between. This means that aspects of what is called Indian Art by art historians may be quite far away from us in time, even if it is close to us in space. And of course the larger corpus of what is called Western art is far away both in time and space. This means that one can begin to think of one’s location and neighborhood in quite unexpected ways. Of course, another consequence of the “asymmetry of ignorance” is that even if a non-Western practitioner were to be reflective of his/her own antecedents, a Western viewer, who takes his/her own vantage point as universal, without recognizing that Euro-American culture or Euro-American modernity is no more and no less provincial than any other spatial configuration of culture and of modernity, may not even recognize that which the practitioner is being reflective about. What then is the strategy that (for the purpose of argument) a non-Western practitioner can adopt? To enter and to create networks that do not ask (like in immigration controls or bouncers in certain discotheques) about one's cultural antecedents. To refuse to answer any question in terms of yes or no when it comes to whether one does or does not belong to the west or the east. One can say that one belongs to above or below (?) rather than to east or west. To make work that belongs to networks and that is uncomfortable with standing alone. Rescension A re-telling, a word taken to signify the simultaneous existence of different versions of a narrative within oral, and from now onwards, digital cultures. Thus one can speak of a “southern” or a “northern” rescension of a myth, or of a “female” or “male” rescension of a story, or the possibility (to begin with) of Delhi/Berlin/Tehran rescensions of a digital work. The concept of rescension is contraindicative of the notion of hierarchy. A rescension cannot be an improvement, nor can it connote a diminishing of value. A rescension is that version which does not act as a replacement for any other configuration of its constitutive materials. The existence of multiple rescensions is a guarantor of an idea or a work's ubiquity. This ensures that the constellation of narrative, signs, and images that a work embodies is present, and waiting for iteration, at more than one site at any given time. Rescensions are portable and are carried within orbiting kernels within a space. Rescensions, taken together, constitute ensembles that may form an interconnected web of ideas, images, and signs. From: Steve Dietz <steve.dietz@walkerart.org> Date: Tue Mar 19, 2002 8:05pm Subject: RE: race and the translocal "To make work that belongs to networks and that is uncomfortable with standing alone." This is a fine phrase, and it seems to lead, as Raqs suggest in regard to the global curator, to the notion of "shows of shows, networked iterations of works in which flexible and fluid curatorial contexts are themselves up for consideration along with the works that they present." How, practically, does one create curatorial contexts, which are themselves up for consideration? For instance, I'm a little confused by the statement "information artworks and new media works can take to networks and to networked exhibition contexts in the same way that archaeological artifacts gravitate toward museums of antiquity." One of the critiques of the museum is precisely the case of the Elgin Marbles, which "gravitated" from their incorporation in a temple of worship to a museum of antiquity for a different kind of veneration, a moment, as Paul Valéry described it, when art and sculpture lost their mother, architecture. The idea that information artworks can "take to networks" seems to me absolutely correct, but my question is whether there is a fruitful relation between the network and the museum that is not, merely, the expression of an asymmetry of power or the museum as mausoleum, sav(or)ing things by killing them. How to exhibit translocally, where the context is both the global network and the physical setting? From: Raqs Media Collective <raqs@sarai.net> Date: Wed Mar 20, 2002 4:09am Subject: on networks and museums There was a certain deliberation with which we put the network and the museum close to each other in the same sentence, and we are glad that Steve immediately zeroed in on it. It was wicked :) on our part to slide these two spaces that seem so far apart from each other into a space in thought where they seem close, but the intention was to provoke a reflection on conceptuality, and on what belongs where. Of course, we are not arguing that new media networks, as exhibition contexts, are analogous to archaeological galleries in museums. The museum, as Steve pointed out, could be a dead space, and the network is, by definition, alive. But there is a point about the loss of context that we want to stress: whereas the artifact in a museum loses context when it "gravitates" toward or is pulled in to a museum, the data object has little or no context to lose. The immateriality of the data object does suggest the possibility of a certain aloofness from immediate cultural geographies and contexts, "above or below—rather than to the east or west of given latitudes." If anything, a data object has much to gain by being positioned in an interlocked way, and by being embedded or at least coincident with other data objects. Contextlessness is the context of the data object. There can be two ways of thinking about belonging: one is to say "I belong to this culture," and the other is to say "these cultures belong to me." In the second sense, one is privileging a notion of taking things, using them, abandoning them, fashioning other things with them, as one is on the move; our belongings then can be said to travel with us as we course through culture. This need not be understood in a foraging or acquisitive sense alone; it can be seen in terms of circulation and the sharing of belongings that never stick to their momentary custodians but rather travel among their custodians in the same way that their custodians travel through the network. We are talking of agile practices, mobile curators, and floating works, which construct complex matrices of belonging and claims on each other, none of which are based on the principles of mutual exclusivity. This presupposes an art circuit that has something in common with the pattern of conversation and give-and-take that might otherwise be the defining feature of an affinity group. This is a form of practice that presupposes the existence of a network, and thus means that the building of the network is as much a part of the practice as the fashioning of the objects that inhabit it. Because the way the objects are positioned and oriented has everything to do with the architecture of the network—of the living as opposed to the dead collection. From: Gunalan Nadarajan <gunalan@lasallesia.edu.sg> Date: Thu Mar 21, 2002 9:22pm Subject: RE: on networks and museums Dear Raqs and others, I find the idea of the data object's immateriality and contextlessness a little problematic. The fact that something circulates within a network does not mean that it is free from context. It may simply mean that the contexts are shifting, as are the meanings associated with them. I see interesting parallels between the shifting contexts of the data object and Derrida's notion of difference. As for Raqs’ desire for "agile practices, mobile curators, and floating works, which construct complex matrices of belonging and claims on each other, none of which are based on the principles of mutual exclusivity” . . . I remain hopeful. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Translocations: A Conversation http://latitudes.walkerart.org/texts/texts.wac?id=295 Online Exhibition http://translocations.walkerart.org Part of How Latitudes Become Forms http://latitudes.walkerart.org ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Steve Dietz Curator of New Media Walker Art Center http://latitudes.walkerart.org http://www.mnartists.org # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net