www.nettime.org
Nettime mailing list archives

<nettime> introducing meta-daria, an autonomous discourse [green, yung,
nettime's_roboconnoisseur on Sat, 19 Feb 2005 00:26:00 +0100 (CET)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> introducing meta-daria, an autonomous discourse [green, yung, green]


Re: <nettime> Introducing Daria: An autonomous software artist
     Vanalyne Green <v.carrollgreen {AT} gmail.com>
     brian lee dae yung <brian {AT} muxspace.com>
     Vanalyne Green <v.carrollgreen {AT} gmail.com>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:24:21 +0000
From: Vanalyne Green <v.carrollgreen {AT} gmail.com>
Subject: Re: <nettime> Introducing Daria: An autonomous software artist

Jumping into the fray

The old formula:  how you know when you're looking at art:  there's a
nude woman's body.  And how do you know it's good:  It's done by a
white man.

I was surprised that you labelled the content 'art,' which I consider
to have some  redefining or transformative or philosophical or
political or ethical reach, when what I saw was recycled men's
magazine's stuff layered over with an arty (decorative) look and some
poetic-y text.  In  a way, I don't blame you - that's the weight of
art history being performed.  But I'm of the school that those days
are over.  John Berger's famous book 'Ways of Seeing' tackles this
subject very well.

Re gendering equipment female:  If often works in reverse but that
gender dichotomy doesn't make it any easier for women either.
-- V. Green


On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:10:05 -0600, brian lee dae yung
<brian {AT} muxspace.com> wrote:

> Dan:
> 
> Can you clarify whether you consider the labeling of Daria as an
> artist to be part of her anthropomorphism or not? From the below
> comment, I take it that the artist label is not a part of the
> anthropomorphism:
> 
> > If the question that concerns you primarily is "can autonomous
 <...>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 08:34:54 -0600
From: brian lee dae yung <brian {AT} muxspace.com>
Subject: Re: <nettime> Introducing Daria: An autonomous software artist

Vanalyne:

Consider that once you get beyond the surface notion of Daria's art as being
closer to men's smut than art, there is a deeper notion of art here. As you
say, the redefining or transformative or philosophical or political or ethical
reach of the work, is not so much in Daria's work, but in mine. Again, I ask
what are the consequences of autonomous software systems integrating into human
society? Can they succeed as an autonomous agent in ways a corporation cannot?

The initial consequence seems to be that her art sucks. Fair enough; I'm sure
Giuliani would have disapproved as well. Hopefully we can get beyond that and
examine the other issues.

Brian

Quoting Vanalyne Green <v.carrollgreen {AT} gmail.com>:

> The old formula:  how you know when you're looking at art:  there's a
> nude woman's body.  And how do you know it's good:  It's done by a
> white man.
> 
> I was surprised that you labelled the content 'art,' which I consider
 <...>

-- 
  ====
brian lee dae yung
biomimetic art and research
  mux space . com

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 16:28:44 +0000
From: Vanalyne Green <v.carrollgreen {AT} gmail.com>
Subject: Re: <nettime> Introducing Daria: An autonomous software artist

Actually I didn't say that the art sucked.  I wasn't being clear,
though; what I was inferring was that the images I saw were not art,
anymore than potpourri and shells stuffed in glass boxes have anything
to do with art.  It's kitsch.

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 08:34:54 -0600, brian lee dae yung
<brian {AT} muxspace.com> wrote:

> Vanalyne:
> 
> Consider that once you get beyond the surface notion of Daria's art as
> being closer to men's smut than art, there is a deeper notion of art
> here. As you say, the redefining or transformative or philosophical or
> political or ethical reach of the work, is not so much in Daria's
> work, but in mine. Again, I ask what are the consequences of
> autonomous software systems integrating into human society? Can they
> succeed as an autonomous agent in ways a corporation cannot?
> 
> The initial consequence seems to be that her art sucks. Fair enough;
 <...>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


#  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 {AT} bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net