Re: <nettime> report_on_NNA

[Eduardo Navas <eduardo@navasse.net>]

Hello everyone,

I've been on nettime since at least 2000, if not 1999, my memory escapes me
now.  Regardless, I experienced the first and second parts that  Brian
Holmes refers to.  

One thing that I have noticed about not just nettime but, in more general
terms, other online collaborations and online discussions is their process
of assimilation by the academy.


Since I've been on this list I have not received as many e-mail messages as
I have these recent days.  I'm amazed.  So I would like to reflect upon one
point Benjamin makes:

On 6/8/06 3:29 AM, "Benjamin Geer" <benjamin.geer@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> I think nettime is a sort of middle way between an academic journal
> and a traditional discussion list.  It's much more open than an
> academic journal, but its standards are higher than those of most
> lists.  The high standards make academics want to post ideas here, but
> the openness means that non-academics can reply, and can post their
> own ideas.   I think that's good, because it goes against the tendency
> for academic discourse to become self-referential and disconnected
> from discourses and practices going on elsewhere.  I personally don't
> care where nettimers work or what their titles are; I like that we can
> have a dialogue here that cuts across professions.
> 

I do think that nettime is somewhere in the middle, where the list is not
fully academic, but holds on to some academic capital while also claiming
legitimation on the early days of the DIY that made the Internet possible.
This is inevitable since many of its members are now established in
different research institutions and universities.  I'm not interested in
considering this to be a good a bad thing--following the overworked
criticism on the academy that go back to the early days of modernism. But I
do think that we need to be conscious of what such shift implies.

This shift has been going on for sometime now, and can be traced to the
launching of other lists like Empyre, New Media Curating and last but not
least IDC.  All thrive on serious discussions.

Cool.  But what really bothers me is this, that the current discussion on
the nettime list is really about nettime and nettime and nettime...  I find
that nettime right at this very moment is suffering much of what bloggers
suffer from, that they reference their other blogger friends and they end up
commenting on their comments.  And in this sense, I disagree with Benjamin,
nettimes shows off its academic side.  I only wish that this much energy was
put into discussing other issues, actual politics.

I really do miss those discussions from not too long ago.  I even
contributed my two cents at that point, but so far I have not encountered
such intensity in nettime postings--until now!  and it is all about nettime
itself.  This is almost the model of art for art's sake...

All this is to say that the list for me is still great.  I have appreciated
it since I joined it and have welcomed all its mutations.  But one thing
that bothers me is that many of the posts reference nettime's past as "the
good old days" in indirect ways.  This, I would argue, is even true for
Tobia's report, which I really appreciated.

Again, my hope is that this intensity, now that it has been revived, can
stay active to discuss politics and other interests once we are done talking
about ourselves.

With all respects (a lurker from time to time...)

Eduardo Navas
http://navasse.net
http://newmediafix.net


#  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