infinity/relational
& new aesthetically-defined "artistic" categories if you will]
here's some [non-random + IMO relevant but not necessarily cohesive]
points:
1. I've only skimmed the Bruce Sterling essays [both of them] and don't
have an in-depth overview of the term "New Aesthetic" [henceforth now to
be known as "Phrase That Will Not Be Named" in an effort to reduce the
ridiculous amount of verification we are bubble-developing around it].
So there.
2. My flickering attention-focus [hullo, continuous partial attn
syndrome] has honed in on this particular attempt at avant-garde
labelling because of how it perpetuates the tradition of "name the new
art phase in order to perform/get x" [whether x = ego
aggrandisement/monetary wealth/extend an individuals prosperity>cred
value]. To employ a relevant phrase: it just smells wrong. And
by smelling wrong I'm in no way referring to Bridle or his content [I have been rss_internalising his tumblr for some time now =
it rawks: though I had no idea of his name until this whole labelling
blerghness blew up] or any other glitch-luvin' practitioners or creative
types. After all, I'm one of them.
3. My seeming lack of attention to research regarding the "Phrase
That Will Not Be Named", or lack of "deep (articulated) thought"
regarding the issue isn't indicative of a negative outlook on "the
glitch". Nor is it due to lack of engagement with the actual
material/pulsing creative output that's [possibly, hopefully]
superseding many flattened contemporary "art scenes" [read: institutions
as opposed to practices]. My lack of focused attention is due to the
fact that *i'm_actually_living_the_aesthetic_in_question* + have
been for years [New? bah!]. The life of a "Phrase That Will Not Be
Named" advocate *requires* continuous partial attention: it *requires* a
profound adherence to deriving substantiated [yet seemingly ephemeral]
meaning from "the now" [ie connective novelty formation, expressive +
anonymous appropriation devoid of ego/exclusive monetisation, the
continuous fact of networked/communication immediacy/recursion, a
burgeoning maker/hacktivist practice-aesthetic, the growing irrelevancy
of standardised content/institutionalised values + associated
comprehension loadings]. Dragging an antiquated, faux-trendoid label and
slapping it over set of practices that have been in operation for as
long as directed digital communication/tech platforms have coalesced =
bad whiff, not to mention downright offensive. It's the problem of
seeking to stuff uncategorised, non-art-defined forms into format [+
vice versa], of assigning crusty paradigms/terms to output [like Bridle +
his tumblr] that's being subsumed into a discourse designed to
pinpoint/catalogue/perpetuate. Drawing a [restrictive labelling] box around a set of _expression_[s] that
exist as working practices seems like inverse encouragement: this
disappointing need to contextualise>label>scene-create>institutionalise>monetise = sad[panda making. Google "sad panda" if you don't get the reference].
4. Content curation isn't art. The urge to perform it may be similar
to what drives artists to produce: in many cases, content curation is a
ceaseless search for connection through firehosed content
streams/"novelty" verification that may just ellipse the need for
art/culture classifications. Is it possible to conceptualise a world
where the need to frame practice/process/product through cultural or
artistic filters is largely obsolete? [
reddit.com +
4chan.org +
9gag.com +
tumblr.com = giving it a decent go.]
5. Appropriating + remixing graphic markers/standards from
marginalised or "other-fied" disciplines/decades does not a new genre/paradigm
make, especially when begging to be [or deliberately engineered to be]
monetised by a system and/or individuals determined to emergent-capture
[yes, this includes institutionally sanctioned galleries + alternative
galleries + oldschool curators + newskool aggregators +
conference-merry-go-rounders + theorists + panels + karma-seeking
discourse boffins]. Codify, hipsterise + aggrandise at your leisure,
but be prepared for watered-down, digestible, bastardised versions of
worthwhile social + expressive currencies.
6. And so it goes.
7. This too will pass.
[Mostly-too-large-2-chew]Chunks,
Mez/@netwurker