Hi, nice to hear that there's a Loie Fuller fan out there. Yes, she
engaged in some amazing experimentation, particularly into radioactive
substances and heavy chemicals that ended up killing her (of "pneumonia"
- then again, when you see what sorts of radiotherapies were around at
the time it's sadly not so surprising).

She's been quite vigorously documented on the continent - Giovanni Lista
is an interesting author as a futurist specialist tuned to
art-technology links at the turn of the 20th century, Gabriele
Brandstetter has written on Fuller, and there have been many
reconstructions by Brygida Ochaim, sometimes in interesting contexts
where Brygida's performances were surrounded by contemporary art
installations (Lyon Dance Biennial long time ago; Ferme du Buisson in
Marne la Vallee, etc.).

The word marginalised is always a tricky one - marginalised with respect
to what/ whom/ when? (Fuller would no doubt have been very happy to
witness the revival of attention in her work that has occurred over the
past two decades). It's also probably a valuable one in the context of
debate about interactions between live performance and new media. When
does the margin become mainstream? When and why does this get admitted,
and when does it appear preferable to uphold the notion of an
"alternative" space? And when is this preference warranted, and when is
it just a positioning strategy unrelated to the actual art production
(insofar as that's possible...).

Talking about mainstream (or not), what are others' opinions on
yesterday's Spencer Tunick exploit?

Just musing again

Best

sjn



>-----Original Message-----
>From: Curating digital art - 
>www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/ 
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of GEORGE ADRIAN
>Sent: 18 July 2005 11:47
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] Live art and new media
>
>Loie Fuller at the end of the 1800s was working with inventors 
>and scientists such as Marie Curie and Thomas Edison to 
>explore how their discoveries could be used to develop her 
>stage performances.
>
>A little passion of mine as Fuller is so marginalized by both 
>the dance world and the art world.
>
>Adrian
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 16 July 2005 13:33
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] Live art and new media
>
>
>-
>It's intriguing but I suppose logical Tom that the systems 
>you're mentioning as having migrated from live arts to new 
>media seem to have in common their affordances regarding the 
>manipulation of time - synchronisation, playback, etc. Of 
>course I realise that they also have strong spatial qualities 
>and affordances - expanse, intensity and direction of light, 
>sound, etc - but might one imagine that the ephemerality of 
>performance has favoured techniques and technologies which 
>privilege the control of time?
>
>Just an idle musing, probably a bit of a truism. I've always 
>been interested in the way the first major reference arena for 
>breakthroughs in performance technologies from the late 19th 
>century was the world of scientific journals - Scientific 
>American first and foremost. Like the gaming world Lev 
>Manovich describes, the world of theatre and performance acted 
>as a formidable catalyst and disseminator for many technical/ 
>industrial innovations. Probably through paying itself off via 
>the commercial theatre circuits as much as anything. Some of 
>Siggraph's "Electronic Theatre" events - the "fringe" stuff 
>that has more to do with live art than with screenings - seem 
>to have perpetrated that tradition.
>
>best
>sjn
>
>
>
>
>
>----Original Message-----
>From: Curating digital art - 
>www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/ on behalf of Tom Cullen
>Sent: Sat 7/16/2005 12:25 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] Live art and new media
> 
>In reply to Beryl's quote "The relationship between Live Art 
>and new media has often been one simply one of documentation 
>or distribution"
>
>Speaking purely as a technician, and if we are defining New 
>media (I know it's a loaded question) as it's means of 
>production is also it's means of presentation, then the live 
>art area has a long history of new media interaction. 
>
>The first synchronisation systems for lighting, video, sound 
>etc all started with Live arts, DMX control used to control 
>countless art works was developed for the theatre, Dataton 
>control system used to control any playback medium was 
>developed for live use as well as exhibition, and recently the 
>new digital equalisation systems now being developed for live 
>use will find their way in to the gallery.
>
>I think what I'm saying is that there has been a history of 
>innovation of technology in live arts that we could conclude 
>is new media, and I'm sure that the blurring of the edges 
>between the two will continue. Looking at the recent Navigate 
>performances and talks this issue of new media within live 
>arts is becoming more prevalent.
>
>Quickly going back to the definition of new media, a live arts 
>performers means of production is also their means of 
>presentation are they themselves new media?
>
>PLEASE NOTE: THE ABOVE MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INTERNET.
> 
>On entering the GSi, this email was scanned for viruses by the 
>Government Secure Intranet (GSi) virus scanning service 
>supplied exclusively by Energis in partnership with MessageLabs.
> 
>Please see 
>http://www.gsi.gov.uk/main/notices/information/gsi-003-2002.pdf
> for further details.
>
>In case of problems, please call your organisational IT helpdesk
>
>______________________________________________________________________
>This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
>For more information please visit 
>http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
>______________________________________________________________________
>