Hello everyone,

I've become a lurker lately.  Well, on this list I've always been one.  But
I was much more active in other lists for many years.  Therefore I think I
may be able to entertain the position of the lurker with some
authority--though I'll definitely be brief with my comments to get back to
my dark virtual corner, which I very much enjoy.

One thing that strikes me about the concept of audience in an online
collaboration that also finds its way into physical space, such as Diwo, is
that while what Lauren points out is quite appealing to agree with: that the
people on the mailing list had the choice (or at least may have visited the
possibility) that Brecht professed, such a thing can only be  possible if
all the list members (including the lurkers) hold on to the idea of an
audience in the traditional sense, to then become active when realizing that
being an audience member is a choice on lists, either because they are
fascinated by it, or because, like some lurkers, they may be indifferent to
much of what happens on the list.

Whatever the reason, in Diwo, some members knew, based on the history of
e-mail lists, not just netbehaviour's, that some would choose to be passive
in a more traditional sense--because some members always are... and when
there may not be any actual lurkers (fat chance, I know), members will
probably think some exist anyways because this is a vital part of e-mail
lists.  Hence the idea of an audience in a traditional sense is quite vital
to lists in general. Because someone must "listen" or read and when they
don't, the sender sure will at least acknowledge the message s/he just sent
when it goes back via the e-mail list, in this way s/he becomes a
meta-audience, kind of like ouroboros. So lurkers are vital, real or
imaginary.  This is specific and possible here because an essential factor
of e-mail lists is that the exchange is all based on texts and attachments
of graphics of course, no real eye contact is possible. Latency rules. You
might be performing by yourself for all you know (receiving that e-mail
back), but you will not know until much later, probably after you're done
with your obsession.  This makes lurking in e-mails lists quite particular
and specific, and needless to say, fascinating.  Perhaps a different type of
spectacle dependent on latency?

What I find peculiar about Diwo is that all of a sudden the lurker became a
much more important figure than usual.  I almost felt exposed, because I
knew members were performing for me based on what I just explained.  The
intensity that the postings  reached the first week worried me to the point
that I considered leaving the list.  It reminded me of Syndicate, a list I
left because I just could no longer take the SPAM.  But with Diwo it was
quite different.  In the end I stayed, and I was glad I did.  Quite
interesting I will add, as the lurker (me) had to come out of hiding.  And
here I am typing a few lines on a different list at that, before I go back
to my little hole.

As to what will happen in the future of Diwo, I will just hope that it does
not become too self-aware of itself, leading to self-referentiality.  An
inevitable tendency in all cultural endeavors as history takes hold.
Very much enjoyed Diwo.

Cheers.

E.
  

On 3/5/07 2:08 PM, "Lauren A Wright" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


> But as Ruth raised, what difference does it make to the audience? Without
> getting off the plot with too much theory, I'd like to mention in closing
> something I read today while PhD'ing... Been reading Walter Benjamin on
> Brecht... And he writes in "What is Epic Theatre?" of how Brecht's art form
> encourages the "false and deceptive totality called 'audience'" to
> disintegrate and for audience members to realign themselves according to
> their interests in reality. I think that's what we're seeing here...
> Brecht's theatre encourages a kind of participation on the part of the
> audience where the relations between performers and audience are
> reconfigured.. Certainly that's what this project (like so many other
> genuinely participative practices) encourages, and the result is that the
> unmoored audience establishes multiple kinds of new relations between
> themselves and the "performance" or the collaborative project, in our case.