Hi Victoria,
hello list,
thank you for asking for our understanding of 'performativity'.
Interesting debate.
In our work we describe it like this: "the motif of a 'Data Performer'
relates not only to the visualisation and reification of immaterial
data, but also to the actions and performance of the viewer. Data
Performers are involved in space-time environments which we call
enterable spaces of thoughts (begehbare Denkräume). The viewer becomes a
participant in an interactive plot."
http://www.artlinecatalogue.eu/event-performing-data.html
Thank you for these exchanges of views.
Monika
Monika Fleischmann & Wolfgang Strauss
-------------------------------
http://fleischmann-strauss.de
Am 24.03.14 14:29, schrieb Victoria Bradbury:
> Hello List,
>
>
>
> We have a number of threads and conversations going that you are welcome to
> continue, however, as the topic this month is quite broad, and has expanded
> ever broader to encompass a wide swath of all things new media, let me
> introduce a final more focussed challenge for the final week of March.
>
>
>
> In the spirit of CRUMB's practical approach to research, I propose that we
> spend the final week giving examples of performativity and code within our
> own work by responding to a question of When:
>
>
>
> When, in your own art practice, does performativity occur? Is it when the
> code is written? Is it when you perform with your body or voice? When a
> participant encounters your work? At all of these points, at another time,
> or not at all? Can you give a specific example?
>
>
>
> You may choose to comment on the way you are defining performativity in
> your answer (many definitions have been offered over the course of the
> month).
>
>
>
> I will post again soon answering this question in relation to one of my own
> projects.
>
>
>
> Victoria
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Sarah Thompson <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
>> Hi GH and list
>>
>> I am not setting you up
>> this is really serious issue in terms
>> of how coders seem to think that we
>> are all comfortable with boundaries adjusting
>> and this is political on so many peoples' parts
>> in terms of readjusting territories
>> but it is also deeply psychological in terms
>> of being able to tell the real from the symbolic
>> I know you said that thing about monkeys and
>> yes it's on the right track, but seriously if young
>> people are self-harming and getting a thrill out of
>> self-harming with others then surely the symbolic
>> is failing them in some way in terms of not addressing
>> their concerns in terms of 'live coding' or whatever
>> Is the performatvity of code not moving both
>> psychologically as well as politically to a lot
>> of people's interests using psychology as a weapon
>> sort of thing
>>
>> X
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: G.H. Hovagimyan
>> Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 8:15 PM
>>
>> To: Sarah Thompson
>> Cc: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] March Discussion Begins: The
>> Performativity of Code
>>
>> Hi Sarah & List,
>> On Mar 15, 2014, at 7:01 PM, Sarah Thompson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> because they feel safe in terms of what is me
>>> and what is not me
>>>
>> Oh Sara you are setting me up!
>> I can also say it's all me or it's all you or it's both and neither.
>> On a deeper perceptual level, I think humans have filters on all their
>> senses. I think we evolved to survive by filtering out sensations and
>> putting reason to what we experience.
>> Our tool making allows us to see beyond our senses. Our computers think
>> beyond our brain and memory. We know there is more than what we can sense.
>> Your idea of safety is probably tied into that notion of evolutionary
>> survival on some level.
>> Is that enough psychology for you? ;-) This gets to the core notion of
>> performance as being. That's why using computers and New Media can extend
>> our questioning of our perceptual boundaries.
>>
>>
>>
>> G.H. Hovagimyan
>> http://nujus.net/~gh
>> http://nujus.net/~nublog
>> http://artistsmeeting.org
>>
>
>
|
