 |
 |
Hi beth, Re: pollock, process, code, cf: http://lab404.com/ghost/defense.html Performativity can lead to process art, which then leads to process philosophy, and we are back at whitehead, and i am happy. Re: knitting slippage, there are several glitch artists working with fabric (it's "a thing"). Looms, babbage, punch cards, yesssss. Curious (or not) -- cut piece as a work of fabric art. Best, Curt On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:11 PM, Rachel Beth Egenhoefer <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > + Which comes first the code or the art? (GH) > > What is the intention of the artist? Is the end result the most important? The act of producing something? Or is a self reflexive loop? Maybe a reductive example but is Jackson Pollock's painting the art, or is it his process that is that art? I feel like this was much debated in the early 2000's as the difference between software art and code art and electronic art (or maybe that's just when I was in grad school so everything was heavily debated). > > > > + "I agree that digital artists in particular need to consciously seek ways to broaden the implementations of controlling code to include shut offs. " (GH) > > I recently had a discussion with someone posing the question - has there ever been a technology introduced that was stopped as a result of public back lash? Maybe getting way off topic here, but this is interesting to think about - we've become more and more complacent in how we are controlled. Examples I came up with are the A-Bomb, and in progressive cities like San Francisco (where I'm based) styrofoam. > > > And in the time it took me to write this email 3 more came in from the list, so I feel I will forever be behind in the debate! But none the less, until next time… > > Rachel Beth > > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > Rachel Beth Egenhoefer > Program Director & Assistant Professor, Design > University of San Francisco > http://www.rachelbeth.net > http://xarts.usfca.edu/~rbegenhoefer > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .