Roger,

Thanks for the response - and I do agree and feel the respect you ere  
giving is as important as the demand you put on the curators.

I also agree with most of the criticism that has arisen so far.  
Personally I always have had a hard time with works in which concept  
and political or intellectual point of view do not find their  
transubstantiated way from the realm of ghosts (or should we say  
idea) to the realm of media (or should we say "material") that are  
meant for our senses to perceive (and not only for our intellect to  
indulge in).

Continuing the criticism I started a few emails ago that I do believe  
that the size and importance of an institution should be reflected in  
the curatorial practice of that institution (and for instance do not  
make believe that an individual curating for/in such an institution  
can remove her/himself from the institutionalized weight while  
curating for such institution), I would like to add that I am equally  
critical of the curatorial/artistic habit of people who are in the  
seat of driving such institutions and enabling artists to do their  
work, to piggyback on these artists as co-curators or co-artists. I  
personally think this habit is a rather sad indication - especially  
if one o fhte potential piggybackers then withdraws from standing up  
to the issue. (by the way, not that anyone believes I am arguing  
indirectly with Peter Weibel - I am not - I can do that directly - I  
am conveying observations on relationships I find detrimental to  
artistic work and which directors, curators and people in power  
should abstain from.)

And a last thread: Indeed I think to have observed that digital  
technology brings us back to oral traditions. This has been an  
amazing observation to me.  This is in parallel to the networked  
media and multinational corporations creating a global culture mostly  
on the surface and at the same time creating all the niches for the  
smallest deviations and least known thoughts, ideas, habits, music  
etc. Being overwhelmed with the archival potential of digital  
technology, we will loose most the information due to being  
overwhelmed, loosing versions of programs, software and hardware. And  
then the rich ones will have the power to hand over their information  
from generation to generation (to port it, to create tradition in the  
original sense of the word). And all of us other people will be part  
of the oral-digital culture where images are rotting as quickly as  
they are taken, DCs and DVDs disintegrate in humidity and sunshine.  
we are recreating the times of any large empire (be it Egypt or the  
Roman Empire or the Roman Catholic Church) where the tradition of  
information, art and thought is depending on the big powers and where  
the ones who are further down in the pyramid are changing songs,  
history and knowledge because they have only the "oral tradition",  
which now is the "digital tradition". But this does not legitimize  
those in power to fool around with our "oral creation and tradition"  
in the digital world, where we can still leave our feeble marks for  
the next couple of generations possibly.

Johannes Goebel


On Jun 16, 2006, at 10:50 AM, roger malina wrote:

> Johanes
>
> I would rather not make this ad hominem.
> I have been in touch with both named co curators=
> but apparently the project was basically the
> work of only one of them.
>
> The point I was really wanting to make that
> if one wants to work in a way that basically says
> that all material on the web is "raw material"
> for an artists production, without any regard to
> whether the authors agree to the re-use, then
> I think to be intellectually consistent the curator needs to
> also in return be willing to enter into a symmetric
> process and engage the push back. Or perhaps
> someone needs to go hack that site and make it
> offensive to the curator !!!
>
> And as I stated in my first post, I think my
> main concern is the process of taking someone
> else name= creating something in their name
> and then publishing it on line.
>
> Now of course in oral cultures, and in
> much of the multiple author discourse, the
> "original" author has no special status
> ( Shakespeare appropriated many of the
> scripts that he re wrote in his own name) but
> in this process the "originator" is erased from the
> next step.
>
> I guess I still come back that the inverse process=
> publishing something in someones name= BECAUSE
> it imbues the material with implied authority/credibility/
> orginality= is nothing more than identify theft.
>
> roger
>
> On 6/16/06, Johannes Goebel <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Are we allowed to learn the name of "one of the curators" - or maybe
> the name of the curator who is NOT the one who won't enter the
> discussion but who may not have been approached so far? I do not
> believe that the second approach would be invading the private sphere
> of the one of the curators nor that of the other one of the curators.
> Johannes Goebel
>
>
>
> On Jun 16, 2006, at 10:20 AM, roger malina wrote:
>
> > Dear Crumb
> >
> > For some time I have been in private
> > email discussion with one of the curators
> > of the ZKM project that we have been
> > discussing.
> >
> > I have asked him for permission to
> > make public our email exchanges
> > but he has refused, telling me that he
> > doesnt have time to deal with the
> > response or discussion.
> >
> > I think that when someone creates a public
> > act like this they must assume responsability
> > for dealing with  any "push back". The
> > virtual world is full of real people. Having time
> > to create a public project but not having the
> > time to engage in discussion seems to be
> > not much fun. Its easy to have fun by yourself
> > at other peoples expense.
> >
> > He has appealed to freedom of speech
> > and fun as some of the background to
> > his project and doesnt understand why
> > some of the people whose texts have
> > been mashed without concurrence are
> > objecting.
> >
> > The Leonardo/OLATS Advisory Board
> > chaired by Marc Battier is discussing
> > whether we will request that all reference
> > that implies that Leonardo/OLATS has
> > agreed to participate in the project be
> > removed from their web site.
> >
> > roger malina
>