Hi Patrick, Eduardo & all,
Interesting question here...
>is there a tendency with this sort of work to be self consciously/
self referencing (not always a bad thing at all in my head), you know
the kind of thing.... mail like art icons or mailart like icons...
I think that you have brought up a reasonable point, in that there could
be a tendency of getting caught up in a self- referential pattern.
Especially, in repsect of many peers collaborating and taking part in
such a project together. For it to live beyond such a self- referential
form of behaviour, outside of the circuit; we felt that having an
exhibition of the work in the HTTP Gallery space was a vital ingredient.
We've had quite a few visitors to the space already since the opening,
which there was about 120 in the end.
Then there is the deeper level for those who were not directly involved
in the DIWO project, the lurkers. I feel that Eduardo communicated the
point accurately regarding the lurker as audience "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
meta-audience, kind of like ouroboros. So lurkers are vital, real or
So, out of the small Netbehaviour list of 350 subscribers, 95 - 100
actively created work for the DIWO project, and the rest of those were
the audience. Of course, in another sense, we were audience at the same
time, waiting to observe what wonders would appear in the inbox on a
So the combination of visitors in the gallery and those on the list
introduced a kind split-level, exhibition which incorporated the
Internet and physical space via a networked and distributable medium
which know as email.
>Your interesting first reflections on the curating of DIWO answers many of
>the questions I had hoped to ask, but as always there are more raised to bat
>is there a tendency with this sort of work to be self consciously/ self
>referencing (not always a bad thing at all in my head), you know the kind of
>thing.... mail like art icons or mailart like icons..
>If that is a theme or thread, then is the absurd/ or just different nature
>of the real time email correspondance rather than the snail mail reflective
>vibe of time delayed exchanges, the focus of the work?
>Does it become a work or body of work ABOUT the post snail mail world we
>inhabit, or something i cant quite manage to express in an email!?
>Ive just spent an hour opening DIWO attachments chronologically, great project.