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 
becomes a
meta-audience, kind of like ouroboros. So lurkers are vital, real or 
imaginary."

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 
daily basis.

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.

marc

>Hi Ruth.......
>
>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
>back....
>
>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.
>
>bw
>
>patrick
>
>
>  
>