JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING  January 2011

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING January 2011

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: December/January theme on CRUMB: Nam June Paik

From:

Heather Corcoran <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Heather Corcoran <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 21 Jan 2011 20:57:16 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (104 lines)

Hi Jon

Perhaps I do let Tate off too easy by expecting not to be able to touch 
- probably because I am also taking for granted that I work at FACT, 
only a few blocks down the road from Tate, where you can see artists 
tinkering with technologies in ways that would make Nam June Paik smile 
almost every day here. The exhibition is in two parts - Tate approached 
FACT as an exhibition partner for this specific reason, that we show 
artists and artworks that are the living legacy of his work and are set 
up for presenting work that is interactive and participatory. There are 
far fewer works here but you can crawl under Laser Cone, flick through 
his video catalog and a group of young people have made an installation 
in response that lets you magnetize some TVs and play TV instruments. It 
was in a sense a 'dual strategy approach' then, albeit in a different 
way than presenting two versions of a single work.

On the flipside, I suspect it would be difficult (or at least 
prohibitively expensive) for us at FACT to present many of these 
'originals' (however many versions of them) because we aren't climate 
controlled and we don't normally have the extremely high level of 
rigidity that institutions like Tate do for protecting the works. In 
that way I appreciate that Tate shows things that institutions like FACT 
can't. And call me a sucker but when NJP's nephew Ken introduced the 
exhibition and all of a sudden it dawned on me that Nam June Paik, 
someone whose personality seemed so vibrant, is really gone (otherwise 
he'd perhaps have been introducing the show himself), it made me want to 
see some of the things he'd built with his two hands all the more (or 
with his technician's hands or assistant's hands, somehow I don't mind 
even this). If I had to choose for one or the other to exist in the 
world, I'd without a doubt choose the participatory over the object. But 
luckily I don't have to because I can participate elsewhere. (I saw a 
small show last year where a student artist had created a Random Access 
installation seemingly without even realizing it was near identical to 
an existing work, so I had a great play around with that!).

I will not let them off so easy for including Zen for Film running off a 
DVD loop and data projector though. If they were going to transfer an 
'original' to another format anyway, why not just run a new blank film 
print? That seemed particularly strange to me, as it is so much about 
the materiality of the film in the space... I am assuming the estate 
made this choice, therefore it was Paik's wish? Or perhaps a condition 
of the sale of the original print? Strange in any case.

It would be interesting to compare the Guggenheim and Tate shows, as 
they are under two different scenarios - one when the artist was alive, 
and could talk to the curators and staff; and one where he isn't, and 
the estate is left to represent his wishes (which I am sure they talked 
at length to him about before his death). I wonder if he was alive, if 
the show would have looked any different.

Best,
Heather

On 19/01/2011 11:24, Jon Ippolito wrote:
> I was happy to read in Sarah's account of the Paik show at the Tate the lingering after-effects of Paik's wacky and winning persona, especially the fact that "everyone thought they were his best friend." Her anecdote about staff removing dead fish from the Video Fish tank reminded me of one of my favorite Paik performances, where he handed out dried fish bought in Chinatown at the 7th New York Avant-Garde Festival with instructions to "return the fish" to the water by throwing it in the Hudson.
>
> Caroline Langill mentioned Sarah Resnick's DOCAM presentation on conserving a Paik modified TV. The "TV Repair Man" she referred to (love that Pythonesque phrase) is "CT Lui," a Chinese immigrant with an equipment supply store on Murray Street and a keen eye for ancient electronics. When I last visited Lui's place, it was a small shop chock full of electronic junk, so I was surprised to learn from Google that Lui has a Web site; evidently he's quite proud of his Chinese military lineage:
>
> http://www.ctlny.com/about/about.html
>
> I was also glad to learn that the Tate exhibited Random Access, which is perhaps my favorite work of media art:
>
> On Jan 5, 2011, Sarah wrote:
>    
>> At Tate the show is, of course, geared towards the museum object - none
>> of his interactive works are recreated, so it is the original objects we
>> have on display to look at and not touch. I wished that I could have
>> played with the magnets on a recreated Magnet TV or run a tape head
>> across Random Access to hear a sound, but I expected this and do feel
>> delight in seeing 'the original'.
>>      
> To create Random Access, Paik ripped a playback head out of a reel-to-reel audio player, affixed it to a wand, and wired the wand to speakers. He then cut the audio tape into segments and stuck them on a nearby wall. Visitors could run the wand across the various segments in whatever direction or speed they liked. The work's participatory aesthetic and web-like installation anticipated countless new media tropes, including audio remix, random-access memory, DIY media, and hypermedia. Manfred Montwe took some nice photos of the original 1963 installation:
>
> http://telematic.walkerart.org/overview/overview_ippolito.html
>
> Resnick quoted Paik's studio lead, Jon Huffman, as saying the appearance of the television set for Untitled (1968) was less important than its construction--something I would think is self-evident for Random Access as well. In fact, for The Worlds of Nam June Paik in 2000, Jon Huffman and CT Lui worked with the Guggenheim's John Hanhardt, Paul Kuranko, and me to build *two* versions of Random Access for the exhibition. The idea was that if one died while visitors were using it, we could swap out it out for the second while the first was being repaired. (We left the same tape on the wall for convenience.)
>
> It's not unheard of to create a copy of a work for exhibition, but what may surprise some people in the context of Sarah's remarks above is the fact that the two versions of the Random Access apparatus on the pedastal looked completely different. If memory serves, they were different sizes, and one had a black and brown finish, the other a gray or white exterior. (They were basically whatever Lui could dig out of his shelves from the period of reel-to-reel decks with a certain type of playback head--and that still worked!) In other words, for the artist and the curators of this exhibition, the operation of the work was more important than its looks--and to judge from their reaction, the audience concurred.
>
> So I'm sorry to hear that we now "expect" not to be able to touch works that were originally all about participation, and that indeed we still think in terms of "the original" when it comes to media art. I'll bet dollars to donuts that the "original" at the Tate isn't one we showed at the Guggenheim or the one in Montwe's photos, but a "new" original.
>
> Sure, there will eventually come a sad day when CT Lui shutters his shop, and voltage differences or equipment degradation prevent anyone from reinstalling Random Access using reel-to-reel audio with a detachable playback head. But I don't think we're there yet, and even when we are, we can choose to augment our display of inert vintage hardware with creative approaches like reinterpretation.
>
> A couple years after the Worlds of Nam June Paik, Dawn Steeves and Justin Tayler, two undergrads in my New Media department, asked if they could reinterpret Random Access using contempory hardware--a CD boombox. I knew that solid-state components can't be wrangled like analog decks, but I didn't want to discourage them. So I said, sure, give it a try. They came back a week later to tell me that they never managed to recover function of the laser diode after prying it out of the box, but they did accidentally discover an unexpected effect: when one of them received a call from the other with two mobile phones near the device, the signal briefly activated the drive motor and spun the disk a turn or two. So for their final project, they outfitted the CD drive with a hammer and bell, and repeatedly triggered orbits of the disk by calling each other on speed dial according to a certain "score." The result was chamber music for two cell phones and a ruined boombox.
>
> I knew somewhere Nam June was smiling.
>
> jon


-- 
Heather Corcoran
Curator
FACT (Foundation for Art and Creative Technology)
88 Wood Street
Liverpool, UK
L1 4DQ

w: http://www.fact.co.uk
e: [log in to unmask]
t: +44 (0)151 707 4425
m: +44 (0)798 336 4707
f: +44 (0)151 707 4445

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager