My thoughts exactly, Simon. I've been wanting to articulate something
similar since the 1st Bruce Sterling piece came out.
Synthetic Environment Strategist>
Game[r + ] Theorist.
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Simon Biggs <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'm failing to see how the New Aesthetic represents a novel paradigm. It
> seems to be an umbrella term for a range of tendencies that have been
> apparent for some ten or twenty years. Like Relational Aesthetics before
> it, I fear it is a branding exercise for a dumbed-down consumer-friendly
> version of some rather more sophisticated earlier work.
> On 17 Apr 2012, at 21:55, Helen Sloan wrote:
> > Finally a decent argument about the 'New Aesthetic'. Hats off to Robert
> > Jackson for writing this.
> > I wonder if it was James Bridle's wish to rise to media stardom through
> > article by Bruce Sterling. It ensures Lighthouse in Brighton some good
> > coverage and audiences over the next months, that's for sure.
> > As far as I'm concerned the 'new aesthetic' as championed has been
> > for about 20 years. It is different from art but there are points of
> > and they should be allowed to flourish together if needed. In my own
> > I supported AntiRom, Arup and Tomato and vice versa in this context in
> > relatively early days. I knew the difference between their work and art
> > these overlapped on many occasions). Art however still needs some freedom
> > beyond the design context and vice versa. Many art programmes do not
> > my expectations any more, not least the current cultural olympiad one in
> > Art is instrumentalised, and I felt this pressure from the 'new
> > not because of a context like olympics or social mobility but because it
> > needed an instant impact. Art is often a slow burner that needs thought
> > depth as Robert Jackson pointed out in his article.
> > I suppose it depends on what your belief is about art - for me, it's an
> > opportunity to put a different spin on the status quo. It could be
> > politically, visually, experientially etc.
> > The New Aesthetic Tumblr project is interesting in that context, but
> > are other blogs, artworks and streams that make this debate much more
> > diverse than the one that's been presented as the New Aesthetic.
> > Best wishes
> > Helen Sloan
> > SCAN
> > On 17/4/12 21:00, "Guilherme Kujawski Ramos"
> > <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >> a reasoned contribution to the debate
> >> http://www.furtherfield.org/features/banality-new-aesthetic
> >> -----Mensagem original-----
> >> De: Curating digital art - www.crumbweb.org
> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Em nome de Sarah Cook
> >> Enviada em: terça-feira, 17 de abril de 2012 06:44
> >> Para: [log in to unmask]
> >> Assunto: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] belatedly new
> >> Hi all
> >> thanks for your thoughts, and links, on the new aesthetic. i think the
> >> raised are really interesting and something which has been circulating
> >> my research for some time:
> >> aggregating and 'liking' as new forms of curatorial practice
> >> how audiences consume content differently in online spaces
> >> object-beingness (old fashioned Heideggerian dasein, or the
> >> present-at-handedness and how that is accommodated curatorially)
> >> I particularly am interested in Dan's comment that
> >> "A lot of my New Media Art friends seem to want to avoid this
> conversation, or
> >> have adopted a "tell me why this matters" stance. I guess that's
> >> understandable, it's easy to look at the Tumblr blog and not see much
> >> substance. Plus it's a broader cultural thing, it doesn't exclude
> fashion and
> >> advertising, it is probably generationally divisive."
> >> I'd like to unpick this further... Is it an art and design division or a
> >> generational one? cultural one? in what way did Eyebeam's Re:group show
> >> Beryl and I were nominally involved in as Eyebeam's research partners
> at the
> >> time) address this and is it the only show to have done so? We've
> talked about
> >> exhibitions on this list where media art on view was at the service of
> >> than aesthetic experience -- changing the world, addressing issues such
> >> financial regulation or climate change -- but not in terms of how
> >> about these works circulates, how the history of art and design is being
> >> written through them. What are the criteria for evaluating these works
> >> those we've used so far (how the work behaves, how the audience
> >> how the work questions or exhibits its own production and
> distribution)? As
> >> Curt said,
> >> To fail to ask these questions leads to a kind of reversion toward
> >> these new image as discrete, hermetic, "aesthetic" objects rather than
> as the
> >> residue/result of a series of cultural processes, networks, and
> >> (which is what images have always been, and what these new images
> >> are).
> >> Apologies for rambling,
> >> Sarah
> >> P.S. I would love to hear of other writing about surf clubs -- is there
> >> should there be) a reader on it?
> >> "Esta mensagem e reservada e sua divulgacao, distribuicao, reproducao ou
> >> qualquer forma de uso e proibida e depende de previa autorizacao desta
> >> instituicao. O remetente utiliza o correio eletronico no exercicio do
> >> trabalho ou em razao dele, eximindo esta instituicao de qualquer
> >> responsabilidade por utilizacao indevida. Se voce recebeu esta mensagem
> >> engano, favor elimina-la imediatamente."
> >> "This message is reserved and its disclosure, distribution,
> reproduction or
> >> any other form of use is prohibited and shall depend upon previous
> >> authorization. The sender uses the electronic mail in the exercise of
> >> work or by virtue thereof, and the institution accepts no liability for
> >> undue use. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, please delete it
> >> immediately."
> Simon Biggs
> [log in to unmask] http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype:
> [log in to unmask] Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh
> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/