Dear Rob & list,
7-1, spectre and nettime were the first lists we lurked on, but it wasn't really until the early days of RHIZOME RAW that we contributed.
At that time, or rather this is our memory of it, 7-11 and nettime (and spectre) were getting spammy and RHIZOME RAW had a relative conversational clarity. Later RHIZOME RAW also became a frenzy of noise and announcements, which is probably why RHIZOME introduced their DIGEST. The conversations (if that's indeed what one could call them) did sometimes felt like an wide recursive loop about what the nature of net art was and what its relationship to the art establishment was interspersed with lots of squealing and flaming between the list and netochka nezvanova (aka =cw4t7abs, antiorp etc). In some respects this conversation still repeats itself through terms like media art and not post-net or post-internet.
best wishes,
Jon & Alison
archive >
thomson-craighead.net
up next >
Architecture Film Festival, Rotterdam
Solo exhibition, MEWO Kunsthalle Memmingen
Kassel dockfest 2013
Solo exhibition, Dundee Contemporary Arts
On 3 Oct 2013, at 03:16, Rob Myers <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 01/10/13 03:53 AM, Charlotte Frost wrote:
>>
>> So, first up, what was YOUR first experience of online art discussion?
>
> It was 1996 and I had signed up to an art mailing list (I cannot now
> remember its name or where the archive of my old [log in to unmask] college
> account is).
>
> But I didn't have a handle on the shared academic or specific mailing
> list culture that would have allowed me to participate constructively.
>
> This meant that I made a lot of elementary mistakes. For example I
> replied to a cross-posted essay as if it was a comment by someone on the
> list. This annoyed people and left me feeling alienated.
>
> So my first experience of online art discussion was of its social and
> technological form rather than any specific art historical content.
>
> Perhaps I would have done better if I'd tried IRC or the MOOs instead (I
> knew about MediaMOO), something more realtime and social. Maybe that's
> just technological determinism.
>
> But surely part of the reason for this discussion is the idea that new
> tools and new media create new possibilities for discussion. And if this
> is the case, the technological and emergent social differences between
> the various means of discussing art online will affect the discussions
> that take place using them.
>
> - Rob.
>
|