Only a few days being absent on CRUMB panel, I feel now overwhelmed by my
contributors and CRUMB community's posts.
In the current post that I try to keep short, I'd like to focus on the
issues surrounding "Object."
In a recent post, Ashok Mistry used the term of “residue” to describe the
object coming out of a creative process. To keep my current post short, I
would hesitate to use it to describe, for instance, John F. Simon, Jr.’s
daily drawings that are the result of a daily meditation process for 25
years. The entire artistic life of John F. Simon, Jr. is a creative
process. No matter what we talk about – his drawings or paintings,
ephemeral or finished - would always be only a part of this process. They
can all be defined as the “object.” But, they can all switch their identity
from “ephemeral” to “final” according to different context. John F. Simon,
Jr.’s work is a very intriguing case to study, as the work covers all
definitions of “object,” and show how an “object” can vacillate between
ephemeral and final.
Ashok Mistry and Victoria Bradbury’s discussions on the various terms that
describe the definition of “object” are extremely intriguing for me.
“Residue,” “by-product,” “resultant,” or “outcome,” and how about
What we see here is that the definition of “object” in process-based art
involving technology is blurred today. Is it time for us to redefine the
meaning of “object?”
The definition of "object" is relating to the issues that Ken, Stephanie,
Bruce, and Beryl were discussing these days, from performative to curating
process, from collecting to how curator and art historian can "look beyond
the technology and into the concept and aesthetic intent of the artist."
I have some thinking about the various issues they raised, will talk about
it more tomorrow. Meanwhile, I found Anna Ramos' post on "COMPOSING WITH
PROCESS" very interesting, as it opened up our discussion about
process-based art in music and sound, which is entirely another topic. On
our contributors' board, we have Jane Grant, Gayle Young, Hans Tammen and
Carol Parkinson from music and sound art fields. I would be thrilled to see
what they have to say about "process-based art curating" in music and sound!
See you tomorrow!
Xiaoying Juliette Yuan 袁晓萦
Media Arts Curator
Visiting Scholar NYU Steinhardt
Department of Music and Performing Arts Professions
35 West 4th Street, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10012
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Victoria Bradbury <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, May 18, 2015 at 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] Issues surrounding "process-based art"
To: [log in to unmask]
Hi Ashok and All,
This is written hurriedly on a train to London, thanks Juliette for this
I like Ashok's use of the term residue for what I would call resultant
objects. Objects can be the result of a process-based artwork, or they can
serve to inform the process. Often objects become part of the instructions
for a work, indicating to performers or participants how they are meant to
engage or proceed. I like to think about how objects can have different
meanings or uses through the different stages of engagement with
On Monday, May 18, 2015, ashok mistry <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear List,
> An interesting discussion, Just to stick my oar in... It is interesting
that some commentators refer to the 'object' that come from a process. In
my experience of experimenting with processes (especially when the finished
artwork is ephemeral) I prefer to think in terms of forming a 'residue'
rather than a object. I'm not trying to undermine the importance of a
'finished' artwork but, if the the focus of the endeavour is the process
rather than what it yields- the idea of residue opens up more scope for
exploring process in multilayer, non-linear terms. This idea comes from a
live artwork I'm currently developing that translates data through
different scenarios (starting with a twitter feed created by the audience
through to music and movement) edning up with a residue of data in the form
a print out onto a roll of paper. Too much emphasis on an end product can
lead to ornamentation of data used in the process. When one thinks of
residue, it can come from anywhere in a process, not necessarily the end.
It can be a by-product or leaks from within the process. It would be
interesting to know what curators think of a residue.
> Kind regards
> Ashok Mistry
> 07968 977 820
// Victoria Bradbury
Researcher @ www.crumbweb.org
New Media Caucus <http://www.newmediacaucus.org> <CommComm>
Attaya Projects <http://attayaprojects.com> // Collaborator