GLI.TC/H in Chicago 2010.09.29-2010.10.03

GLI.TC/H BUMP from Max Capacity on Vimeo.

GLI.TC/H is an international gathering of noise & new media practitioners in Chicago from September 29 thru October 03, 2010!
GLI.TC/H features: realtime audio & video performances with artists who misuse and abuse hardware and software; run-time video screenings of corrupt data, decayed media, and destroyed files; workshops and skill-share-sessions highlighting the wrong way to use and build tools; a gallery show examining glitches as processes, systems, and objects; all in the context of ongoing dialogues that have been fostered by experimentation, research, and play. GLI.TC/H is a physical and virtual assembly which stands testament to the energy surrounding these conversations.
Projects take the form of: artware, videos, games, films, tapes, code, interventions, prints, plugins, screen-captures, systems, websites, installations, texts, tools, lectures, essays, code, articles, & hypermedia.


web click here


Hacking attitude

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Hacking attitude
View more presentations from PSST : 2.0 OPINIONS AND TRENDS.

she said it was not the day before yesterday but the one becoming the tuessssday dayday

Cyberfeminism 101

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

functionfeminim- cyberfemism time line and links

click here

Notes on Knowledge Economy from Cyberfeminsm

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Nancy Paterson

click here

and here for her stock market skirt

From Cyborgs to Hacktivists: Postfeminist Disobedience and Virtual Communities Carolyn Guertin

 ...'Connectivity has been called the genius of feminism by theorist Robin Morgan (53), and this genius is being realized in electronic spaces and texts in more complex ways than in any other medium to date. Connectivity is the poster child of the postfeminist universe,...'

for the whole discussion  click here

... further discussion of Carolyn Guertin's "From Cyborgs to Hacktivists: Postfeminist Disobedience and Virtual Communitiesoutbound link"
click here

The Ceder Tavern Singers- a big deeelight

for more delight click here

smart mistakes nice new works ... and a prize

Smart Mistakes and the Short List for Share Prize 2010.

2nd?7th November, 2010
Regional Museum of Natural Science
Turin, Italy

Every year, the Share Festival chooses a special topic to focus on, to
help broaden our minds, sharpen our skills, and inspire creative
expression. So don?t miss this year?s festival from 2nd?7th November,
2010 in Turin!

Smart Mistakes ? Share Festival 2010

ERROR, mistake, mutation, failure, dysfunction, discrepancy, accident,
unexpected change, chance discovery, the aesthetics of error, mass
waste, project failure, abandon project, disaster, flaw, inconvenience,
misappropriation, side-effect, slip-up, flop.

This year, the VI Piemonte Share Festival will be focusing on the
artistic and cultural significance of mistake, in all its broader
senses. The creative potential of analysing and looking into what lies
behind an error is truly great, as it represents the uncovering of an
issue. Which is of particular interest in this year of global
emergencies. The issue uncovered then demands attention, which in turn
elicits controversy, while it is controversy that generates solutions
and innovation.
In the art and culture of our digital age, does mistake still play the
role of instigating change and activating value?

Share Prize 2010
Now are you ready to discover the group of artists called to Turin to
take part in a Share Festival?

Some 270 projects from 20 countries were submitted for consideration for
the Share Prize 2010. The aim of the Share Prize is to discover, promote
and support the digital arts. The competition is open to artists that
use digital technology as a language of creative expression, in all
shapes and formats.
The cultural aim of the Share Prize is to make participation in the
Share Festival open and accessible to all artists.

An international panel of judges consisting of Jurij Krpan (Ljubljana),
Andy Cameron (London), Fulvio Gianaria (Turin), and Bruce Sterling
(Austin/Turin) assessed the submissions. After a very interesting
meeting and a professional, in-depth analysis of all the works, it is
with great pleasure that we announce the six incredible artists who have
been short-listed for the Share Prize 2010.

Read the judges? statement here

The prize winners will be announced at the Share Prize award ceremony on
7th November, 2010 at the Regional Museum of Natural Science in Turin.

Kuai Auson (EC), 0h!m1gas (2008)
0h!m1gas is a biomimetic stridulation environment, based on the activity
of an ant colony under video and audio surveillance, transforming the
ants into DJs and creating a sound-reactive space which reveals the
connection between scratching, as an aesthetical expression created by
human culture, and the stridulation phenomena produced by ants as a
communication mechanism.

Perry Bard (CDN), Man with a Movie Camera (2007)
Man With a Movie Camera: The Global Remake is a participatory video shot
by people around the world who are invited to record images interpreting
the original script of Vertov?s Man with a Movie Camera, and upload them
to http://dziga.perrybard.net, where software developed specifically for
this project archives, sequences and streams the submissions as a film.

Sonia Cillari (IT), As an artist, I need to rest (2009)
The artist is lying still on the floor of the exhibition space, exhaling
through a very long cable, which departs from inside her left nostril
and ends at the centre of the main screen, suspended from the floor. A
digital creature which she calls 'feather' is entirely generated by her
exhaling into the suspended screen. During the performance, Sonia
Cillari exhales 14,000 digital elements and brings the digital feather
into more than 6 different states of beings, from 'addition' to
'resistance' patterns of life.

Ernesto Klar (IT/VE/USA), Luzes relacionais (2009-10)
Luzes relacionais" (Relational Lights) is an interactive audiovisual
installation that explores our relationship with the
expressional-organic character of space. The installation uses light,
sound, haze, and a custom-software system to create a morphing,
three-dimensional light-space in which spectators actively participate,
manipulating it with their presence and movements. "Luzes relacionais"
is pays homage to the work and aesthetic inquiry of Brazilian artist
Lygia Clark.

knowbotic research (CH), Macghillie_ just a void (2009-10)
In the public performance project MacGhillie, urban sites are visited by
a figure, clad in a camouflage suit, who shows neither the traits of an
individual, or even of a person. The so-called Ghillie Suit was
originally invented in the 19th century for hunting and was later also
used during the First World War (bis heute). Its camouflage anonymizes
and neutralises of the person who wears it in public. The figure
oscillates between the hyperpresence of a mask and visual redundancy.

Teatrino Elettrico (IT), DC12V (2009)
DC12V is a board-game version of elektrolivecircus. Sounds are generated
using analogue instruments only, recordings of movements, percussion,
friction and the electromagnetic fields of various everyday machines.
Small in converted into big, futile into necessary, objects into
personages, the board into a location. A desktop tragedy in one act for
self-propelled machines.

Share Festival 2010
2/7 NOVEMBRE 2010

Associazione "The Sharing"
Via Rossini 3
10124 Torino
tel. 011 5883693


scoring the play - Rosemarie Fiore

Long exposure photographs of videogames by (for more click) Rosemarie Fiore:
“These photographs are long exposures taken while playing video war games of the 80’s created by Atari, Centuri and Taito. The photographs were shot from video game screens while I played the games. By recording each second of an entire game on one frame of film, I captured complex patterns not normally seen by the eye.”

the dancing/stutter'n ineffable by alan sondheim

Ineffable http://www.alansondheim.org/ineffable.mov
(it takes a while to upload worth the patience)

inviolable, inviolate, legendary, marvelous, mythical, noncommunicable,
exceptional, extraordinary, fabulous, heavenly, holy, ideal, happiness";
untouchable, unutterable, unwhisperable, venerable, wonderful "unutterable
contempt"; "a thing of untellable splendor", incommunicable, expression or
description; "indefinable yearnings"; "indescribable awesome, awful, cele-
stial, divine, empyreal, empyrean, ethereal, beauty"; transcendent, tran-
scendental, undefinable, unexampled, unmentionable, indefinable, indescri-
bable, inenarrable, inexpressible, innominable, "ineffable ecstasy"; "in-
expressible anguish"; "unspeakable defying unnameable, unparalleled, un-
precedented, unspeakable, untellable, noteworthy, numinous, phenomenal,
portentous, prodigious, religious, remarkable, sacred, sacrosanct, spiri-
tual, stupefying, stupendous, {indescribable}, {unspeakable}, {untella-
ble}, {unutterable}] abstract tiny little elusive object of no consequence
but moving alan dojoji to hir inescapable unreachable destiny, only one
s/he has decided for hirself, no one else has made this journey for hir

Humlab, Sandy Baldwin, Alan Sondheim

Alan Dojoji avatar responding to 'go to' command but constantly thwarted;
s/he is also controlled by several altered mocap animations. The result is
a constant skittering motion, achieving nothing - the condition of the
fan, or anyone relegated to a problematic subaltern relation to visible
signs of in-visible power.
inviolable, inviolate, legendary, marvelous, mythical, noncommunicable,

Affective Encounters in Feminist Media- conference papers

Puustinen, “Gender for Sale. Advertising Design as Technologies of Gender.” In Koivunen & Paasonen (eds.), Affective Encounters. Rethinking Embodiment in Feminist Media Studies. http://www.utu.fi/hum/mediatutkimus/affective/proceedings.html.


100 anti-thesis to cyberfeminism

100 anti-theses

cyberfeminism is not ...

  1. cyberfeminism is not a fragrance
  2. cyberfeminism is not a fashion statement
  3. sajbrfeminizm nije usamljen
  4. cyberfeminism is not ideology
  5. cyberfeminism nije aseksualan
  6. cyberfeminism is not boring
  7. cyberfeminism ist kein gruenes haekeldeckchen
  8. cyberfeminism ist kein leerer kuehlschrank
  9. cyberfeminism ist keine theorie
  10. cyberfeminism ist keine praxis
  11. cyberfeminism ist keine traditio
  12. cyberfeminism is not an institution
  13. cyberfeminism is notusing words without any knowledge of numbers
  14. cyberfeminism is not complete
  15. cyberfeminism is not error 101
  16. cyberfeminism ist kein fehler
  17. cyberfeminism ist keine kunst
  18. cyberfeminism is not an ism
  19. cyberfeminism is not anti-male
  20. sajbrfeminizm nige nesto sto znam da je
  21. cyberfeminism is not a structure
  22. cyberfeminismo no es uns frontera
  23. cyberfeminism nije poslusan
  24. cyberfeminism nije apolitican
  25. cyberfeminisme is niet concreet
  26. cyberfeminism is not separatism
  27. cyberfeminism is not a tradition
  28. cyberfeminism is not maternalistic
  29. cyberfeminisme id niet iets buitenlands
  30. cyberfeminism is not without connectivity
  31. cyberfeminismus ist nicht mehr wegzudenken
  32. cyberfeminismus ist kein oxymoron
  33. cyberfeminism is not on sale
  34. cyberfeminism is nor for sale
  35. cyberfeminismus ist nicht gut
  36. cyberfeminismus ist nicht schlecht
  37. cyberfeminismus ist nicht modern
  38. cyberfeminismus ist nicht post-modern
  39. cyberfeminism is not natural
  40. cyberfeminism is not essentialist
  41. cyberfeminism is not abject
  42. cyberfeminism is not an avatar
  43. cyberfeminism is not an alter ego
  44. cyberfeminismus ist nicht truegerisch
  45. cyberfeminismus ist nicht billig
  46. cyberfeminismus ist nicht willig
  47. cyberfeminisme n'est pas jaloux
  48. cyberfeminism is not exclusive
  49. cyberfeminism is not solid
  50. cyberfeminism is not genetic
  51. cyberfeminismus ist keine entschuldigung
  52. cyberfeminism is not prosthetic
  53. cyberfeminismo no tiene cojones
  54. cyberfeminisme n'est pas triste
  55. cyberfeminisme n'est pas une pipe
  56. cyberfeminism is not a motherboard
  57. cyberfeminism is not a fake
  58. cyberfeminism nije ogranicen
  59. cyberfeminism nije nekonfliktan
  60. cyberfeminism nije make up
  61. cyberfeminism nije zatvoren prozor
  62. cyberfeminism is not a lack
  63. cyberfeminism is not a wound
  64. cyberfeminism is not a trauma
  65. cyberfeminismo no es una banana
  66. cyberfeminism is not a sure shot
  67. cyberfeminism is not an easy mark
  68. cyberfeminism is not a single woman
  69. cyberfeminism is not romantic
  70. cyberfeminism is not post-modern
  71. cyberfeminism is not a media-hoax
  72. cyberfeminism is not neutral
  73. cyberfeminism is not lacanian
  74. cyberfeminism is not nettime
  75. cyberfeminism is not a picnic
  76. cyberfeminism is not a coldfish
  77. cyberfeminism is not a cyberepilation
  78. cyberfeminism is not a horror movie
  79. cyberfeminism is not science fiction
  80. cyberfeminism is not artificial intelligence
  81. cyberfeminism is not an empty space
  82. cyberfeminism is not immobile
  83. cyberfeminism is not about boring toys for boring boys
  84. cyberfeminismus ist keine verlegenheitsloesung
  85. cyberfeminism is not a one-way street
  86. cyberfeminism is not supporting quantum mechanics
  87. cyberfeminism is not caffeine-free
  88. cyberfeminism is not a non-smoking area
  89. cyberfeminism is not daltonistic
  90. cyberfeminism is not nice
  91. cyberfeminismo no es callado
  92. cyberfeminism is not lady.like
  93. cyberfeminismus ist nicht arrogant
  94. cyberfeminismus ist keine nudelsauce
  95. cyberfeminism is not mythical
  96. cyberfeminism is not from outer space
  97. cyberfeminismo no es rock 'n roll
  98. cyberfeminism is not dogmatic
  99. cyberfeminism is not stable
  100. cyberfeminism has not only one language

re.act.feminism exhib

Two visitors to the exhibition 're.act.feminism - Performance art of the 1960s and 1970s today' eye a photograph by Belgrade artist Tanja Ostojic dated 1972 at the Academy of Arts in Berlin, Germany, 12 December 2008

quote from their web site
re.act.feminism – performance art of the 1960’s and 70’s today was an international performance and exhibition project exploring the “return” of feminist performance art of the 1960’s and 70’s in form of re-dos, reenactments, appropriations, new articulations, or archival and documentary projects. The exhibition, performance program and videoarchive featured more than 70 artists from two generations, providing an exemplary overview of gender-critical performance art of the 1960s and 70s in Europe and the USA, and investigating its resonances in current artistic productions.
The curators’ intention was to extend the perspective beyond the canon of the known and familiar in order to demonstrate the diversity and complexity of (feminist) performative strategies. This included performance movements in Eastern and South Eastern Europe as well as the former GDR (since the beginning of the 1980s) which often developed parallel to and independent of ‘western art’.
Performance art emerging in the 1960s and 70s was infused with ideas of social emancipation and fundamentally influenced by women artists interested in feminism. Performance art explored the intersection of art and life, of private and public. By focusing on the sentient, creating, knowing, speaking body it is the ideal medium to deconstruct the status of women as art objects and appropriate the subject position, to dramatize the social and physical vulnerability of women’s bodies in a patriarchal society and to deconstruct and subvert notions of stereotypical identity. Moreover, as a new art form, occurring outside the confines of the traditional art space, performance was a medium for collective and social intervention in the public sphere.

The artistic avant-garde of the 1960s and 70s, including feminist performance art, are currently regaining attention among a younger generation of artists and also among institutions. There are several reasons for this interest. On the one hand it reflects the (institutional) desire for the historicisation of performance as an ephemeral art form. On the other hand there seems to be a need of a younger generation to actively appropriate history and –so our thesis– a search for radical artistic expressions reflecting and stimulating social change.

The “return of performance art” seems to be a paradoxical notion. Performance art developed in a time of global awakening in the 1960s and 70s as an ephemeral, process-based art form, in which the body and the actions of artists, and sometimes also those of audiences, became the artistic medium. Performance art opposed notions of object-based art and related strategies of commodification and often left the traditional art institutions, galleries and museums. Performance was therefore understood as embedded in the now, the present moment, and therefore haunted by disappearance, as Peggy Phelan’s has famously stated:

"Performance’s only life is in the present. Performance cannot be saved, recorded, documented or otherwise participate in the circulation of representations of representations: once it does so, it becomes something other than performance. … Performance’s being ... becomes itself through disappearance." (Peggy Phelan, Unmarked, 1993)

However, as many authors have claimed successively performance does not only exist in the live act, but is often intrinsically linked to its recording and reaches a broader audience only through its traces and documentation. Authors such as Paul Clarke and Rebecca Schneider have elaborated further that there might even be a liveness to these traces, documents and recordings, as well as to the process of transmission:

Documents – so their thesis- are mostly produced intentionally for posterity, for a future reading and handling and their liveness lies in this future encounter, in the live circulation and reception, which is anticipated in its live production. The documents and traces, the mythologies and stories may trigger phantasies and inspire to re-enact, re-perform or re-act.

The exhibition re.act.feminism focussed on this contradictory relationship between the live act and its traces and documents, the fragmentary archives and the live reception, and reflected on how (performance)history can be reconstructed and a possible future 'invented'.

Bettina Knaup, Beatrice E. Stammer


Lyotard and The Sound of Silence: Film Music and Lament by Reni Celeste

 The Sound of Silence: Film Music and Lament  by Reni Celeste  Originally published in Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 22:113-123 (2005).

quote...'For the cinema, there is no greater resource than the pop song. Behind each melancholic lament, raging riff, drumbeat, and guitar solo is the laughter of Dionysus, the tragic jester of ultimate loss.
Francois Lyotard draws a parallel between music and primordial loss and fear. Music is the site of deep paradoxes. It struggles to leave a trace of something audible that goes beyond the audible. Lyotard speaks of a passage from Pascal Quignard entitled "Language" that describes the sound of a collective fear that renders all language secondary. "All the languages of the world seem secondary with regard to this lament of hunger, distress, loneliness, death, and danger."18 Lyotard finds in music the deepest expression of the bestial lament over immortality. "The breath is a wind of terror: one is going to be no more. We cannot 'hear' it, but it is not mute. It puts 'exactly nothing between your teeth.'" This is not merely certain kinds of music, but music in general. "No matter how clear the phrases of the clearest music might be, they bellow forth fright in secret."19 In this sense, the work of art can never be reduced to its cultural or empirical context. He explains that
If the work of art is, it is because it bears witness to something in excess of what the body can sense, of what is sensible and circumscribed by the (biological, cultural) institutions of the body. [...] This excess is already at the very origins of sensation. Sensation is not only the reception of useful contextual information, it is also in its immediacy the reminder of a threat. The body does not belong to you, it is sensible only insofar as it is exposed to the other thing, deprived of its self-distinction, in danger of annihilation. It is sensible only as lamentable.20
This makes the aesthetic realm a distinction that is only possible through the figure of extinction and its lament. As he describes it, "The body is passible because it has doors and they are open. What enters through the body, sensations, aesthesis, is not just the form of an object, it's the anguish of being full of holes."21 Differences between the various arts, he explains, are only different ways the body has of being threatened with loss. "Aesthetics is phobic, it arises from anesthesia, belonging to it, recovering from it."22 This description of the "breath of lament" puts music at the very core of being. These holes in the body that Lyotard describes as the senses threaten the border between inside and outside. Like a character from an Edgar Allan Poe tale suffereing from a "heightening of the senses,"23 one can imagine being killed by an odor or sound. Music does not fill the lack opened by the visual. It is the lack itself. That we can distinguish ourselves from music is merely a cultural knowledge or function of language.' for more click here

Susan Hiller's Last Silent Movie- wonderful work

The Last Silent Movie opens the unvisited, silent archives of extinct and endangered languages to create a composition of voices that are not silent. They are not silent because someone is listening. The work sets free some of the ghosts and spectres haunting the unacknowledged unheimlich of sound recording which allows us to hear the words and voices of people mostly now dead. In The Last Silent Movie, some of them sing, some tell stories, some recite vocabulary lists and some of them, directly or indirectly, accuse us, the listeners, of injustice.

click here


"Jellyfish" by Andrea Gibson

Andrea Gibson, Yellowbird

Andrea Gibson - Blue Blanket

Cyberfeminism Sadie Plant Nonidentity to Posthumanity

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Promiscuous Language

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Virginas!! Eve Ensler: happiness in body and soul | Video on TED.com

Eve Ensler: happiness in body and soul | Video on TED.com

Vik Muniz makes art with wire, sugar | Video on TED.com

Vik Muniz makes art with wire, sugar | Video on TED.com

Golan Levin on software (as) art | Video on TED.com

Golan Levin on software (as) art | Video on TED.com

important!!! keep the net neutral...

A message from Ruth passes on....

Hi Folks,
This came through from P2P list vial the opennetcoalition
It sets out a pretty clear argument and a suggestion for action.
It does seem that on matters of digital commons the voices of
(non-corporate) citizens are either inaudible or unintelligible to
policy makers at the moment.

What do you reckon?



Make you voice heard by responding to the European Commission's public
consultation on Net neutrality! The more citizens and NGOs submit their
own responses to the questionnaire, the more chance we have to
collectively weigh in the EU policy-making process to ensure that the
Internet remains a free and open communications architecture. You have
until September 30th to send your submission and tell the Commission to
protect the Internet.


*** Why you should send your own submission to the Commission?

In November 2009, the European Commission released a ?Declaration on Net
neutrality? in which it said it would report to the Parliament and
Council before the end of 2010[1]. Before doing so, the Commission wants
to hear from stakeholders and has launched a questionnaire in this
purpose[2]. But big telecoms corporations as well as copyright lobbies
are hand in hand to push for the end of neutrality so as to boost their
commercial revenues, and there is no doubt that they will answer to the
Commission's consultation.

If they have their way, the intense innovation and democratic
participation enabled by the Internet would be harmed, as Internet
Access Providers would increasingly discriminate against certain types
of data flowing through their networks to develop new business models
based on traffic prioritization. They could asphyxiate potential
competitors and further expand their ties with powerful content
industries able and willing to pay in order to benefit from unfair
priority on the Internet. Such practices would stifle innovation and
hinder the development of new efficient business models that fully rip
the benefits of the digital economy. They would also undermine diversity
and pluralism in the new information ecosystem, which are both
fundamental characteristics of the Internet and represent a historical
contribution to our democracies. In order to safeguard the freedom of
communication that all Internet users enjoy nowadays, citizens and NGOs
all across Europe must massively tell the Commission to put the public
interest first and protect the common-good nature of the Internet.

*** How to to draft your submission?

It's up totally to you:

   * You can address the questions of your choice, since you are not
required to answer the whole questionnaire.
   * You can write in the language in which you're most comfortable.
Any language spoken in the European Union is acceptable.
   * There is no requirement regarding the length of the document.

As you will see, the consultation is comprised of 15 questions, which
cover current discriminatory practices, traffic prioritization, ?managed
services?[3], consumers rights as well as other topics. Obviously, some
of them are quite technical, but again you don't have to answer all the
questions. Question 15[4], for instance, appears to be broad enough for
any citizen to express their views to the Commission regarding their
attachment to the principle of Net neutrality and how best to protect

Although we can't prejudge the content of the forthcoming report,
submissions from citizens and civil society organizations will be highly
needed. Indeed, the questions' wording suggests that the Commission is
not necessarily keen on enacting regulations that would enshrine the
principle of network neutrality in European law. The Commission tends to
think that the provisions of the Telecoms Package ? which establish
transparency so that consumers can switch access providers if the latter
is messing up with the Internet traffic ? is in and of itself enough to
protect Internet users. This is not sufficient to guarantee fundamental
freedoms. First of all, competition between providers is far from being
a reality in many areas of the EU. Second, nothing would prevent all
providers to start discriminating their traffic. That's why we need a
pro-active stance on Net neutrality, with the adoption of ad hoc
regulations to protect this principle.

*** Where can you find relevant resources to draft your submission?

Here is where you can find some resources as well as background
information to help you draft your response to the Commission:

   * Web-dossier on Net neutrality
   * Report on ?Protecting Net neutrality in Europe?, released last
fall during the debate on the Telecoms Package
   * Answers to the werebuild.eu survey on the open Net
   * Brief: ?It is crucial to save Net Neutrality!?
   * Report (in French only): ?Garantir la neutralit? du Net?
   * La Quadrature du Net will publish its own answer as soon as it is
submitted and invites every NGO and citizen to do the same.

Much more information is available on the Web on the matter. In
particular, organizations such as Free Press, Public Knowledge or the
EFF extensively covered this issue in the United States.

Together we can act to make sure that Net neutrality regulation becomes
a reality:

Send your submission to INFSO-NETNEUTRALITY(at)ec.europa.eu by Thursday,
September 30th!


2. See the Commission's press release:

3. ?Managed services refer to communications networks for which specific
characteristics may be guaranteed by the network operator. They are
distinct from the ?best-effort? Internet

4. Question 15 reads as follows: "Besides the traffic management issues
discussed above, are there any other concerns affecting freedom of
expression, media pluralism and cultural diversity on the Internet? If
so, what further measures would be needed to safeguard those values?"

- --
- --- La Quadrature du Net ---- http://www.laquadrature.net
- --- http://twitter.com/jerezim - http://identi.ca/jerezim


new work.... red mars libetto for laurel

to seeee and hear  click here

bit more about Josipovici on Book News


Over at Immedia mention is made of the word Radicant- our new modernism will grow roots

in the article Radicality in Art Today...

quote... 'The French art theorist and curator Nicolas Bourriaud was there to debate this question (is radicality in art possible today)  together with the Dutch artist Jeanne van Heeswijk and the Danish academic Michael Bolt, who has been an outspoken sceptic of Bourriaud’s concept of relational aesthetics. Bourriaud’s perspective was that radicality is not possible today because it is impossible to back to the kind of environment of 20th century modernism in which the avant-garde movement could be radical. Bourriaud pointed out that if taking the etymolog of the radical seriously, understood as roots, or going to the origins, radicality today is not possible.

According to Bourriaud we have to give up two attitudes in order to move on. On the one hand we have to give up the attitude of nostalgia of modernism and get rid of the metal trap of post-modernism, or post-everything. The whole post prefix of the last 30 years, resulting in terms such as post structuralism, post colonial, post feminism, post humanism etc., has given us the impression that we are too late, that there really is nothing to be done but to look back and analyse how to handle the effects of the events upon which everything in the present grew out of. Bourriaud proposes instead the concept of the radicant, understood as an organism that grows its roots on the ground, a term better fit for describing where we should go with art from here. Whereas 20th century modernism was radical, our modernism will be radicant, growing roots while it evolves or grows.

The central goal for the art field then, is to break loose from postmodernism and the extreme preoccupation with identity, that in Bourriaud’s account acts as a “war machine”. Identity, according to Bourriaud, is an ideological virus that the political field has been structured around, reducing everything to the question: “Where do you come from?”

To answer this question, it was necessary to show that modernism was not a "movement", like mannerism, or the name of a period. Like Romanticism, it is multifaceted and ambiguous. And it didn't begin in 1880 and end in 1930. Modernism, whenever it began, will always be with us, for it is not primarily a revolution in diction, or a response to indus­trialisation or the First World War, but is art coming to a consciousness of its limitations and responsibilities.

 Article in the New Statesman by Gabriel Josipovici... Modernism still matters

quote....'Writers such as T S Eliot and Samuel Beckett worked in synchrony with continental Europeans such as Thomas Mann and Franz Kafka, pushing against the limitations of art. Why have English-language writers turned away from this challenge?'....

Perhaps they haven't, in the right light, on a good day Flarf could maybe sort of be seen as a new modernist project....? I have been thinking yesterday as I've been browsing and reading articles on Flarf and more than that  (always) reading flarfish work itself ... that how like Stein they sound. Stein with her speech fun, blurring 'notions of the real. Stein was flarfing in 1910...
Who else I wonder,  well Shakespeare if you read him like that ... not for the dead/dying king (hint hint) story but for the word play... the absorb-ion of 'other' text... but I guess Kafka and Ribalais, Beckett... hmmm needs full-time ruuummmination. Lucky I'm doing a ph-bloody-d!

how bout some definitions ... heres one on flarf from Schotts Vocab printed in the NY Times


A novel form of digitally-inspired poetry, often generated from the results of Internet search engines.

Reporting in The Wall Street Journal on the increasing recognition of “flarf ” poetry, Gautam Naik explained the origins of the trend:

Flarf is a creature of the electronic age. The flarf method typically involves using word combinations turned up in Google searches, and poems are often shared via email. When one poet penned a piece after Googling “peace” + “kitty,” another responded with a poem after searching “pizza” + “kitty.” A 2006 reading of it has been viewed more than 6,700 times on YouTube. It starts like this: “Kitty goes Postal/Wants Pizza…”

Flarf is a hip, digital reaction to the kind of boring, genteel poetry” popular with everyday readers, says Marjorie Perloff, a poetry critic and professor emeritus of English at Stanford University. “You used to find it only in alternative spaces, but it has now moved into the art mainstream.”

Flarf verse has appeared in America’s pre-eminent poetry magazine, Poetry. Some 15 flarf books have been published, and there’s a 400-page anthology coming out later this year. The Walker Art Center in Minneapolis and the Whitney Museum in New York have held flarf readings. Two Manhattan theaters have showcased flarf poets.

In a sign that further establishes flarf’s literary cred, practitioners of a rival poetry movement called “conceptual poetry” are now taking on the flarfists, hoping to establish their approach as the true avant garde challenger to mainstream verse.

According to Naik, flarf emerged in 2001 and has since “blossomed into an anything-goes style no longer restricted to Google searches – so long as it is novel and edgy.”

Its the blossoming that matters...


sucking on words Kennith Goldsmith sucking suckii- delish sound


Is Flarf Corrosive?: A Discussion of Sharon Mesmer's "I Accidentally Ate Some Chicken and Now I'm in Love with Harry Whittington." / Poem Talk : The Poetry Foundation

Is Flarf Corrosive?: A Discussion of Sharon Mesmer's "I Accidentally Ate Some Chicken and Now I'm in Love with Harry Whittington." / Poem Talk : The Poetry Foundation

Flarf is a one-trick pony that thinks a unicorn is another kind of horse

Flarf is a one-trick pony that thinks a unicorn is another kind of horse

To read more...338 articles on/at Harriett Poetry Foundation on flarf... click here

Flarfy poetry article on Harriet

 Sina Queyras

Flarf is a one-trick pony that thinks a unicorn is another kind of horse

Thanks to Vanessa Place for the following. Given that a few days ago we had the response to this piece offered recently at AWP here on Harriet, it seems important to post the original text for your consideration. I think this clears the matter doesn’t it?
1. Conceptualism asks what is poetry?
1. Flarf says sez you!
2. Flarf is never about anything other than poetry itself.
2. Conceptualism is allegorical. It is about things other than poetry itself.
3. Flarf is the court jester. As such, it is still a member of the court.
3. Conceptualism courts jest, but is not the king’s dog.
4. Flarf is composition.
4. Conceptualism is composed.
5. Conceptualism employs a variety of techniques that compromise and complicate the question of excess text, of unreadability, of extra-textual narrativity, of the need for and love of categories and the acategorical, of the false and adored divide between praxis and other praxis, addition and subtraction, theory and things with two types of teeth.
5. Flarf is a one-trick pony that thinks a unicorn is another kind of horse.

6. Flarf is sexual repression on a half-shell. It giggles at dildos.
6. Conceptualism is sexy. The penis is a dildo.
7. Flarf still loves poetry.
7. Conceptualism loves poetry enough to put it out of its misery.
8. Flarf wants to be funny.
8. Conceptualism wants.
9. Flarf maintains a superior attitude towards the world-at-large. Random.
9. Legit.
10. Flarf has one answer to every problem. It involves the spin or schema of interpretation, that is to say, the social construction of a social phenomenon, such as is favored by advertisers and politicians. Thus, its philosophical underpinnings lie primarily in a Platonic premise of a unified ethical and aesthetic field, in the sense that the frame as represented must contain a more or less stable relationship to a larger belief-system, equally stable, preferably central, in order for the frame to function as both relevant to the empirical realities of its potential participants and to the narrative fidelity of the frame itself. Cognitively, the framing-effect involves the amygdala, and thus flarf hits an emotional pitch. The emotional pitch, it could be noted, of the hysteric.
10. Conceptualism has no answers, but is, instead, interrogative. Through the deployment of multiple strategies that serve to destabilize text (extant or made) via reframed reiterations and multiple sites of rhetorical deployment, conceptualism is neo-Kantian, epistemologically concerned with the ongoing sobject and the instantiation of radical evil, in other words, the affirmative will to evil that manifests the fact of will itself. In other words, the instantiation of that which is consciously contra-textual in the sense of all that has made text make contextual sense, the rendering immaterial of every materiality of poetry. The contra-text being the new con-text, con-, as I have pointed out elsewhere, in the sense of being a cunt. Conceptualism is, as the term indicates, primarily a cortical engagement.
11. Flarf is funhouse Freud: the id tweaking the superego.
11. Conceptualism is Lacan in a mirror, the discourse of the slave.
12. Flarf is Freudian in the sense of the drive by way of the virtual dérive. As such, it must be sans satisfaction. Le donné
12. Conceptualism is Lacanian in the sense of desire by way of the Law by way of the petit objet a. As such. La donne
13. Flarf plays Cuzin while playing it off, it speaks to people in people-voice okay, it’s the first to suggest titty beer bong hits and butterscotch Jell-O shots, it wants to stay up late and bitch bitch bitch, it might bleed out but nothing’s permanently stained, it surfs like point break without leaving a wake, it goes Louey-Louey and blows O.C. pretty, it would like you to like it, really?, it wants to be kinda Dada but it’s not that fucking desperate, wants to play it black but mostly lays trick pussy.
13. Flarf plays Cuzin while playing it off, it speaks to people in people-voice okay, it’s the first to suggest titty beer bong hits and butterscotch Jell-O shots, it wants to stay up late and bitch bitch bitch, it might bleed out but nothing’s permanently stained, it surfs like point break without leaving a wake, it goes Louey-Louey and blows O.C. pretty, it would like you to like it, really?, it wants to be kinda Dada but it’s not that fucking desperate, wants to play it black but mostly lays trick pussy.
14. Flarf is a style, a mode as à la as sliced cheese on pie. Those who write flarf write flarf, or, to use their terminology, they write “flarfy” poetry, to be distinguished from regular poetry. Flarfy poetry makes hay where the sun don’t shine. Like baboons copulating in cages at the zoo, flarf fucks inside the glass walls, a show-stopping show, playing to the embarrassed (maybe) or bemused (could be) or the temporarily entertained (probably), it’s kind of natural but nature’s not in it (who me?). In this sense, flarf is a whoopie cushion in the world of the new & old lyric poem.
14. In this sense, conceptualism is a fart.
15. Ron Silliman likes flarf.
15. Ron Silliman does not like conceptualism.
16. Flarf succeeds in doing what it sets its mind to, to upend and offend, to play the hand all the way through. The best flarf is virtuosic.
16. The best conceptualism is failure.
17. Flarf looks like poetry.
17. Poetry looks like conceptualism.

source click here



Flarf vs. Conceptual: Nada Gordon

Flarf Festival 06: Nada Gordon - "Nugatory Wax Milk Goats"

Flarf Festival 06: Stan Apps - "Elmo"

Studio 360's Flarf episode

click here

gooooooggling flarf- googling flarf by Michael Gottlieb- from jacket again - oh jacket

quoting Michael..."Does poetry have a job? Is there something that is it supposed to do? Do for us? To us? I would suggest if what we are now calling Flarf has a role in our life, jointly or severally or individually – in, say, our literary life, its role is not, cannot be substantially different than that which previous methodologies or schools or movements have taken upon themselves. Its job – and I do think I believe that poetry indeed does have a job – is to crack open this terrible world and give it back to us in a way so we see it – at once, whole, entirely anew and, simultaneously, completely familiar. Its job is to enable us to see it in a way that we never could before, and never could now — without the aid of this new work. If we can adduce that this is art’s, poetry’s job – or, better perhaps – its responsibility, in every age, then we can, we have to, perhaps, stipulate that with every age poetry must needs find new tools to make it — as someone dead once proclaimed — to make itself new, to make itself over, anew. The old tools don’t work anymore, at least for the time being – they are tired. The terrible vistas they once revealed now seem merely pretty. This is a commonplace: it is virtually impossible to look at Van Gogh or Matisse or read Eliot or Williams and grasp how uncompromising – how ugly, brutal, honest – they once seemed. It is our curse, is it not — as artists, to become picturesque? We should live so long.

That’s why we need these folks, and every tool they can lay their hands on..." 

for more click here

The New Pandemonium: A Brief Overview of Flarf

quote from Jacket article
This is what you should know--this is not like any other POETRY reading. I mean people heckle and wisecrack and shout and wear bunny ears and pee themselves while crying and screaming ‘Awwwwwwwww Yeah!’ and ‘Cid Corman!’ Bruce Andrews actually laughs in the audience.

—Anne Boyer, “A Draft: What Happened at the Flarf Festival” 

'That Flarf did start as a coterie—and that the original intent of the Flarf poets was neither to democratize the world via the Web nor to go undercover as a stupid person who reports back to readers—is clear from Sullivan’s account of the group’s genesis, which also underscores exactly how difficult it is to present Flarf as a viable political intervention. Central to any account of the genesis of Flarf is Sullivan’s poem “Mm-hmm,” which he characterizes as “the most offensive poem I could manage.” Sullivan submitted “Mm-hmm” to the poetry.com website, which is essentially a vanity press that accepts anyone’s work and then seeks to sell the poets bound copies of their work and that of other “winners” (“The Flarf Files”).

Yeah, mm-hmm, it’s true
big birds make
big doo! I got fire inside
my “huppa”-chimp(TM) 5
gonna be agreesive, greasy aw yeah god
wanna DOOT! DOOT!
Pffffffffffffffffffffffffft! hey!
oooh yeah baby gonna shake & bake then take
AWWWWWL your monee, honee (tee hee) 10
uggah duggah buggah biggah buggah muggah
hey! hey! you stoopid Mick! get
off the paddy field and git
me some chocolate Quik
put a Q-tip in it and stir it up sick 15
fuck! shit! piss! oh it’s so sad that
syndrome what’s it called tourette’s
make me HAI-EE! shout out loud
Cuz I love thee. Thank you God, for listening! 20
                                                               (“The Flarf Files”)
Despite (or because of) its deliberate awfulness, the poem displays some clear affinities with well-known avant-garde poetry of the early 20th century. Aside from the intentional misspellings and phonetically rendered flatulence, which calls to mind some of the more puerile typographical devices used by Marinetti, the poem derives much of its comedic force from a common trait of Dadaist poetry—its rapid shifts of subject matter—with the “stoopid Mick” references coming from nowhere after a line of nonsense that evokes, perhaps intentionally, some of the facile appropriations of “African” speech rhythms in poems by Tzara and Huelsenbeck...'

Ball by Ander Monson... excerpt

For starters, the dagger and the Ball are connected in interesting ways. The Ball itself, as you'll soon see (see also "Exteriority," "Vanishing Point: Middle West, Citizenship," "Interiority"), is more than just a ball. It is a way of life. A symbol of something. An obsession, but not just an obsession. It virtually requires annotation, exploration, theorization. It's hard not to make the ball into myth. It makes itself into myth by force of its own conviction.
And if you like the Ball, and I like the Ball, or if you like balls at all ("we've got the biggest balls of them all" --AC/DC, juvenile-ly), enjoy also The Available World, which uses a slice of the Ball--perhaps sliced off with something like a dagger--as the cover image (see below for more). Like many of my books, there are a lot of correspondences between this one and that one.
It is either a defect or a feature. I prefer a feature.

I don't know why I find the Ball so fascinating, why it means more and more the more I think about it. Balls are like this, the more you use them, the more you think about them, the more they roll and accrue gravitational forces. Super balls, for instance. They accrue dust and gum and fur and whatever else as they travel quickly through the air, ready to break your parents' collectibles if muscle-loosed. Too, I'm a fan of the video game Katamari Damacy and its sequels, which features some serious ball action. You probably need to check this game out if you haven't played it yet.
Some epigraphs from TAW:

Let us roll all our strength, and all / Our sweetness, up into one ball; --Andrew Marvell
The prince rolled them all up, rolled and rolled, until the katamari was big enough to be lifted up to space to replace the shiny stars that were so grievously lost. And that, dear friends, was the plot and purpose of the fabulous game called Katamari Damacy. --We Love Katamari Damacy
Every ball is a model of the world. Even down to the layer after layer inside of it:

for more
click here

Ander Monson is really interesting his blurb is as follows
...'Inside every thing there is another thing. Inside each self there is another. Crack the I open and another one emerges. The I — even a fictional I like those we find in memoir — is a mine. The book, a mine. It's mine: I should know. This is the website for the book. Superimpose it on the book. Print it out and stuff it in. The book is a static artifact. The website, not so much. There's more here, new tunnels, new considerations, more thinking. It might not be the same when you return. So: think of the website when you think of the book. Start with the book. When you see a word adorned with a dagger (†) in the book, enter it in the box above.'

!!!! The Find: Reality Hunger: A manifesto by David Shields magnificent

Reviews on Reality Hunger: A Manifesto

(Knopf, published February 2010)

David Shields... more here

“It's about time someone said something this honest in print.” —Susan Salter Reynolds, Los Angeles Times
“David Shields's radical intellectual manifesto, Reality Hunger (Knopf), is a rousing call to arms for all artists to reject the laws governing appropriation, obliterate the boundaries between fiction and nonfiction, and give rise to a new modern form.” —Vanity Fair
“This is the most provocative, brain-rewiring book of 2010. It's a book that feels at least five years ahead of its time and teaches you how to read it as you go.” —Alex Pappademas, GQ
“……I don't think it would be too strong to say that Shields's book will be a sort of bible for the next generation of culture-makers.” —David Griffith, Bookslut
“This dude's book is the hip-hop album of the year…” —Peter Macia, Fader
“David Shields' new manifesto, Reality Hunger, models a radical rethinking of the rules of artistic appropriation.” —Chris Mitchell, The Week
“One of the great books of the year.” —Jeff Simon, Buffalo News
“Good manifestos propagate. Their seeds cling to journals and blogs and conversations, soon enough sprawling sub-manifestoes of acclamation or rebuttal. After the opening call to action, a variety of minds turn their attention to the same problem. It's the humanist ideal of a dialectic writ large: ideas compete and survive by fitness, not fiat. David Shields's Reality Hunger has just the immodest ambition and exhorter's zeal to bring about this happy scenario.” —Sam Sacks, The Wall Street Journal
“Entertaining, insightful, and impressively broad… brings to mind an amped-up Nicholson Baker… Most important, it's a guidebook for where literary writing could go in the future… You might not agree with Shields's broadside or his hardheaded conclusions, but it's difficult not to fall under the sway of this voracious and elegantly structured book. Reality Hunger is ultimately an invigorating shakedown of the literary status quo: recommended for readers, essential for writers.” … Scott Indrisek, Time Out New York
“A spirited polemic on behalf of nonfiction… an important book. The fiction vs. nonfiction debate has become intense in recent years, and Shields cranks it up a notch… smart, stimulating, and aphoristic. …a provocative and entertaining manifesto.” —Blake Morrison, The Guardian, Book of the Week
Reality Hunger is not just a manifesto for a new kind of genre-blurring 21st-century prose; it is also a series of short, sharp provocations. . . . Shields has a point when he nails the traditional contemporary novel for being, for the most part, not at all contemporary. …And I suspect he may be on to something in sensing that his boredom with traditional fiction is symptomatic of a culture-wide exhaustion with the form.… He manages to give bourgeois traditionalists a right good kicking. One cannot help but admired his verve as well as his nerve.” —Sean O'Hagan, London Observer
“Essential reading for both readers and writers. Bold, entertaining, contentious, it pushes us to think about the processes and future of fiction-making, as well as its relation to nonfiction. In short, it shakes us up a bit.” —Stephen Emms, The Guardian
“The book is anything but a monograph; it's a polygraph.” —Toby Litt, Financial Times
“The subtitle of David Shields's Reality Hunger categorizes it as "a manifesto," which is a little like calling a nuclear bomb "a weapon."” —Don McLesse, Kirkus Reviews
“Thrilling to read, even if you disagree with much of it.” —Zadie Smith, The Guardian
“I find Shields's book absorbing, even inspiring. The ideas he raises are so important, his ideas are so compelling, that I raved about this book the whole time I was reading it and have regularly quoted it to friends in the weeks since.” —Jami Attenberg, Bookforum
“The phrase "paradigm shift" is one that induces my gag reflex, but that's what he's up to here. And, dear readers, shift happens.” —Kimberly Marlowe Hartnett, Seattle Times
“How can we create a literature that's urgent and vital and true to this particular here and now? Practices of writing, and reading, are shifting. None of us should take current modes of expression for granted. I want people to read his book and passionately debate these issues. I want this discussion to matter. And I want to be part of it.” —Catherine Bush, Toronto Globe and Mail
“It's already become required reading in university spheres, galleys passed from one student to the next like an illicit hit of crack cocaine. I came away from Reality Hunger excited about writing my own fiction, and impatient about books that don't offer these same thrills.” —Sarah Weinman, Flavorwire
“David Shields has put a bullet in the brain of our ridiculously oversimplified compulsion to think of everything as a narrative. His latest book, Reality Hunger, is a story with all the veils—and, for that matter, all the skin and tendon—pulled away. It's a collection of quotations crushed together into a collage about the stories we tell ourselves. Everybody knows that memoirs are bullshit, but they still read them because they have to satisfy the need to force the world into a pretty frame. With Reality Hunger, Shields smashes the frames.” —Paul Constant, The Stranger
“I've just finished reading Reality Hunger: A Manifesto, and I'm lit up by it—astonished, intoxicated, ecstatic, overwhelmed.” —Jonathan Lethem
“One of the most provocative books I've ever read…I think it's destined to become a classic.” —Charles D'Ambrosio
“This is the book our sick-at-heart moment needs—like a sock in the jaw or an electric jolt in the solar plexus—to wake it up.” —Wayne Koestenbaum
Reality Hunger demolishes all the conventional literary pieties to which nearly everyone pays eager lip service.” —Tim Parks
“Most exciting book of the 21st century so far.” —Ekow Eshun, Director of the Institute of Contemporary Arts, London (on Twitter)
Reality Hunger, by David Shields, might be the most intense, thought-accelerating book of the last 10 years.” —Chuck Klosterman (on Twitter)
“David Shields's radical intellectual manifesto, Reality Hunger, is a rousing call to arms for all artists to reject the laws governing appropriation, obliterate the boundaries between fiction and nonfiction, and give rise to a new modern form.” —Elissa Schappell, Vanity Fair
“I think Reality Hunger is absolutely wonderful. Exhilarating.” —Mark Leyner

Great interview with him on KCRW  here

William Gass - Bookworm on KCRW

William Gass - Bookworm on KCRW