Based on “circular causal” or cybernetic feedback theory (and Jack burnham System Esthetics), this drawing simply shows upgrading of each event done by self-organizing principle, that also resembles process of adoptive systems in Donald Schons theory and practice of learning.
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 27th, 2010
- Category: Diagrams-methodology, Ideas and brainstorming
- Comments: None
ART01 as feedback loop envisioned
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 25th, 2010
- Category: Communication, Diagrams-methodology, Methodology
- Comments: None
Envisioned communication streams at ART01 pre-production
This is a sketch of envisioned communications streams between actors in ART01 event during its preproduction.
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 23rd, 2010
- Category: Diagrams-methodology, Ideas and brainstorming
- Comments: None
Research on ART01 genealogy
If we envision ART01 project as a collaborative and process orientated where open source technologies are used, where information dissemination and knowledge transfer is important and by where negating art object and accepting systems aesthetics leads to group production and feedback as an artwork itself, maybe genealogy could be sketched in a way done here:
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 22nd, 2010
- Category: Diagrams-methodology
- Comments: None
ART01 blog construction
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 12th, 2010
- Category: Diagrams-methodology, Funding
- Comments: None
Strategies of ECF funds
One of EU cultural funding institution is European Cultural Foundation (ECF). From their web-page: “We believe that culture engages and inspires people to transcend boundaries. The connecting power of culture is essential for creating open, inclusive and democratic societies, and is invaluable for building Europe.”
Both positive and suspicious criticism can be turned to question of boundaries and to connecting power as it seems by the overview of granted projects from the past that projects envision “barbaric”, “primitive”, “outlandish”, “fringe”, or in most cases “exotic” cultures showcasing in dominant one: Roma, Balkan, etc. in EU.
Is ECF creating a showcases for cultures that have been, or will be included in EU dominant one so as to create atmosphere for domestic/dominant cultures to acknowledge them and thus make less space possible for nationalist forces build up on preconceptions? Maybe that would be the entrance point for ECF grant? There is no explanation what are the boundaries, so one has to envision them according to information on ECF in order to transcendent them accordingly.
“Connecting power” can be loosely interpreted as networking structure of actors in cultural scene: artist and cultural workers. Personal impression is that the artist here is portrayed as “aesthetics design worker” that will create representation according to the cultural worker visions (management in the cultural world where artist becomes a meager discussed by Brian Holmes, Gerald Rauning and others springs to mind). So it is not connections of the artists, but connection of interest groups specified by the cultural managers and cultural industry.
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 9th, 2010
- Category: Diagrams-methodology, Ideas and brainstorming, Methodology
- Comments: None
Musing on aesthetics and theory of Art01
What interests me the most, I think, is that I am looking for a way to explain what are different aspects of explaining system of ART01. By creating event I am proposing:
– alternative event to dominant of art exhibition where artworks are offered for inspection, assessment and consummation;
– an environment where process is in focus, thus modes of operating change to adjust it;
– that aesthetics are than of process, not of object;
– that form is a process and content is actions that make the process.
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 5th, 2010
- Category: Ideas and brainstorming, Proposal
- Comments: None
PROPOSAL FOR COLLABORATORS – CORE GROUP
Dear friend, I would like to invite you for a collaborative project that would start now as online communication and disscusion and end as residency in Berlin summer 2010. The points our collaboration would address are:
– redefining borders of art systems with autonomy as a strategy;
– developing alternative and parallel art systems;
– DIY aesthetics (Do it Yourself);
– DIWO aesthetics (Do it With Others);
– multidisciplinary and interactive approach;
– collaborative and participatory art practices.
Methods: Donald Schons “learning, reflection and change” will be initiated and carried out trough action, reflection in action and reflection on action. According to Castoriadis self-instituted autonomy of the work-progress of such group would be implemented trough critical self- and social- reflexion considering the “ . . . motives, its reasons for acting, its deep-seated tendencies . . . ” to distributed creativity and non-authorship that includes (not independence but) interdependence. Interactivity between participants are in focus, not the final work. Improvising with everyday together with use of digital technologies and free open source software for multimedia, but also in any sort of discipline and its interactivity is welcomed. (to be discussed)
Goals: to create an environment where autonomy is negotiated, discussed and acted. To create environment where participants exchange knowledge and produce art work as interaction between participants that include forms that are temporal and done in real time, as focus is on interactivity, not on the finalized object. Modes of representation are negotiated to the point where process becomes representation.
Why: focus on collaborations and non-authorship comes from the idea that one, solitary, individual creator drives into self-egoistic occupation that results in confrontation, rivalry and competition which are pillars for functioning of neo-liberal society. To exchange knowledge and to collaborate, in this sense, means to create environment where creativity is not based on market driven forces.
How: To keep open flow of ideas and to create flow between participants, actions are introduced by participants where improvisation and bricolage approach to creativity is happening in real time. Participants bring their ideas that are proposed, discussed and rehearsed beforehand by using on-line tools. Ideas are initiated at the residency and acted out. Focus is that each participant strives to connects his/hers creativity to initiated idea. This way we are striving to produce a human/machine feedback-loop.
Important background:
Researching autonomy in art operating systems brought me to a conclusion that only by producing an event consisting of transdiciplinary activities that are initiated by the participants and developed in horizontal manner and self-organizing fashion, can I introduce and present complex social and group topography in such art autonomy. I have decided to initiate this project as my MFA final exam at Transart Institute, which in a way contradicts my proposal. People can ask: why should we work for your MFA, what is our benefit? And I do agree that question is on the right track. But I also do put blind faith in people, where I am proposing a TAY inside art operating system of TI, where gallery can be used, appropriated, for our own way of expressing. By (blind) trust in human goodness I have proposed something that can go wrong in many ways: no participants, no funds, TI administration doesn’t approve the project, there is no visible artistic merit, there is no artistic authorship that can be assessed, etc. Partially, this is what I want to confront by critically observing system of the study and art I am taking part. Partially, I am trying to use this opportunity to make another meeting position of like-minded people, using the system that already exists, by parasiting on resources that are there, but to also give back knowledge and information that needs to be shared. I see this project as creating temporary autonomy zone in the system of institution, a system of collective experience and experiment instead of individual showcase.
Time: to be negotiated – approximately between 15th of July 2010 and 15th August 2010.
Place: ContentArt gallery, Berlin, other locations are optional.
Proposed time-line: (to be changed and discussed according to work flow and interests)
Now: opening mailing list in accordance to people invited
trough February: discussion on methods and goals and WHY
trough March: proposing action and discussing them
trough April: proposing on-line software that would suit virtual participation, discussing and tryouts
trough May: propose activities – skill sharing – discuss needs, equipment etc
trough June: finalize time-line for actual event
July – August: event
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 3rd, 2010
- Category: Diagrams-methodology, Funding, Ideas and brainstorming
- Comments: None
Connections of funders, production and public
If autonomous art system is envisioned, than a valid question is where the money comes from and how it influences a project. In this diagram a positive way to give back value to the public for their tax collected money is drawn. Giving back to the public trough involving them inthe project or giving information on how to and creating space for workshops where knowledge transfer is happening are some of the options.
What is in question here is how to negotiate and how to recognize positions of systems that apply for funding: what is agenda of their system, what is systems background? Simply, are they following structure that funder requires to obtain funds or is their focus to retur public welth in the sphere of public.
- Author: GentleJunk
- Published: Feb 1st, 2010
- Category: Diagrams-methodology, Ideas and brainstorming
- Comments: None
TI event interdependancies diagram
A diagram of ART01 operations, interdependencies and solutions for organizing TI 2010 event – relations put to visible.