--

circulating contexts

curating
COVER
media / net / art
1
Edited by CONT3XT.NET (Sabine HOCHRIESER, Michael KARGL, Franz THALMAIR),
Vienna 2007
Editorial coordination by Franz THALMAIR
Design by Ulrike OSTERMANN (http://www.fr-ost.com)
Contributions by Penny Leong BROWNE, Yueh Hsiu Giffen CHENG, CONT3XT.NET,
Ursula ENDLICHER, John J. FRANCESCUTTI, Jeremy HIGHT, G. H. HOVAGIMYAN,
Ela KAGEL, Joasia KRYSA, LeisureArts, Eva MORAGA, Scott RETTBERG, Duncan
SHINGLETON, Luis SILVA, David UPTON, xDxD xD
Proofreading by Astrid STEINBACHER
Translations by Erika DOUCETTE
-- "Extended Curatorial Practices on the Internet"
-- "TAGallery--Meta/Collections of Meta/Data"
ISBN: 978-3-8370-0880-7
If not indicated otherwise: This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribu-
tion 3.0 License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licen-
ses/by/3.0 or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San
Francisco, California, 94105, USA.
Printed by: Books on Demand GmbH, Norderstedt [Herstellung und Verlag]

[Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbi-

bliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte
bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.]
CONTENTS

introduction
006 Extended Curatorial Practices on the Internet

models
020 LX 2.0--On Contemporary Art Galleries and Internet Art
025 Kurator Software: Version Beta 1.0 (2007)
033 TAGallery--Meta/Collections of Meta/Data

discussions
054 Visualising Workflows and (Filtering) Processes
059 Virtual/Real Representations in Real/Virtual Spaces
065 Facing Participation/The Lack of Collaboration
068 Web 2.0--Curatorial Facilities or Technical Barriers
070 Involvement of (Art) Institutions/The Rise of Significance

theories
076 The Aesthetics of Collaborative Creation on the Internet
084 Curating Ambiguity--Electronic Literature
092 Relational Aesthetics in Curating Internet-Based Art
102 Web 2.0 and "Looping-Passing" Curatorship
112 Real and Virtual: Curatorial Practices and Artistic Aesthetics

resources
128 Texts and Essays
135 Books and Readers
137 New Media Art and Curatorial Resources
4
 --
introduction

curating
media / net / art
5
Extended Curatorial Practices
on the Internet
By CONT3XT.NET
(Sabine Hochrieser, Michael Kargl, Franz Thalmair)

Curating Internet-based Art in a media of its own developed into a

multifaceted communication process on content among users of all
backgrounds and provenances.

Net curators are deemed "cultural context providers" (1) "meta

artists" (2), "power users" (3), "filter feeders" (4) or simply "proactive
consumers" (5). "Curating (on) the Web" (6), as Steve Dietz, founder
of the New Media Initiative at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis,
termed it in 1998, not only creates a public space for Net Art
protagonists, but also enables them to participate in creating their
own public space, which often takes on the form of discursive models.
Handling technological developments and knowledge about existing
channels of communication are integral parts of Internet curating, as
are providing resources, initiating collaborations and remaining in
contact with international networks.

Expanding the curators' field of action--allowing them to incorporate

more than the supervision, contextualisation and exhibition of
artworks in museums, galleries or off spaces--is closely linked to
the media-specific characteristics of art produced on the Internet.
Internet Art does not necessarily have to be presented in a customary
exhibition space, because as long as there is a computer with Internet
access, it can be accessed anywhere any time. In many cases, Net
Art emerges through the participation of an audience with diverse
approaches to the Internet, which comments on, transforms and
disseminates artworks in many different ways. In addition, the
somewhat rather communicative mechanisms on which this art is
based are simultaneously its subject, thus allowing it to function as
a reciprocal "feedback loop" (7) between the original author and the
user. In the 20th century, the numerous postulations on the end of
authorship and the end of concept of the "work of art" as a definable
entity with a definable set of limits (Werkbegriff) gave way to a
discourse--which, in turn, is constituted through its own development
and reception processes--as they also accompany the advancement
and visualisation of these very processes. In this vein, curators are
those "who set up contexts for artists who provide contexts" (2).

6
In contrast to the late 1990s when Internet-based Art was celebrated
as avant-garde spectacles, today Technology-based Art views for
the attention of a broader public interested in art. Higher demands
are made on curators to include these art forms in conventional
exhibitions, which simultaneously poses several problems: "curating
immateriality" (8), a term postulated a few years ago, is faced with
immense technological challenges (9) and at present theoretical
groundwork is being laid for providing ways of addressing
Technology-based Art that extends beyond viewing it as "Techno
Art" and the tacit implication that "the medium is the message" (10).

The goal of the project "circulating contexts--CURATING MEDIA/

NET/ART" was to focus on the problems of curatorial work
being located at the interface between representational space and
presentational forms of traditional art formats, in the Computer Art
ghettos as well as in the realm of Electronic Art, Net and Media Art.
This project is based on an interdisciplinary approach, is applying and
using experimental methods, and is comprised of three projects that
are compiled for presentation in this publication. The projects are the
information platform [PUBLIC] CURATING (http://publiccurating.
blogspot.com) [image, p. 15], the exhibition"space" TAGallery (http://
del.icio.us/TAGallery) [image, p. 16] and the mailing list [CC] (http://
lists.subnet.at/mailman/listinfo/cc) [image, p. 17], which all address the
point of juncture between virtual solutions and real world problems.
A call for papers resulted in supplementary essays by theorists
reflecting on the present state of the debate on curating Internet Art,
particularly since the emergence of the so-called Web 2.0. These
essays are presented in this publication, too.

[PUBLIC] CURATING is an ongoing research project collecting

methods, resources, and theories concerning the changing conditions
of curatorial practices on the Web. The weblog, set up in November
2006, is a database of international curating projects, theoretical
approaches, and a resource for curatorial platforms, art-databases
and contemporary ways of the so-called New Media curating. The
second project is TAGallery, an experimental "online-exhibition-
room" based upon social Internet technologies and folksonomy. It is
an alternative space for collaborative curating and cooperation, based
upon linking and tagging. Thought as the basic method to create a
freely accessible and modular network of personal associations on the
World Wide Web, TAGallery extends the idea of a tagged exhibition
and transfers the main tasks of non-commercial exhibition-spaces

7
to the discourse of an electronic data space. Last but not least, the
third part of "circulating contexts--CURATING MEDIA/NET/ART"
is a slightly moderated discussion list named [CC] and temporarily
run from 1 June to 31 August 2007. During this period, five common
topics concerning the curation of New Media and Internet Art were
the starting point for discussions lead by the participants. Excerpts
of the contributions to the mailing list are published in the catalogue
as well.

The basis for each of the project parts was the development of several
questions that simultaneously functioned as a point of departure for
the mailing list [CC].

Visualising Workflows and (Filtering) Processes

Curating on the Internet is a working process that wants to be

visualised in the same way as the processes frequently hidden behind
Internet-based Art. The curator, "who does not want to get 'inside' or
'outside' the system, but stays at her place to deepen her knowledge"
(11), acts not only as an intermediary in the presentation of art
but also according to his/her own filtering processes, choices and
decisions. The transparency of his/her work is highly relevant for the
transparency of the presented artworks, too, and aims to get a broad
public involved in a collective discourse.

"With the steady incorporation of the Web into the mainstream arts
scene, the launching of exhibitions and the building of archives has
become an increasingly creative and authorial practice. However,
the act of curating used to be a clandestine affair. Those holding the
position would have once worked quietly within the institutional
archives, orchestrating their exhibitions anonymously from 'behind
the curtain', but now in the past ten to fifteen years the process of
curating and the person who practices it have emerged center stage
in public discourse" (12).

Metaphorically speaking, the constant and ongoing publication of a

"curator's notebook" contributes to the visualisation of a workflow
that does not only show the final results of this process in form of
an exhibition. It unfolds the existence of a network of non-linear
thoughts, relational research and deductive/inductive (filtering)
processes.

8
-- Which useful methods of visualisation of a "curator's notebook"
exist?
-- Is the curator in "danger of losing reputation" by publishing his/her
working methods?
-- Which benefits does the exhibition viewer get by taking a look at
(or even contributing to) the curatorial process?
-- Could an exhibition be completely replaced by the display of the
curating processes?

Virtual/Real Representations in Real/Virtual Spaces

It is easier to get an entire museum collection on the Internet than to

get a single exhibition of Internet Art in a museum space. Provided
that there is a computer with Internet access, Net Art can be viewed at
any time and any location and therefore can be left in its own medium
of production. But even if Internet-based Art does not require to be
exhibited in the traditional context of museums, galleries or off-
spaces, curators have to find ways to present this kind of virtuality in
real spaces and transform them into a "living information space that
is open to interferences" (13). The chance to be shown in museum
contexts raises the importance of a whole genre.

In return, the exhibiting of traditional art collections "is not only

accommodated by the spatial realisation of architectural spaces
any longer. Increasingly influential is the way that the design of
an extended typology of spaces, including the Internet, structure
creative practices" (14) and rises the chance to get a broader audience
and a more effective discourse, abstaining from conventional forms
of display.

"Like the best exhibition publications, extending an exhibition online

means more than simply re-presenting it but also reformatting it for
the best possible experience in the medium--in front of a computer
screen, transmitted via the Internet" (15), and the other way around.

-- What are the possibilities to show Internet Art in a conventional

art space that go beyond simply putting a computer in the hall?
-- How can a museum be reformatted?
-- How far can the curator go and transform the display of the artefact
without violating its autonomy?
-- In how far can an active discourse influence the representation of
Internet-based Art in exhibition spaces?

9
Facing Participation/The Lack of Collaboration

Not everyone is always participating in everything. Curators "whose

practice includes facilitating events, screenplayings, temporary
discursive situations, writing/publishing, symposia, conferences,
talks, research, the creation of open archives, and mailing lists"
(16), need to know about how to activate and motivate a potential
audience for collaboration. However, the needs of the audience are
as diverse as "Net Art's audience is a social medley: geographically
dispersed, varying in background, these art enthusiasts are able to
involve their involvement constantly, drawing from roles such as
artist, critic, collaborator or 'lurker' (one who just watches or reads,
without participating)" (17) .

-- What are the premises for being able to motivate the public to
participate in the curatorial process?
-- Does the potential participant need to have a benefit (e.g. co-
authorship) to be encouraged to participate?
-- Are there any emergency plans if nobody is participating?

Web 2.0--Curatorial Facilities or Technical Barriers

The hype about the so-called Web 2.0 and its facilities is still
unbroken. In the context of representing and contextualising art
on the Internet, Joseph Beuys' message "Everyone is an artist" can
be transferred to the person of a curator, too: "When we begin to
share our experiences of exhibited artefacts with other people on
the Internet, we are producing for public use. For instance, we may
write about an exhibition on our weblog; post photos about 'The Last
Supper' on Flickr; or add to a Wikipedia article" (5).

Total democracy and freedom in usability--often preached with

the token "2.0"--are not appropriate for everyone. It "counters the
technological fetishism and media exclusivity that surrounds too
much Computer-based Art and informs many curatorial practices in
the field; and it points beyond a common but nonetheless misguided
and shallow linkage of techno-formalism and techno-avant-gardism
(this is the new art and it looks like nothing before it because it uses
New Media)" (18).

To prevent cooperation and interaction-enhancing tools from being

simple technological tools, a social network that interacts with them

10
"needs to be able to connect. It needs to allow for co-ownership of
others in its activities. An insistence in exclusive ownership in an
inter-communal collaboration kills the motivation of co-participants.
It destroys a sense of cooperation and trust" (16).

-- Where are the boundaries of Web 2.0 in curatorial activities?

-- Should every new tool be immediately adapted for curatorial
activities?
-- What are the premises for a reflective use of Web 2.0 in the
curatorial processes?

Involvement of (Art) Institutions/The Rise of Significance

The concept of what is traditionally understood as curating is

still bound to the institution of the museum and other equivalent
exhibition spaces--and so is not only the image of curating but
also its mode: "In its evolution since the 17th Century, [curating]
centers itself around the 'expert' opinion of the curator as educated
connoisseur and archivist of various works. In so doing, the curator
determines the works' cultural value, as well as, in present days, their
mass entertainment value, which is equally important in the era of
ubiquitous free market democracy (at least in most of the Western
world)" (19). Contrary to the work of a curator on the Internet,
it is frequently ignored that "the global network itself became
the educational environment for those without direct access to
institutions. The involvement in free and open projects, from where
the power user not only builds up reputation, but also gains crucial
skills, can easily equal the value of an academic degree" (11).

Problematic within the separation between real and Virtual Art

(collecting, curating, etc.) is that neither museums and their
protagonists nor the visitors of the institutions recognise the value
of Internet-based Art, its working processes and the possibilities of
applying it within the museum itself.

In the context of New Media Art, the metaphor of the Internet as

a huge archive can be referred to the tasks of museums and other
traditional art collections: "The discursivity of multimedia, and how
it can be associated with dialectical aesthetics, is characterised by the
ways in which montage-like spatial juxtaposition--achieved through
hyperlink structures and searchability--is drawn upon for narrative
effect. The functionality of links and databases extends upon already

11
existing tabular, classificatory forms, such as the collection archive,
catalogue, and methods of spatial arrangement in galleries--all
technologies intimately associated with the historical evolution of the
museum. Adopting a museological aesthetics that understands, and is
more effectively calibrated to digital communication technologies will
see the museum emphasised as a machine for creating juxtaposition,
a generator of conditions for dialogical encounters with the
unforeseen (enabling, even privileging, the experience of surprise,
the unexpected and perhaps the random)" (14). The ongoing neglect
of the those similarities leads to the fact that "a broader art audience
may still place more trust in the selection, and therefore validation,
undertaken by a prestigious museum, but in the online environment,
the only signifier of validation may be the brand recognition carried
by the museum's name" (13).

-- Is it really necessary to have an institution in the background in

order to gain a better reputation as a curator?
-- How can institutions be convinced about the advantages of working
with New Media Art and addressing a public that goes beyond the
common art scene?

--

Authors' Biographies
CONT3XT.NET is a Vienna-based organisation founded in 2006 as a collaborative
platform for the discussion and presentation of issues related to Media Art. Against the
background of an interdisciplinary theoretical approach to all forms of communications
technologies, its mission is the critical investigation and documentation of relevant
tendencies in contemporary art production. CONT3XT.NET works both online and offline
and regularly offers news and announcements as well as initiatives developed by its
members in collaboration with artists, theorists, curators, writers and other Media Art
affiliated people. The organisation was founded by Sabine Hochrieser, Michael Kargl
(a.k.a. Carlos Katastrofsky) and Franz Thalmair.

Sabine Hochrieser was born in Steyr (Austria) in 1975. She studied "Art History" and
"English Philology" at the University of Salzburg with special focus on "Knowledge
Management within Cultural Activities". Amongst others, she works as an exhibition
organiser, translator and project coordinator in Vienna.

Michael Kargl (a.k.a. Carlos Katastrofsky) was born in Hall (Austria) in 1975. He
studied "Sculpture" at the University Mozarteum Salzburg with special focus on "Virtual
Architecture and Cyberspace". He is a professional Media artist and, amongst others, he
works as an art mediator and lecturer in Vienna.

12
Franz Thalmair was born in Wels (Austria) in 1976. He studied "Romance Philology"
and "Linguistics" at the University of Salzburg with special focus on "Sociolinguistics and
Semiotics". Amongst others, he works as a freelance writer within the cultural field and as
a communications manager for museums in Vienna.

Notes/References/Links
(1) Scholz, Trebor (2006): "Curating New Media Art", http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/
idc/2006-April/001439.html [on July 26, 2007].

(2) Scholz, Trebor (2006): "Curating New Media Art", http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/

idc/2006-April/001444.html [on July 26, 2007].

(3) Schulz, Pit (2006): "The Producer as Power User", http://www.nettime.org/Lists-

Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00136.html [on July 26, 2007].

(4) Schleiner, Anne-Marie (2003): "Fluidities and Oppositions among Curators, Filter
Feeders and Future Artists", http://www.intelligentagent.com/archive/Vol3_No1_curation_
schleiner.html [on July 26, 2007].

(5) Mutanen, Ulla Maaria (2006): "On Museums and Web 2.0", http://ullamaaria.typepad.
com/hobbyprincess/2006/06/museums_and_web.html [on July 26, 2007].

(6) Dietz, Steve (1998): "Curating (on) the Web", http://www.archimuse.com/mw98/

papers/dietz/dietz_curatingtheweb.html [on July 26, 2007].

(7) Burke, Alex (2005): "Artwork and Audience: Art in the Public Domain", in: Fowle,
Kate / Aslan, Shane (eds.) (2005): "Curating Now 05", California College of the Arts
MA Program in Curatorial Practice, San Francisco, http://sites.cca.edu/curatingarchive/
archive/CuratingNow05.pdf, p. 28 [on July 26, 2007].

(8) Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2006): "Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age
of Network Systems", DATA Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York.

(9) During a lecture in the Museum Moderner Kunst (MUMOK) in Vienna on 27 May
2007, Christiane Paul mentioned, for example, problems concerning the maintenance
of technical devices built into installations or of the extreme demands made on video
projectors that have to compete with daylight in exhibition spaces. See a documentation
of this lecture at http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/en/department/bildwissenschaft/
veranstaltungen/telelectures/archiv/index.php [on July 26, 2007].

(10) McLuhan, Marshall (1994): "Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man", The MIT
Press, Cambridge/Massachusetts, pp. 7-21.

(11) Schultz, Pit (2006): "The Producer as Power User", in: Cox, Geoff / Krysa, Joasia
(eds.) (2005): "Engineering Culture: On 'The Author as (Digital) Producer'", DATA Browser
vol. 3, Autonomedia. Brooklyn/New York, pp. 111-127.

(12) Williams, Alena (2002): "Net Art and Process", http://switch.sjsu.edu/nextswitch/

switch_engine/front/front.php?artc=99 [on July 26, 2007].

13
(13) Paul, Christiane (2006): "Flexible Contexts, Democratic Filtering and Computer-
Aided Curating", in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2006): "Curating Immateriality: The Work of the
Curator in the Age of Network Systems", DATA Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/
New York, pp. 81-103.

(14) Dziekan, Vince (2005): "Beyond the Museum Walls: Situating Art in Virtual Space
(Polemic Overlay and Three Movements)", http://journal.fibreculture.org/issue7/issue7_
ver2_Beyond%20the%20Museum%20Walls.pdf [on July 26, 2007].

(15) Dietz, Steve (1998): "Curating (on) the Web", http://www.archimuse.com/mw98/

papers/dietz/dietz_curatingtheweb.html [on July 26, 2007].

(16) Scholz, Trebor (2006): "The Participatory Challenge", in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2006):
"Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age of Network Systems", DATA
Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York, pp. 189-209.

(17) Greene, Rachel (2004): "Internet Art", Thames & Hudson, London, p. 31.

(18) Lillemose, Jacob (2005): "Some Preliminary Notes towards a Conceptual Approach
to Computer-based Art", http://www.digitaalplatform.be/php/cat_items3.php?cur_
id=913&cur_cat=204&main_cat=119 [on July 26, 2007].

(19) Lichty, Patrick (2003): "Reconfiguring the Museum. Electronic Media and Emergent
Curatorial Models", http://www.intelligentagent.com/archive/Vol3_No1_curation_lichty.
html [on July 26, 2007].

14
CONT3XT.NET, "[PUBLIC] CURATING _____ methods resources theories" (2006)
http://publiccurating.blogspot.com

15
CONT3XT.NET, "TAGallery" (2007)
http://del.icio.us/TAGallery

16
CONT3XT.NET, "[CC] mailing list" (2007)
http://lists.subnet.at/mailman/listinfo/cc

17
18
--
models

curating
media / net / art
19
LX 2.0--On Contemporary Art
Galleries and Internet Art
By Luis Silva

LX 2.0 [image, p. 26] is a curatorial project developed by "Lisboa 20

Arte Contemporânea" (1), a commercial Contemporary Art gallery
based in Lisbon. LX 2.0 is one of the direct consequences of the
regular program presented by "The Upgrade! Lisbon" (2), a monthly
gathering of New Media artists, curators and interested people, also
held at Lisboa 20.

Extremely interested in the possibilities of the digital medium (and

by its contemporary touch) the gallery's director has shown great
interest in creating the gallery's New Media branch. Because of
extreme physical constraints (only one room allocated for the regular
exhibition program), it was decided to create an online platform
through which Lisboa 20 would commission, display and archive
online (Internet Art) projects.

The first commissioned artists were Santiago Ortiz (3) (with the
project "NeuroZappingFolks"), Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY
INDUSTRIES (4) (with the project "Manhã dos Mongolóides--
Morning of the Mongoloids") and Carlos Katastrofsky (5) (with the
project "Last Wishes"). Besides commissioning new works created by
artists who have been developing a relevant work in exploring the
Internet as an artistic medium, LX 2.0 will also, gradually, create a
database of links to different resources, like artists' sites, exhibitions,
platforms, publications, and readings, in order to contextualise
and allow for a theoretical background for these works and their
underlying discourse.

Even though being a traditional concept in the New Media Art field,
a feature clearly stated in the project definition, it constitutes a unique
exercise in the Portuguese artistic landscape.

It aims at achieving a double goal, on the one hand, to bring awareness

to the online medium in the Portuguese "institutional" art scene
(more than being a partnership with a gallery, LX 2.0 is as part of the
gallery as one of its regular exhibitions), educating and informing the
audience about New Media Art and its underlying discourse but also,
at the same time, to become a relevant project from a global point

20
of view--despite being a small-scale project, based in a peripheral
country with little history in New Media Art.

If at a first glance LX 2.0 seems a traditional online project, featuring

new art works and linking to various resources, a closer look brings
awareness that it is everything but conventional. As it was already
mentioned, it is a small peripheral project aiming at becoming a global
reference for the international New Media community, but most
importantly, it is an online curating exercise done by a traditional,
commercial space, a Contemporary Art gallery.

Common sense indicates that commercial, or simply more traditional

spaces have an almost religious belief in the impossibility of dealing
with New Media Art, especially its more extreme version, Internet Art.
This situation occurs simply because traditional exhibition venues
(either commercial, like galleries, or institutional, like museums and
art centres) are running on the White Cube ideology. This White
Cube model, a recent development in art history, dating to the 20th
century, is nothing but a hegemonic ideology that prescribes the
correct way of showing art within an institutional context. But being
an ideology, and thus a social construct, it bears no absolute value in
itself.

A commercial gallery mainly tends to show only artworks that fit

into this exhibition paradigm, or into its more recent upgrade, the
Black Box. The reason for this to happen is partly due to the fact that
the gallery has to sell the works in order to function. These are the
two main reasons for the lack of acknowledgement of New Media Art
from the institutional art world. And these are the two main features
that LX 2.0 is not only ignoring, but trying to oppose and demystify.

It is a project created by a space that operates within the White Cube

ideology, a gallery, but a space that recognises that the White Cube
is nothing but an ideology and that process-driven, time-based
artworks are calling for new exhibition paradigms. Each new project
LX 2.0 commissions is launched at the gallery's physical space, at
the same time that a regular exhibition opens. Invitation cards state
both the new opening and the online project launch. LX 2.0 is as
much part of the gallery as the shows taking place in the physical
space, but it exists only online. LX 2.0 is also a non-commercial
project belonging to a commercial space, a traditional Contemporary
Art gallery. Commercial galleries need to sell, but they also have a

21
cultural role to take. Having that in mind, it was defined, since the
very beginning, that LX 2.0 wouldn't be a commercial project. It
didn't make sense to try to sell online artworks, and it would also
mean the failure of the project from the very beginning. Instead, it
was decided that the project would be financed by the commercial
side of the gallery, which was, to some extent, a conscious critical
statement: it is the sale of traditional artworks, such as Painting,
Sculpture, Photography, Installation, or the like, that finances LX 2.0
and allows it to commission new, unsaleable works of Online Art.

NeuroZappingFolks
Santiago Ortiz
http://www.lisboa20.pt/lx20/proj/neurozapping

"NeuroZappingFolks" [image, p. 26] is a digital piece for the Internet.

The lack of interactivity of the work can be seen as a neurosis of the
application itself, simulating a frantic navigation through the Web,
in search of something unknown. The nucleus is constituted by an
algorithm gathering information from the popular website del.icio.us,
where thousands of users store (for themselves, but publicly) URLs
from other pages on the Internet, marking them with specific tags,
short words, functioning as labels, and thus giving the chosen link
some minimum amount of information. The same words (e.g. art,
sex, Internet, anime) are usually used by different people, allowing
for unexpected inter-relations between several sites.

"NeuroZappingFolks" is then a non-linear zapping through the Web,

a path leading to the inside of a Web of relations, a Web that can
be explored from one tag to a site to another tag to another site...
from word to image to word to image. "NeuroZappingFolks" is the
simulation of a brain lost in the Web (lost between servers, but also
lost in Internet's double identity: word and image).

Santiago Ortiz was born in Bogotá, Colombia, in 1975. Artist,

mathematician and researcher on art, science and representational
spaces, he explores the development of shared spaces for different
kinds of knowledge. Ortiz uses communication, creative, and literary
techniques, as well as digital architectural spaces. He works as a
teacher, lecturing all over Spain, Portugal and Latin America. He is
one of the co-founders of the Blank magazine and of the Bestiario
company-collective. He lives in Lisbon and Barcelona.

22
M0RNING 0F THE M0NG0L0IDS
Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES
http://www.yhchang.com/MANHA_DOS_MONGOLOIDES.html

For LX 2.0, Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES created

the Portuguese version of "M0RNING 0F THE M0NG0L0IDS"
[image, p. 27], the laughable, yet tragic (and extremely ironic) story
of a white man who wakes up after a night of drunken partying
to find himself no longer what he used to be. Without any motive
or underlying logic, the man wakes up and gradually realises he is
Korean. He looks Korean, he speaks Korean and he lives in Seoul,
when just the night before he was a white man living in a Western
country. The piece is a delightful insight on the prejudiced views
towards Asian cultures, and especially towards the Korean culture.
Not only are we faced with the main characters and stereotypes of
Asian people as he gradually comes to terms with the irreversible
change, but also are we Westerners confronted with our own biased
views of the rest of the world. It is us, not Asian people, who are being
ironically portrayed. It is a mirror-like device and it reproduces our
own prejudiced image of ourselves.

Almost ten years ago, in 1999, in a Net Art workshop in Brisbane,

Australia, Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES and Marc
Voge, a Korean artist and an American poet, were learning how to
work with Flash. Instead of fully mastering the digital tool, they
concentrated on two of its basic operations: making text show up on
the screen and adding music to an animation. These two features,
which they came to master after a couple of days, would define
Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES' artistic practice in
the years to come.

Reacting against interactivity as a distinctive feature of New Media

Art, and Internet Art in particular (the duo has openly shown their
dislike for interactivity, comparing interactive art to a Skinner box,
but without the reward given after the completion of the desired task),
this Seoul-based duo has created fast paced Flash movies combining
text and jazz music. Drawing inspiration from Concrete Poetry and
Experimental Film, they have narrated stories in various languages
such as Korean, Engish, Spanish, German, Japanese or Portuguese.

Their Net Art projects (if you are willing to compromise enough to
call them that) are stripped of everything usually associated with

23
the field: first of all, no interactivity whatsoever, no hidden buttons,
no hypertextual aesthetics, the narrative is as linear and closed as a
traditional novel, no graphics, no colours (black dominates, with a
few exceptions of blue and red), no photos, no gadgets at all. It is a
textual aesthetics that imposes itself through a Web browser window
and in which viewers are immersed in strong stories that everyone
understands and can relate to.

Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES is based in Seoul. Its

C.E.O is Young-hae Cha (Korea), its C.I.O. Marc Voge (U.S.A)

Last Wishes
Carlos Katastrofsky
http://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net/lastwishes.php

"Last Wishes" deals with the principles of communication. Mailinglists

are popular tools for the exchange of thoughts and opinions: they
make multiple (written) dialogues possible as well as the archiving
for future references. In this work the mailinglist-software "mailman"
is modified to allow only one single posting from a sender. The user is
able to subscribe and to receive messages endlessly but post only once
and by this immediately get unsubscribed. The idea of "exchange" is
thereby turned into something absurd: one can listen but only talk
once. Sending a message thus requires meaningful content, "chatting"
becomes impossible.

The ephemeral quality of this sending-process reminds of Zen-

qualities: be quiet and learn to listen but if you really have to say
something meaningful then talk. Above that, the question arises how
communication is possible when there is a quiet, listening mass and
no one dares to stand up and speak. According to a proverb talking
is silver and being quiet is gold. But being quiet only makes sense
within the process of communication.

Carlos Katastrofsky (http://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net) is an artist based in

Vienna (Austria). Born in 1975 he studied "Sculpture" and currently
works as artist, art mediator and lecturer. He is co-founder of the
organisation CONT3XT.NET (http://cont3xt.net) and netizen since
2002.

References: "Feeling lucky? Downloading as desired risk", http://

transition.turbulence.org/blog/2006/03/10/feeling-lucky-downloading-as-

24
a-desired-risk / "Digital Duchamp: Tagging as Readymade Art", http://
socialsoftware.weblogsinc.com/2005/11/19/digital-duchamp-tagging-
as-readymade-art / "Go for the Original, not the Copies", http://
vercodigofonte.blogspot.com/2005/11/go-for-original-not-copies.html

--

Author's Biography
Luis Silva studied "Social Sciences" and is now completing his MA on "Communication,
Culture and Information Technologies", and finishing a research project on Internet Art.
He has curated a few New Media exhibitions, namely "Online Portuguese Netart 1997-
2004", "Source Code" and "Sound Visions". In 2006 he created the Lisbon node of "The
Upgrade!", an international network of gatherings concerning art, technology and culture.
He is now curating LX 2.0, Lisboa 20 Arte Contemporânea's online program. Silva has
also been working as an independent writer, having published several reviews and texts
addressing the issues of art and technology for various publications, namely Turbulence's
"Networked_Performance", "Rhizome", "Furtherfield" and "newmediaFIX".

Notes/References/Links
(1) LX 2.0--Lisboa 20 Arte Contemporânea, http://www.lisboa20.pt/lx20 [on September
2, 2007].

(2) The Upgrade! Lisbon, http://www.lisboa20.pt/upgrade [on September 2, 2007].

(3) Santiago Ortiz, http://moebio.com/santiago [on September 2, 2007].

(4) Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES, http://www.yhchang.com [on September

2, 2007].

(5) Carlos Katastrofsky, http://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net [on September 2, 2007].

Kurator Software:
Version Beta 1.0 (2007)
By Joasia Krysa, Duncan Shingleton

kurator is an open source software application designed as an online

system for curating source code that can be further modified by
users. The project was developed in two stages, first in 2005 as version
beta 0.1 [images, p. 34] and subsequently in 2007 as version beta 1.0
[image, p. 35] by a team of programmers, artists, and curators (1).
The project speculates upon the production of curatorial software

25
Lisboa 20 Arte Contemporânea, "LX 2.0" (2007)
http://www.lisboa20.pt/lx20

Santiago Ortiz, "NeuroZappingFolks" (2007)

http://www.lisboa20.pt/lx20/proj/neurozapping

26
 carlos katastrofsky, "last wishes" (2007)
http://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net/lastwishes.php

Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES, "M0RNING 0F THE M0NG0L0IDS" (2007)

http://www.yhchang.com/MANHA_DOS_MONGOLOIDES.html

27
beyond a singular closed proprietary model to a collaborative open
source model as a platform for future public development.
The conceptual idea behind the project responds to a wider critical
concern of how open systems (i.e. communication networks such as
the Internet, information systems such as the computer connected
to the network, and online software) have changed the practice of
curating, and in particular how these changes impact upon a politics
of curating. Describing curating in terms of open systems implies a
state in which the system continuously interacts with its environment
demonstrating the characteristics of openness (2). In computer
systems, it refers to open software standards allowing open access and
distribution (originating in the late 1970s mainly to describe systems
based on Unix, and in turn Linux). In this sense, open systems stand
for the same working principles as open source.

The concern of the project is how power relations, control, and agency
(the power to act) are expressed in the contemporary forms that
curating takes, and offers, in the context of network technologies and
open systems. To apply and paraphrase Ned Rossiter's "Organized
Networks", the kurator project seeks to explore "conditions of
possibility, the immanent relation between theory and practice"
(often termed as praxis) and the potential of constructing open
transdisciplinary curatorial forms that "enlist the absolute force of
labour and life" (3).

The kurator project is experimental in that it merges the practices

of programming with curating, in order to challenge the privileged
role of the curator in the process of selection, contextualisation,
presentation, distribution, and collection of source code. It follows
the structures and protocols of traditional curating but "translates"
them into a series of program commands or rules. In this way, the
project implements a system that partly automates the curatorial
function as well as the sense of agency involved in the execution of
rules and the production of meanings.

Version 1.0 of kurator [image, p. 35] implements a system that--

in terms of programming language--is written mostly in PHP and
HTML, and has an open API (Application Programming Interface),
so that users can write or adapt software that directly queries the
data store (4). At the point of collecting content to the system,
there are two modes of "collecting" source code into the database
running in parallel: an open submission manual upload by users and

28
automatic "scraping" of the Internet by the Web crawler module. A
Web crawler (also referred to as a "Web spider" or "Web robot") is
a computer program or automated script that browses ("crawls")
the World Wide Web in a methodical, automated manner, without
human intervention (apart from the programmer), in order to find
information (5). In this way the system assures the continuous supply
of source code that is subsequently indexed and stored in an internal
code repository ("store" module). 

The source code of the kurator software itself is also included in the
system database. As with collecting, indexing is also programmed
to allow providing information about source code both submitted
manually by the users and automatically by the software. Automatic
indexing is implemented through a custom algorithm that searches
comments within the source code that programmers use to describe
the functionality of a section of code, and then tags keywords within
these comments, matching them against other comments present
in the repository. In this way, regardless of language type, source
codes that share similar processes are indexed, instead of matching
syntax within one project or language. Subsequently, users are able
to browse and search the code stored in the database, adding tags or
comments to projects, folders, files, or lines of code.  Users can assign
projects, folders, files, and lines of code to create displays or just mark
them for later use. Finally, the display module allows the creation of
thematic displays of source code assigned by individual users ("user
selection") in different ways such as chronologically, grouped by
author or by project, and so on. In addition to this, the "auto-kurator"
module generates displays by the kurator software itself from its own
database. As a result, the created displays (by users and by the auto-
kurator function) can be saved to the "archive", providing a growing
collection of examples of curated displays, including versions of
the modified kurator code itself.  A commenting system and API
for the display function is provided so that anyone can comment
on particular examples of created displays and retrieve data to be
displayed on external websites.

If the curatorial process can be broken down into a series of

commands or rules, then the software aims to extend these in an
unpredictable, unprescribed, and uncontrolled manner that accounts
for the openness of the system. The system is opened up to the
communicative processes of producers/users and to the divergent
exchanges that take place and that disrupt established social relations

29
of production and distribution. Thus, and importantly, the software
opens up curating to dynamic possibilities and transformations
beyond the usual institutional model (analogous to the model of
production associated with the industrial factory) into the context of
networks (and what the Autonomists refer to as the "social factory").

In this way, the argument is that the curatorial process is demonstrably

a collective and distributed executable that displays machinic agency.
Marina Vishmidt, in "Twilight of The Widgets", describes the project
as follows: "The kurator project draws on an affinity between code art
and curatorial praxis, to redevelop curating as a generative experiment
in social relations. [...] By displacing the curatorial function from
abstract subjective potential to binary code, it reproduces the singular
curator as a collective executable. In this way it preserves the curator
by exceeding the curator, the perfectly consistent paradox that any
art practice grounding its critique in both art-immanent and social
terms is structurally bound to enact" (6).

In this scenario, both the programmer and the curator are required to
act and demonstrate their understanding of the complexity of social
relations in open systems. This exemplifies a general line of thinking
about open source as a model for creative practice both in terms
of production and presentation--as encouraging collaboration and
further development of existing work on the level of contribution,
manipulation, and recombination, and its further release under the
same conditions in the public domain. This is a point also made by
Christiane Paul in her essay of 2006 "Flexible Contexts, Democratic
Filtering, & Computer-Aided Curating" in imagining how the
source code of any project might be made available to the public
for further expansion, outside of the proprietary concerns of the
curator or arts institution--as overtly open source curating. Paul
makes these principles apparent when she explains: "The idea of
open source--making the source code of a project/software available
to the public for further expansion without traditional proprietary
control mechanisms--could also be applied to the curatorial process.
This distributed, open source curation could be considered either in
a more metaphorical way, where exhibition concept and selection
become expandable by the audience; or in a narrower sense, where
curation unfolds with the assistance of open source software that can
be further developed by a community of interest" (7) (8).

Thinking about the curatorial process as involving other agencies and

30
integrated with software suggests the idea of "distributed software
curating"--a practice that is dynamic, collective, and redistributed in
terms of power relations and curatorial control, and one in which
software that is not simply used to curate but that demonstrates the
activity of curating in itself. Distributed software curating suggests
an engagement with instructions (the program) and the writing of
these instructions (programming) but also the other processes upon
which the program relies to run that includes the wider context or
operating system of art (program environment). Together this is both
a literal and metaphorical description of curating that recognises
the conditions within which it operates and becomes a dynamic
executable.

--

Authors' Biographies
Joasia Krysa is an independent curator and lecturer in "Art & Technology" at the University
of Plymouth, UK, teaching MA/MSc/MRes and BA/BSc Digital Art & Technology. She
is a graduate of Goldsmiths College, UK (Fine Art Administration and Curating, 1998),
University of Wroclaw, Poland (Cultural Studies, 1997), and University of Maria Curie-
Sklodowska in Lublin, Poland (Political Sciences, 1997). Her research interests include
the politics of curating in the context of software, network technologies and distributed
curatorial systems. In 2004, she founded the curatorial project "kurator" (http://www.kurator.
org) to produce public events, commissions, symposia, publications, and experimental
curatorial software. Recent projects include the conference "Curating, Immateriality,
Systems" (Tate Modern, London, 2005; http://www.tate.org.uk/onlineevents/archive/Cur
atingImmaterialitySystems), the anthology "Curating Immateriality" (Autonomedia, 2006;
http://www.data-browser.net/03) and curatorial online software kurator (2005, ongoing;
http://www.kurator.org/software).

She is co-editor of the DATA browser book series (Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York;
http://www.data-browser.net) and a member of the Council of Management for the
WRO Center for Media Art Foundation (Wroclaw, Poland; http://www.wrocenter.pl). She
has lectured internationally at venues including ARCO International Contemporary Art
Experts Forum (Madrid, Spain 2007), Piet Zwart Institute (Rotterdam, The Netherlands
2006), Tate Modern and Tate Britain (London, UK 2005), and Centro de Artes Digitais
Atmosferas (Lisbon, Portugal 2005) and WRO Media Art Biennale (2003 and 2007). She
was a recent jury member for the ARCO / Beep New Media Art Awards 2007 (Madrid,
Spain; http://www.arco.beep.es) and the Piemonte Share Festival 2007 (Share Prize,
Torino, Italy; http://www.toshare.it/), and is currently involved in number of curatorial
projects including development of the "Curatorial Network" (http://www.curatorial.net)
with Arts Council England (UK).

31
Duncan Shingleton (http://www.shingleton.org) is a Digital artist and recent graduate of
the Institute of Digital Art and Technology, University of Plymouth (UK). He is involved
with various organisations including the "Ludic Society" (http://www.ludic-society.net),
"kurator" (http://www.kurator.org/), and "i-DAT" (http://www.i-dat.org). He has a special
interest in the creative applications of RFID technologies, and his work has been
presented at "Social Hacking 07" (Plymouth, UK) and "DEAF 07" (Rotterdam). His
paper "Ludic Society Tagged City Play: Judgement Day for 1st Life Game Figures. A
locative REAL PLAY in RFID implants and mobile game maps in a real city", co-written
with Margarete Jahrmann and Max Moswitzer, is shortlisted for this year's Digital Games
Research Association International Conference (2007) in Tokyo.

Notes/References/Links
(1) The project development team is: Grzesiek Sedek (Wimbledon School of Arts, UK),
Duncan Shingleton, Joasia Krysa with further contribution from Adrian Ward (Signwave,
UK), Geoff Cox (UoP, UK) and George Grinsted. The project was funded by Arts Council
England, with additional support from the University of Plymouth (UK). "kurator" (beta
version 0.1) was first launched in conjunction with "Curating, Immateriality, Systems"
conference (Tate Modern, London, 4 June 2005) (http://www.tate.org.uk/onlineevents/
archive/CuratingImmaterialitySystems). Subsequently, it was included as part of "C0de
0f practice season" at Tate Modern (4 June - 31 September 2005) (http://www.tate.org.
uk/onlineevents/archive/code_of_practice/ & http://www.tate.org.uk/contact/forums/
onlineevents); presented in conjunction with the launch of "Online Portuguese Net Art
1997 - 2004" (curated by Luis Silva) at Atmosferas Centro de Artes Digitais (Lisbon,
June 2005) (http://www.atmosferas.net/netart/conferencia_en.htm) and at the "Open
Congress" event (part of NODE.London Season of Media Arts) at Tate Britain (London,
October 2005) (http://opencongress.omweb.org/modules/wakka/Krysa), and as part of
"Software Studies" workshop at Piet Zwart Institute (Rotterdam, February 2006) (http://
pzwart.wdka.hro.nl/mdr/Seminars2/softstudworkshop).

(2) In fact, systems are neither open nor closed but demonstrate tendencies towards
one or other state. Summarising from various entries in Wikipedia, itself an example
of and an approach in keeping with open systems, the concept was first developed in
thermodynamics, then systems theory, but now is also applied in the social sciences
to indicate a process that exchanges material, people, capital and information with its
environment. For more on open systems, see and follow links from: http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Open_system_%28systems_theory%29

(3) Rossiter, Ned (2006): "Organised Networks: Media Theory, Creative Labour, New
Institutions", Institute of Network Cultures, NAi Publishers, Rotterdam, p.17.

(4) PHP (a recursive acronym for "PHP: Hypertext Preprocessor") is a programming

language used mainly in server-side scripting, but can be used from a command line
interface or in standalone graphical applications. See: http://www.php.net - HTML
(Hypertext Markup Language) is the predominant markup language for webpages.

32
API (Application Programming Interface) is a source code interface that a computer
application, operating system or library provides to support requests for services to be
made of it by a computer program.

(5) For an extended definition of "Web crawler", see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_

crawler

(6) Vishmidt, Marina (2006): "Twilight of the Widgets", in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2006):
"Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age of Network Systems", DATA
Browser vol 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York, pp. 81-103.

(7) Paul, Christiane (2006): "Flexible Contexts, Democratic Filtering, & Computer-Aided
Curating", in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2006): "Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator
in the Age of Network Systems", DATA Browser vol 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York,
pp. 81-103.

(8) An interesting example of such an approach in which "open source" becomes a

metaphor for curatorial process is "Open Source Museum of Open Source Art (OSMOSA)"
in the virtual world of Second Life project by group of students from Brown University (US,
2007). Located in Second Life's Eson region the "museum" features artworks that "anyone
can copy, modify, alter or otherwise contribute to" and so the museum itself is open to
alteration. The authors of the project explain: "By 'open source', we mean that OSMOSA
is in the public domain: visitors can add, modify, and remove art from the museum. In
addition, the OSMOSA building is also open source, in that anyone can modify, add to,
or delete parts of the structure". They continue: "We are enabling a community of people
who are interested in producing, transforming, and sharing work within this domain. We
chose Second Life as a platform for our project because no equivalent environment
exists". Open Source Museum of Open Source Art (OSMOSA) in Second Life: http://
www.3pointd.com/20070427/open-source-museum-opens-in-second-life

[This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. To view

a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0 or send a letter to Creative

Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.]

TAGallery--meta/collections of
Meta/data
By CONT3XT.NET
(Sabine Hochrieser, Michael Kargl, Franz Thalmair)

The most basic method of generating a freely accessible, modular

network of personal associations on the World Wide Web is to
create a link and thereby forge a relationship between two or more
contents. In the meantime, producing new fields of context through
33
"kurator software, version beta 0.1" (2005)
http://www.kurator.org/wiki/main/read/Home

34
Duncan Shingleton, "kurator version 1.0", code extracts from upload with auto-kurator
indexing algorithm (2007)

"kurator production diagram, version beta 1.0" (2007)

35
reciprocal referencing via links to homepages, blogs, databases and
artworks has grown to become one of the most common artistic
practices on the Internet. Yet, links are not only an element that
provides a structure for the hypertextuality on the Internet and thus
simultaneously serve as a multidimensional system of reference. Links
also function as tools for remixing existing content, as a simplified
way of copying and pasting and--particularly in the context of New
Media and Information-based Art--as a meaning-generating entity
that plays a part in understanding cultural work on the Internet.
Thus, we "define the remix as the process of understanding a body
of knowledge by using technology to rearrange and recontextualise
its elements in order to construct an original narrative. [...] This
remix or digitally constructivist approach--that of constructing our
own narratives through surfing, searching, tagging and sharing--is
becoming the dominant means by which we consume media, learn
and communicate in an Internet-driven information age" (1).

What Happens when the Link Simultaneously Becomes the Re-

presentative of the Artwork, the Context, and the Exhibition?

At the beginning of 2007, CONT3XT.NET, a platform for presentation

of Internet-based Art and the corresponding name for this discourse,
TAGAllery, was set up as a del.icio.us account. Del.icio.us is a social
tagging platform, a simple Web 2.0 tool with limited functions for
administrating Internet sites using links. These personal yet often
publicly accessible link lists are interlinked among the network of
users, who provide keywords and short summaries for the links. "The
'social' in social tagging comes from being able to view and share
resources with other users of the system. For example, in del.icio.us, as
soon as a user assigns a tag to an item, she sees the number of people
who have also bookmarked the site, as well as the cluster of items
carrying the same tag, and any additional tags that other people have
used to describe the site" (2). The main premise for using a del.icio.
us account for curating is the concept of the "tagged exhibition" (3),
which transfers the imagery and work methods of non-commercial
exhibition spaces into a discursive electronic data space.

"Tagging" is a method that enables different artworks to be assigned

to singular or multiple thematic positions and visualised on different
levels. Keywords, which are put together in clusters to form keyword
groups, heighten the readability and possibilities for interpreting the
artwork and exhibition space. In this process, those who tag and the

36
"gallery visitors" engage in a dialogue with the artwork "that offers
a way for people to connect directly with works of art, to own them
by labelling or naming them--one of the aspects of sense-making"
(2). A specific characteristic and challenge for curating Web-
based Art is the performative and/or process-oriented character of
many pieces, which increases the difficulty of presenting them in
real exhibition spaces. Altered conditions for art production and
reception on the Internet have not only changed the art itself but
also the curating praxis and subsequently the task of the curator
that now also calls for process-oriented forms of representation. In
contrast to traditional gallery spaces, the TAGallery not only offers
chronological showrooms, semantically thick exhibition titles and
various approaches to contextualising the artwork, but also makes
the act of selecting and compiling the artwork public. The ongoing
curatorial process is accessible via newsfeed, which designates a
separate space in which to reflect these processes.

The Internet as a Museum Laboratory--Between Production and

Presentation

In general, the TAGallery understands itself and the possibilities it

offers as a laboratory and workshop for visualising "artistic processes-
-initiated by the curator--that take place in the form of interactions
between the work and the viewer". Therefore, the online gallery
simultaneously alludes to the altered conditions for art production
and reception and to the role of the museum within this process: "The
museum is no longer a static archive. It is a dynamic and socially
powerful institution. The museum's fundamental change from a
static presentational space to a dynamic production space has had
a further, decisive consequence on the museum as an institution,
addressed within the context of Beuys' idea of the museum in motion,
i.e. that it loses its permanent space" (4).

The structure of the medium Internet not only provides a space

for the production and presentation of art, it also contributes to
blurring the boundaries between production and presentation.
"The discursivity of multimedia and how it can be associated
with a dialectical aesthetic is characterised by the ways in which
montage-like spatial juxtaposition--achieved through hyperlink
structures and search-ability--is drawn upon for narrative effect. The
functionality of links and databases extends upon already existing
tabular, classificatory forms, such as the collection archive, catalogue,

37
and methods of spatial arrangement in galleries--all technologies
intimately associated with the historical evolution of the museum.
Adopting a museological aesthetic that understands, and is more
effectively calibrated to digital communication technologies, will see
the museum emphasised as a machine for creating juxtaposition, a
generator of conditions for dialogical encounters with the unforeseen
(enabling, even privileging, the experience of surprise, the unexpected
and perhaps the random)" (5).

The exhibition work on the TAGallery was to select different Internet

protagonists--curators, artists, bloggers and theorists--and to invite
them to work on tagging as a system and its use in curatorial processes.
The results of the first ten exhibitions are as diverse as the taggers
themselves. The selections range from variations of exhibitions that
tag "real" art in virtual spaces to conventional thematic exhibitions
to dialogues that reflect the curatorial process and play with the
imagery of the art gallery. In the following, three examples will be
introduced that are quintessential for the different approaches to
social bookmarking in the framework of curating Internet-based
Art: Ursula Englicher and Ela Kagel reflect their own curatorial
process through a dialogue in their exhibiton "003_link.of.thought_
thought.of.link"; in "Collection_of_collections." LeisureArts utilises
the TAGallery as a medium for creating meta-collections of art by
juxtaposing arbitrary collections of Internet-based content; and
finally, "I tag you tag me: a folksonomy of Internet Art" by Luis Silva,
curator of the Platform LX 2.0, questions the system of the TAGallery
as such, taking it to the point of absurdity.

--

Notes/References/Links
(1) Fisher, Matthew / Twiss-Garrity, Beth A. (2007): "Remixing Exhibits: Constructing
Participatory Narratives With On-Line Tools To Augment Museum Experiences", http://
www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/fisher/fisher.html [on August 4, 2007].

(2) Zollers, Alla (2007): "Emerging Motivations for tagging. Expression, Performance, and
Activism," http://www2007.org/workshops/paper_55.pdf [on August 4, 2007].

(3) Katastrofsky, Carlos (2005): "tagged exhibition - net/art?", http://blog.subnet.at/carlos/

stories/1853 [on August 4, 2007].

(4) Wall, Tobias (2006): "Das unmögliche Museum. Zum Verhältnis von Kunst und
Kunstmuseeum der Gegenwart", transcript, Bielefeld, p. 264.

38
(5) Dziekan, Vince (2005): "Beyond the Museum Walls: Situating Art in Virtual Space
(Polemic Overlay and Three Movements)", http://journal.fibreculture.org/issue7/issue7_
ver2_Beyond%20the%20Museum%20Walls.pdf [on July 26, 2007].

TAGallery_003_link.of.thought_thought.of.link...
http://del.icio.us/TAGallery/EXHIBITION_link.of.thought
By Ela Kagel and Ursula Endlicher

For TAGallery [images, p. 49/50] we were interested in applying the

format of our blog (http://curating-netart.blogspot.com)--a dialogue
between the two of us summarising and juxtaposing experiences/
venues/observations surrounding Net Art as well as Media and Digital
Arts at large--to the idea of curating. As we bounced back and forth
our thoughts, we were letting ourselves get inspired by the previously
mentioned context. We were introducing and debating Net Art,
physical or virtual locations as "gallery" space, or documentations
concerning Web-based questions, for this exhibition. This procedure
turned out to be quite intriguing, as over time, it could stimulate
more than one response, and form some kind of tree-structure.

It was important to us to keep a lively discussion open, and bring in a

variety of different works, artists, organisations and galleries. We were
interested in a brainstorming model, and in a spontaneous "blog"
model of curating where every thought leads to a new thread. Our
technique takes inspiration by exquisite-corpse by the Surrealists,
but plays it by its own rules. Instead of concealing the part that was
written, we used it as some sort of chain reaction, very much also,
again, like in threads and comments within a blog. Therefore, in our
curating model each collaborator adds sequentially a new choice of
links. Our focus is to link thoughts, while thinking of a new link...
Please note that this exhibition is basically a dialogue which is
ordered not according to the chronology but to the tagging system
of del.icio.us.

With projects by: UBERMORGEN.COM/Alessandro Ludovico/Paolo

Cirio, Jo-Anne Green/Helen Thorington, Aleksandra Domanovic/
Oliver Laric/Christoph Priglinger/Georg Schnitzer, Cornelia
Sollfrank, Eva Grubinger/Thomas Kaulmann, 0100101110101101.
org, Ruth Catlow/Marc Garrett, Graffiti Research Lab, Mushon Zer-
Aviv/Dan Phiffer

39
Ursula Endlicher: GRAFFITI ANALYSIS _ Graffiti Research Lab _
New Media in physical space _ 2004 _ http://ni9e.com/graffiti_analy-
sis.php

"These interventions you were talking about, in public space--which

includes any kind of public space, or public media, its layout and
content--are critical annotations on contemporary life, practice, and
politics, placed as 'tags' into our cultural landscape, which naturally
also includes online life and behaviour. I immediately was thinking of
'Graffiti Analysis', as one of my favourite works by Graffiti Research
Lab. In this piece they are using a 'capture device' for recording the
motions used when drawing a 'tag'. The analysed data is used to create
visualisations based on parameters such as speed and direction of the
initial drawing. Printouts of this 'digitised' motions are placed within
the urban environment, extending the notion of 'traditional' graffiti
into New Media. Additionally, whenever Graffiti Research Lab finds
posted graffiti by other artists in the streets, they photograph it and
put it up on their website to locate the artists who drew them to
invite them to be included in this project... I like the fact that they
refer to graffiti as 'tags' which I think makes a great addition to this
TAGallery project. :)" [to Graffiti_Analysis Graffiti_Research_Lab
2004 Exhibition_link.of.thought ... saved by 20 other people ... on
June 21]

Ela Kagel: SHIFTSPACE _ Mushon Zer-Aviv + Dan Phiffer _ Open

Source Layer Above Webpages _ 2006 _ http://www.shiftspace.org

"Thx for bringing up the public space aspect with the HTTP gallery
project! A lot of people tend to think that the net is a public space.
This might be true for some parts of it, our common blog for instance.
However, the online world has seen a number of affronts against
the public domain recently. One of my favourite projects that deal
with the increasing walling-off of public space is ShiftSpace.org. This
project attempts to subvert this trend by providing a new public space
on the Web. By pressing the [shift] + [space] keys, a ShiftSpace user
can invoke a new meta layer above any webpage to browse and create
additional interpretations, contextualisations and interventions.
I like this idea of the open source layer which allows you to remix
websites and add your own comments--It's almost a form of Online
Graffiti." [to ShiftSpace Mushon_Zer-Aviv Dan_Phiffer opensource
2006 public_space Exhibition_link.of.thought ... saved by 57 other
people ... on June 21]

40
Ursula Endlicher: HTTP [House of Technologically Termed Praxis]
_ Ruth Catlow + Marc Garrett (Furtherfield) _ Net Art repository _
2004 _ http://www.http.uk.net

"Thank you for adding 0100101110101101.org. I remember seeing

their work the first time at the Venice Biennial in 2001 where they
presented their computer virus piece 'Biennale.py'. Fantastic! You
asked before, 'Why can't we take Net Art for instance into the public
space where we can see others interacting with the works?' This is
one of the topics I am always interested in, especially in my own
work: how to bridge, translate, and let the Web perform in 'public'
space--in physical space and online. This gallery dedicates itself to
these questions, describing themselves as providing a 'public venue
for experimental approaches to exhibiting artworks simultaneously
in physical and virtual space'. One of their latest projects, 'DIWO' or
Do-It-With-Others, an E-Mail Art project, was based on a specific
curation method of collecting, sharing, and collaborating together
via an email list which ultimately produced an exhibition..." [to HTTP
Ruth_Catlow Marc_Garrett Furtherfield repository 2004 gallery
curating physical_space virtual_space Exhibition_link.of.thought ...
saved by 79 other people ... on june 21]

Ela Kagel: 13 MOST BEAUTIFUL AVATARS _

0100101110101101.ORG _ Second Life exhibition _ 2006/2007 _
http://0100101110101101.org/home/portraits/index.html

"Eva Grubinger and Thomas Kaulmann have developed a program

for producing and distributing art way back in the 'old days' of the
Internet--and they did a pioneering work with that. Meanwhile, more
than 10 years later, there are a number of platforms, which turn out to
be artistic playgrounds for the masses, thus drawing on the interest
of Net Art curators. Second Life for instance is one of those virtual
systems which is 'imagined, created and owned by its residents':
Through 2006 and 2007, Eva and Franco Mattes (who are also known
as 0100101110101101.ORG) created portraits of what they found to
be the most beautiful avatars in Second Life. They have chosen 13
portraits (clearly a reference to Andy Warhol's 13 Most Beautiful
Boys and 13 Most Beautiful Women), which was recently shown
at the Postmasters Gallery in New York. Eva and Franco Mattes see
Second Life as a contemporary version of Warhol's factory: a place
of 'creation of alternate identities, of building and living a fantasy'."
[to 13_Most_Beautiful_Avatars 0100101110101101.ORG secondlife

41
exhibition 2006 2007 avatar Exhibition_link.of.thought ... saved by 6
other people ... on June 21]

Ursula Endlicher: C@C COMPUTER AIDED CURATING (revisited)

_ Eva Grubinger + Thomas Kaulmann _ curatorial project _ 1993
_ http://www.tate.org.uk/onlineevents/archive/CuratingImmaterialitySy-
stems/speed_grubinger.htm

"This is a 'machine-based' curating project, developed even earlier

in Net Art times. 'C@C' was a prototype program developed for
producing and distributing art, as well as presenting, documenting
and discussing it. They started to develop the piece in 1993, and
by 1995, it already ceased to exit. The link therefore shows Eva
presenting the piece and discussing its history during a conference
at the Tate Modern in 2005, 'Curating, Immateriality, Systems: On
Curating Digital Media'." [to C@C_Computer_Aided_Curating Eva_
Grubinger Thomas_Kaulmann curating 1993 sharing Exhibition_
link.of.thought ... on June 21]

Ela Kagel: NETART GENERATOR _ Cornelia Sollfrank _ activistic

netart _ 1999 _ http://net.art-generator.com/index.html

"The smart artist makes machines do the work--that is the credo of

this platform which automatically produces Net Art on demand,
based on keywords. With this project, she gained popularity already
in 1999, but if you browse the Web today you will see that many blogs,
Online Art magazines and other Digital Art resources still refer to
this artwork. Most probably, this has to do with the fact that Cornelia
challenges the concept of ownership in the first place. This pioneering
work also evokes the question of who can be legally assigned with
displaying and curating these machine-based artworks. In fact, they
sample material which has been created by others--if they would use
material made of machines we certainly would have another situation.
So, this is an interesting attempt of practising the concept of non-
curation of Net Art works. But still, I do believe that it is important
to find appropriate curatorial ways of mediating Net Art to a broad
audience." [to NetArt_Generator Sollfrank 1999 EXxhibition_link.
of.thought appropriation ... saved by 1 other person ... on June 21]

Ursula Endlicher: VVORK _ Aleksandra Domanovic + Oliver Laric

+ Christoph Priglinger + Georg Schnitzer _ gallery _ 2006 _ http://
vvork.com

42
"Your choice brings me to reflecting on sites with different approaches
in curatorial practice ... vvork.com is a site dedicated to posting
information on art in threads while it seems that one post brings in
the next and so on, all around one visual or conceptual topic, until it
moves on to the next. Along with the posted image of the piece goes
artist name, and occasionally a brief description of the piece. What
kind of curation method are they following? Or is it the opposite: non-
curation? Just a flow of brainstorming sessions? I like this approach
of floating from of one idea to the next and find it very inspiring." [to
vvork Domanovic Laric Priglinger Schnitzer gallery curating 2006
Exhibition_link.of.thought ... saved by 185 other people ... on June
21]

Ela Kagel: STEVE.MUSEUM _ Museum Committee _ art museum

social tagging project _ 2006 _ http://www.steve.museum

"I am taking your choice as an inspiration to present not exactly an

institution, but rather a reference to a new curatorial practice, which
is evolving from the institutional field right now. In my opinion,
the initiative of the Steve Museum clearly has its roots in the realm
of Net Art. This project aims at improving access to works of art
through inviting their audience to submit their own metadata to
the museum's artworks. In doing so, they are establishing a pool of
tags, analysing data, and engaging in discussion. This could be an
important contribution to close the semantic gap between audience
and curators." [to Steve.Museum 2006 curating gallery museum
Exhibition_link.of.thought ... saved by 229 other people ... on June
21]

Ursula Endlicher: TURBULENCE _ Jo-Anne Green + Helen Tho-

rington _ Net Art repository _ 1996 _ http://www.turbulence.org

"Google Will Eat Itself is really great in its conceptual approach of

how to make art and money on the Web, and have fun with it. As it
is all about linking in the TAGallery, I thought I might include not
one artist, but a 'place', that hosts and commissions Net Art for now
11 years. So I am choosing a Net Art 'repository', because I think
it is important to bring in a link that points to an organisation that
has been dealing with promoting, exhibiting and commissioning
art on the Web from the early browser days on..." [to Turbulence
Green Thorington repository 1996 curating gallery Exhibition_link.
of.thought ... saved by 263 other people ... on June 21]

43
Ela Kagel: GOOGLE WILL EAT ITSELF _ UBERMORGEN.COM +
Alessandro Ludovico + Paolo Cirio _ autocannibalistic DIY-model
_ 2005 _ http://www.gwei.org/index.php

"I like this interpretation of the Do-It-Yourself-idea. The artists

generate money by serving Google text advertisements on a network
of hidden websites. In doing so, they automatically buy Google
shares and consequently will have bought Google via their own
advertisement one day--well, in 202.345.125 years to be precise... This
artistic study of what they call an 'autocannibalistic model' reveals
the economics of Google and their global monopoly of information.
So it's a perfect DIY online-approach, with a lot of black humour."
[to Google_Will_Eat_Itself Ubermorgen.com Alessandro_Ludovico
Paolo_Cirio autocannibalism diy activism 2005 politics Exhibition_
link.of.thought ... saved by 327 other people ... on June 21]

--

Curators' Biographies
Ela Kagel is a Digital Media producer & curator in Berlin. She is a member of "Public
Art Lab" Berlin and co-initiator of the "Mobile Studios" project. Online since 1996, Ela
has focused her work on the intersection of art and technology--with a special interest in
Digital Culture. On this basis she has created concepts for various cultural events: Media
Art exhibitions, networked performances, mobile applications, television formats, ambient
computing or multimedia exhibition design. Besides this, Ela is a curator and researcher
in international Media Arts. In September 2006, she has initiated "The Upgrade! Berlin",
a series of public field trips to Media Art places in Berlin along with a growing online
resource.

Ursula Endlicher is a conceptual "Multiple-Media" artist based in New York working on

the intersection of Internet, Performance and Multimedia Installations. Having used
the Internet since 1994 she bridges the Web and physical reality either in multimedia
settings or in performance. Her focus lies in analysing the social, political and structural
components of the WWW. Special focus goes to reflecting on hidden architectures on the
Web, such as translating HTML into different formats, to make them visible, enjoyable,
and experiential for everyone. She received online commissions from Turbulence.org,
and from the Whitney Museum's Artport. Her work is included in Rhizome's Artbase, and
featured on Furtherfield.org. Endlicher has shown her work at Artists Space, New York,
Illegal Machines, Ars Athena and on Thirteen/WNET's ReelNY.web. Recent workshops
included an invitation to TanzQuartier Wien.

44
TAGallery_005_Collections_of_collections.
http://del.icio.us/TAGallery/EXHIBITION_collect
By LeisureArts

Tags/bookmarks as collections = A collection of collections.

With projects by: Valery Nosal, Miriam van Houten, PSB Gallery, Pam,
Grettir Asmundarson, Tuwa, Alberto Barullo, GoldenPalaceEvents.
com, Fred Beshid , Darren Meldrum

CHEWING GUM WRAPPER COLLECTION _ Valery Nosal _ 2002-

Present _ http://www.chewing-gum.net/menu.html
Collection of chewing gum wrappers. [to Chewing Gum_Wrapper_
Collection Valery_Nosal Exhibition_collect collection ... on July 03]

60 JOKER XPO’S _ Miriam van Houten _ 2004-Present _ http://

www.dxpo-playingcards.com/jokers/jokers-xpos.htm
Collection of jokers. [to 60_Joker_xpo's Miriam_van_Houten 2004-
Present Exhibition_collect collection ... saved by 2 other people ... on
July 03]

THE PSB GALLERY OF THRIFT STORE ART _ PSB Gallery _ 2000

_ http://www.taiga.com/~paul/#GALLERY
Collection of thrift store art. [to The _Psb_Gallery_of_Thrift_Store_
Art Psb_Gallery 2000 Exhibition_collect collection ... on July 03]

SMILEY COLLECTOR _ Pam _ 2001 _ http://www.smileycollector.

com/collection_index.htm
Collection of smiley face collections. [to Smiley_Collector Pam 2001
Exhibition_collect collection ... on July 03]

TINY PINEAPPLE NURSE BOOK COLLECTION _ Grettir Asmun-

darson _ unknowndate-Present _ http://www.tinypineapple.com/
nursebooks
Collection of books about nurses. [to Tiny_Pineapple_Nurse_Book_
Collection Grettir_Asmundarson unknowndate-Present Exhibition_
collect collection ... saved by 1 other person ... on July 03]

STAIRS IN MOVIES _ Tuwa _ 2006-Present _ http://stairsinmovies.

blogspot.com/index.html
Collection of screen captures of stairs from movies. [to Stairs_in_
Movies 2006-Present Exhibition_collect collection ... on July 03]

45
THE INCREDIBLE SPAM COLLECTION _ Alberto Barullo _ 2005-
2006 _ http://www.theincrediblespammuseum.com
Collection of spam email. [to The_Incredible_Spam_Collection
Alberto_Barullo 2005-2006 Exhibition_collect collection ... saved by
8 other people ... on July 03]

GOLDEN PALACE EVENTS _ GoldenPalaceEvents.com _ 1997-

Present _ http://www.goldenpalaceevents.com/auctions
Collection of oddities purchased via online auctions. [to Golden_
Palace_Events GoldenPalaceEvents.com 1997-Present Exhibition_
collect collection ... saved by 1 other person ... on July 03]

MUSEUM OF FRED _ Fred Beshid _ a place where the past is

preserved for the future _ 2000_ http://www.museumoffred.com
Collection of paintings from thrift stores. [to Museum_of_Fred
Fred_Beshid 2000 Exhibition_collect collection ... saved by 13 other
people ... on July 03]

THE TEST CARD GALLERY _ Darren Meldrum _ unknowndate _

http://www.meldrum.co.uk/mhp/testcard/index.html
Collection of BBC and ITV television test cards. [to The_Test_
Card_Gallery Darren_Meldrum unknowndate Exhibition_collect
collection ... saved by 26 other people ... on July 03]

--

Curator's Biography
LeisureArts is an infra-institutional practice engaged with various forms of ephemeral,
convivial, and quotidian cultural production: http://leisurearts.blogspot.com

TAGallery_006_I tag you tag me: a folksonomy of Internet Art

http://del.icio.us/TAGallery/EXHIBITION_I.tag_you
By Luis Silva

Social bookmarking allows for users to easily store lists of resources

(websites, for instance) and have them available to the public,
allowing people with the same interests (or not) to share and have
easy access to relevant information on a specific subject. But the most
important feature of social bookmarking lies in the categorisation of
these resources by the users themselves. Tagging is the word that
comes to mind.

46
Tagging consists basically in the possibility these social bookmarking
services have of allowing the users not only to bookmark something,
but to informally assign tags (relevant keywords) to it, thus creating
meta-data about the tagged resources in a collective way, rather than
individually, something that can be seen as a second layer of meaning,
but determined by the users rather than the original producer of the
content. This is what is called folksonomy, a user-generated taxonomy
used to retrieve and categorise Web content.

The departure idea for this project is thinking of tagging as curating.

If tagging creates meta-data about pre-existing content, it can be seen
as the creation of a discourse about it. And if that content happens to
be Online Art, tagging both allows for a subjective juxtaposition of
art works and the elaboration of a critical discourse about it. Curating
then. But this isn't new.

This is regular curating done in a schematic way, using a different tool

to get the job done. But since tagging is a social activity in its essence,
giving birth to folksonomies, it allows for social curating, with social
selection of works and social production of discourse about them.
This is what this project intends to be. Rather than traditionally
curating a show through tagging the projects with the name of the
show, we will be asking people to tag some of their favourite Internet
Art pieces with a few defined tags and some that they can choose
freely. The idea is that this device will then create a folksonomic net
art exhibition done collectively by a group of people. It can be seen as
a social experiment, aiming at finding out what will that second layer
of meaning be like, or if it will work at all. A challenge then. I tag you
tag me, or a random folksonomy of Internet Art [image, p. 51]. Let
the tagging begin.

With projects by: 53os, _____ING, Agnes de Cayeux, Alan Bigelow,

Alexander Mouton, Anders Weberg, Ben Rubin, Brian Caiazza,
Carlos Katastrofsky, Chiara Passa, Chih Min, Christiaan Cruz,
Chromakey, Cici Moss, Concept Trucking, G. H. Hovagimyan,
Garrett Lynch, J. R. Carpenter, James Whipple, Jimpunk, John
Freyer, John Michael Boling, Josh On, Kenneth Tin-Kin Hung, La
Molleindustria, LeisureArts, Les Liens Invisibles, Lev Manovich,
Luis Silva, Marc Kremers, Marek Walczak, Mario Klingemann,
Mark Hansen, Mark Napier, Martha L. Deed, Martin Wattenberg,
Mary-Anne Breeze, Millie Niss, Mouchette, Nano Corporation, Oleg
Marakov, Olia Lialina, Patricia Gouveia, Peter Sinclair, Regina Célia

47
Pinto, Ricardo Miranda Zuñiga, Santiago Ortiz, Stewart Smith, Yael
Kanarek, Y0UNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES and many
artists more who are not yet tagged...

I TAG YOU TAG ME (000_ORIGINAL) _ Luis Silva _ del.icio.us/cu-

rating _ 2007 _ http://del.icio.us/I_tag_you_tag_me

Tagging can be seen as the creation of a discourse. And if that content

happens to be an online artwork, tagging both allows for a subjective
juxtaposition of art works and the elaboration of a critical discourse
about it. [to I_tag_you_tag_me_000_Origi Luis_Silva 2007 relations
del.icio.us folksonomy curating Exhibition_I.tag_you ... saved by 12
other people ... on July 03]

--

Curator's Biography
Luis Silva studied "Social Sciences" and is now completing his MA on "Communication,
Culture and Information Technologies" and finishing a research project on Internet Art.
He has curated a few New Media exhibitions, namely "Online--Portuguese Netart 1997-
2004", "Source Code" and "Sound Visions". In 2006 he created the Lisbon node of "The
Upgrade!", an international network of gatherings concerning art, technology and culture.
He is now curating "LX 2.0", Lisboa 20 Arte Contemporânea’s online program. Silva has
also been working as an independent writer, having published several reviews and texts
addressing the issues of art and technology for various publications, namely Turbulence’s
"Networked_Performance", "Rhizome", "Furtherfield" and "newmediaFIX".

48
Ursula Endlicher & Ela Kagel, "TAGallery_003_link.of.thought_thought.of.link..." (2007)
http://del.icio.us/TAGallery/STATEMENTS_link.of.thought

49
Ursula Endlicher & Ela Kagel, "TAGallery_003_link.of.thought_thought.of.link..." (2007)
http://del.icio.us/TAGallery/EXHIBITION_link.of.thought

50
Luis Silva, "I tag you tag me: a folksonomy of Internet Art" (visualised with 6pli) (2007)
http://www.6pli.com/I_tag_you_tag_me
Luis Silva, "I tag you tag me: a folksonomy of Internet Art" (original acccount) (2007)
http://del.icio.us/I_tag_you_tag_me

51
52
 --
discussions

curating
media / net / art
53
As part of the project "circulating contexts--CURATING MEDIA/
NET/ART" a mailinglist [images, p. 73] was initiated at http://lists.
subnet.at/mailman/listinfo/cc to investigate five challenging questions
of CURATING MEDIA/NET/ART. During the discussions
additional topics arised and turned the conversations into a valuable
pool of information regarding current tendencies and problems in
this field. The following excerpts of the discussions were selected to
show some of the main paths in this exchange of opinions, theories
and experiences. It is readable in two ways: either chronologically or
along suggested interlinking marked by tags (as can be seen in the list
below). Besides the shortening of the postings, they were not altered
in any way except the correction of some typos.

topic = !
politics = *
processes = #
market = $
ghettoisation = X
thematic focus = §
agency = ::
participation = +

Visualising Workflows and

(Filtering) Processes--cura-
ting as politics--curating as
(socio)politics--curating: tools
and purposes--processes of the
list
!
[CC] visualising work.flows and (filtering)processes
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Fri Jun 1 21:57:41 CEST 2007

Curating on the Internet is a working process that wants to be

visualised in the same way as the processes frequently hidden behind
Internet-based Art.

54
The curator, "who does not want to get 'inside' or 'outside' the system,
but stays at her place to deepen her knowledge (1), acts not only as
an intermediary in the presentation of art but also of his/her own
filtering-processes, choices and decisions. The transparency of his/her
work is more relevant for the transparency of the presented artworks,
too, and aims to get a broad public involved in a collective discourse.
With the steady incorporation of the Web into the mainstream arts
scene, the launching of exhibitions and the building of archives has
become an increasingly creative and authorial practice."

"However, the act of curating used to be a clandestine affair. Those

holding the position would have once worked quietly within the
institutional archives, orchestrating their exhibitions anonymously
from 'behind the curtain', but now in the past ten to fifteen years the
process of curating and the person who practices it have emerged
center stage in public discourse" (2). Spoken metaphorically,
the constant and ongoing publication of a "curator's notebook"
contributes to the visualisation of a work-flow that does not only
show the final results of this process in shape of an exhibition. It
unfolds the existence of a network of non-linear thoughts, relational
research and deductive/inductive (filtering)processes.

(1) Schultz, Pit (2006): "The Producer as Power User" in: Krysa, Joasia
(ed.): "Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age
of Network Systems" DATA Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia. Brooklyn/
New York, http://www.data-browser.net/03
(2) Williams, Alena: "Net Art and Process. Some Thoughts on
Curatorial Practice", http://switch.sjsu.edu/nextswitch/switch_engine/
front/front.php?artc=99

*#
[CC] curating as politics
Luis Silva silva.luis at netcabo.pt
Sat Jun 2 13:27:43 CEST 2007

[...] Rather than thinking of the curatorial activity as a filtering

device (which can be seen as an automatic activity since filters have
no selfawareness, for instance), I tend to think of it as an inclusion
activity. And if there is inclusion, there has to be exclusion, and by
excluding and including, a political activity is bound to happen. So to
me, subjective as it may be (and it is!), curating is political (using the
broader sense of the term) in essence and I guess a good curatorial

55
practice must bear this notion in itself to be successful, or it will end
up being something between pointless and naive.

When taken into the online medium, curating becomes a laboratory

for the study and the experimenting of new ways of establishing the
power (or political) connections between those involved. Without
the big fancy aesthetics (and ideologies) of the white cube and the
black box, without their big budgets and high profiles, what is left
is the curatorial activity, the works and their dialectics (always in
connection to those creating and experiencing them). [...]

*#
[CC] curating as (socio-)politics
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Sat Jun 2 22:33:08 CEST 2007

[...] Transparency in the curating-process, online as well as offline,

could make the ex-/including not less political (and should not, at
all...) but raise the understanding of decisions by which visibility for
art is generated and set up.

#
[CC] curating as (socio-)politics
Carlos Katastrofsky carlos.katastrofsky at cont3xt.net
Mon Jun 4 19:16:14 CEST 2007

[...] is it useful to document the process of curating and the desicions

involved? i tend to say yes, but on the other hand the question arises
if this wouldn't narrow the possibilities to read an exhibition. in a
museum people are often looking at the labels before looking at the
works referred to. wouldn't this happen here, too? and how can such
a highly intuitive process be documented without losing much?

# ::
[CC] curating as (socio-)politics
Joasia Krysa joasia at kurator.org
Mon Jun 4 22:38:07 CEST 2007

[...] For me the issue is not so much curatorial subjectivity (as

this is something already given and a construction itself) but,
more importantly, curatorial agency - the possibility of curatorial
intervention. [...]

56
 # + ::
[CC] curating as (socio-)politics
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Wed Jun 6 09:52:44 CEST 2007

[...] If the audience is not immediately involved in the process of

creating an exhibition (or whatever the curating is) it is essential that
the curator creates at least sort of an additional feedback-space, where
his/her own "point of view" can be discussed, transformed and/or
extended--even if he/she might be in "danger of losing reputation" by
publishing his/her working methods.

Sometimes curating is treated as if it was an artistic practice (and

perhaps sometimes it can be), but, that raises the (provocative/naive)
question if an exhibition could be completely replaced by the display
of the curating-processes? "Curating pour curating" as in "l'art pour
l'art" so to say ... [...]

# ::
[CC] curating as (socio-)politics
Luis Silva silva.luis at netcabo.pt
Wed Jun 6 11:21:12 CEST 2007

[...] I guess that this is something that really bothers me, something
that I try to get as away from as possible. Curating as a meta-artistic
practice... I see it as a political practice (if we can separate art from
politics that easily, but let's say we can for the sake of argument), a
critical one. Curating pour curating (excellent choice of words!) is
what can be seen as poor curating. [...]

# ::
[CC] curating: tools and purposes
Luis Silva silva.luis at netcabo.pt
Wed Jun 6 11:29:59 CEST 2007

[...] The critical aspect in the experiences such as kurator.org stems

from the fact that, despite being programmed by a human being,
emergence can act as personal taste or a subjectvie view of the world
in the action of curating artistic content.

[...] When curating, for instance LX 2.0, I am selecting artists to

invite to the project, based on a subjective notion of relevance (artists

57
exploring the online medium in a relevant way). How is it possible to
quantify, and therefore make objective such a criteria? or even other
criteria? it isn't possible because curating is a subjective view, it is an
ideosincratyc production of meaning. I wonder if through curating,
meaning is created from the selected works or if it is the opposite, the
works being chosen to fit the production of meaning...

[...] The notion of subjectivity is of course a social construction,

as is everything we're discussing, but the point is, I have to agree,
agency. what are we trying to achieve when we curate? We have
been discussing the procedures, subjective (or not) ways of selecting
content. As I said, that is a tool, but what is the purpose of curating?
what is that agency Joasia mentioned?

# ::
[CC] curating: tools and purposes
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Fri Jun 8 09:32:02 CEST 2007

[...] Perhaps the main agency in curating is non-agency or the short

stop of agency [...] Curating stops the continuous flow of information
(art, etc.) in a subjective way to issue a (political, poetical, theoretical,
...) statement about what is happening right now and perhaps to
create a "cumulus" of discourse around this statement at a certain
given time and place.

* # :: $
[CC] processes of the list
G. H. Hovagimyan ghh at thing.net
Wed Jun 13 15:08:06 CEST 2007

[...] The real question is why does anyone curate anything? What is
the reason and let's be honest I don't believe in altruism. People do
things for specific reasons such as gaining power or getting money or
... you fill in the blank.

[...]I would suggest that a curator especially a net art curator should
become an instigator of a process that is open ended. To my mind this
means setting up a loose structure that allows for maximum creativity
and then inviting individuals to do something. You organize the
material after the event occurs. In this way you are an archivist more
than a curator. This is already somewhat of the default process on

58
the web. What has not occurred is the next step which is the analysis
and presentation of webmaterial in real life. That is the exciting part.
How to actualize net experiments in the real world and furthermore
how to create value, as in monetary so that the art works are taken
seriously and the artists get paid.

Virtual/Real Representations in
Real/Virtual Spaces--represen-
tation of art: art fairs--relati-
onships--filtering--blockbuster
shows--business models--com-
merce swallows art
!
[CC] 2 virtual/real representations in real/virtual spaces
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Sun Jun 17 10:04:29 CEST 2007

It is easier to get an entire museum-collection on the Internet than to

get a single exhibition of Internet Art in a museum-space. Provided
that there is a computer with Internet-access, Net Art can be viewed
at any time and any location and therefore be left in its own medium
of production. But, even if Internet-based art does not require to
be exhibited in the traditional context of museums, galleries or off-
spaces, curators have to find ways to present this kind of virtuality in
real spaces and transform them into a "living information space that
is open to interferences" (1). The chance to be shown in museum-
contexts raises the importance of a whole genre.

In return, the exhibition of traditional art collections "is not only

accommodated by the spatial realisation of architectural spaces
any longer. Increasingly influential is the way that the design of
an extended typology of spaces, including the Internet, structure
creative practices" (2) and raises the chance to get a broader audience
and a more effective discourse, abstaining from conventional forms
of display. "Like the best exhibition publications, extending an
exhibition online means more than simply re-presenting it but also
reformatting it for the best possible experience in the medium--in

59
front of a computer screen, transmitted via the Internet" (3) and the
other way around.

(1) Paul, Christiane (2006): "Flexible Contexts, Democratic Filtering

and Computer-Aided Curating" in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.): "Curating
Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age of network
Systems", DATA Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York.
(2) Dziekan, Vince: "Beyond the Museum Walls: Situating Art in
Virtual Space (Polemic Overlay and Three Movements)", http://
journal.fibreculture.org/issue7/issue7_ver2_Beyond%20the%20Museum
%20Walls.pdf
(3) Dietz, Steve: "Curating (on) the Web", http://www.archimuse.com/
mw98/papers/dietz/dietz_curatingtheweb.html

-- What are the possibilities to show Internet-art in a conventional

art-space, that go beyond simply putting a computer in the space?
-- How can a museum be reformatted for the presentation of Web-
based art?
-- What is the role of the curator in this context?
-- How far can he/she go and transform the display of the artefact
without violating its autonomy?
-- In how far can an active discourse run by artists, curators, and
viewers influence the representation of Internet-based art in
exhibition-spaces?

$X
[CC] 2 virtual/real representations in real/virtual spaces
Carlos Katastrofsky carlos.katastrofsky at cont3xt.net
Thu Jun 21 08:00:21 CEST 2007

[...] i tend to say that most of the people (including people setting up
exhibitions (curators?)) aren't even aware what's going on in this part
of the art world. do we ghettoize ourselves by not communicating
enough with the outside? [...]

§X
[CC] Re: virtual/real representations in real/virtual spaces
G. H. Hovagimyan ghh at thing.net
Sun Jun 17 15:17:10 CEST 2007

[...] Much of the problem with curating net art is the narrow focus
and restrictions that the curators use when they are shaping their

60
exhibition. In an effort to define net art they include some works
and exclude others based on a criteria. For example; there might be a
show that has a theme of Javascript or flash or open source or internet
based video or ..... What tends to happen is a focus on the tools and
the type of programming languages used. This gives the shows a
sameness of form. It also tends to ghettoize the artworks within the
realm of digital arts and isolates the work from the larger art world
discourse. [...]

$
[CC] representation of art: art fairs
Carlos Katastrofsky carlos.katastrofsky at cont3xt.net
Thu Jun 21 08:34:29 CEST 2007

currently art basel (http://www.artbasel.com)is going on and has--as

a part of the "grand tour" this summer in europe (documenta, venice
biennale, sculpture projects muenster and art basel)--become a part
of something which formerly didn't include fairs. can this be seen as
some kind of "democratisation" of curatorial modes? no more high
- art - curated shows, but the rising of "the market" as a curator?

$X#
[CC] representation of art: art fairs
Joasia Krysa joasia at kurator.org
Thu Jun 21 16:39:14 CEST 2007

[...] Much in the same way, I would see the inclusion of Art Basel Fair
alongside other events that you have mentioned as a demonstration
of the same principle--i.e. drive to extend the market and to extend
and/or re-profile its consumer range...

On the point of 'ghettoization' of art for Internet that G.H made

and that is an important one as it points to a more general issue of
a relationship between 'new media art' world (for lack of a better
word) and mainstream art world - there seems to be a tendency to
increasingly rethink these relationships and increasing attempts to
work against these orthodoxies.

[...] On the level of artworks - this again might be through merging

online/offline environments to defy easy labelling as technology or
platform-specific. [...]

61
 $+
[CC] relationships
G. H. Hovagimyan ghh at thing.net
Fri Jun 22 14:59:47 CEST 2007

[...] In any case, back to the internet, I find that the networked
structure in computers creates social networks. This creates group
dynamics. The trouble with commodity art is that it depends on
unique artworks and brand name signature style artists. This is in
contradiction to the main impetus of the networks which is social
and collaborative. The market on the other hand benefits from an
increased sense of the social/communication realm. People go to art
fairs and the collectors shop there because it's easier than making the
rounds of the art galleries. [...]

§
[CC] filtering
G. H. Hovagimyan ghh at thing.net
Sat Jun 23 13:36:05 CEST 2007

[...] In the case of media art, net art or whatever I think after a certain
number of festivals you begin to see a repetition of types of work.
Most variations have to do with the type of software or cameras or
printers or projectors one uses. The newness of the field and the tools
used is mistaken for a new way of viewing the world.

$ X ::
[CC] 2 virtual/real representations in real/virtual spaces
David Upton david at upton.cc
Thu Jun 21 12:48:26 CEST 2007

[...] I think the answer is largely about money. Most exhibiting and
curating at the moment seems to be about getting big prices for 'hot'
artists, and trying to build up your proteges to 'hot' status. [...] We
'ghetto-ise' ourselves by not producing/curating unique valuable
objects for the 'kunstmarkt'...

[...] John Berger said (in 1977) "The bogus religiosity which surrounds
original works of art and which is ultimately dependent upon their
market value, has become the substitute for what paintings lost when
the camera made them reproducible. Its function is nostalgic. It
is the final empty claim for the continuing values of an oligarchic,

62
undemocratic culture. If the image is no longer unique and exclusive,
the art object, the thing, must be made mysteriously so." It doesn't
look as if the values of our culture have changed very much in 30
years!

[...] I also think we have to display it in ways that help people (ordinary
people, i.e. outside the ghetto) learn to 'value' it in a real sense. Why
should they go along and see these things we make? They are aware
of paintings and sculpture and have some means of coming to terms
with them, and some criteria for liking them. But new media art is
just--well--new.

[...] We all have to eat somehow. Heaven help me, and you can throw
me off the list for saying this if you want, but I think new media art
also needs a few (realistic) 'business models'. [...]

X ::
[CC] 2 virtual/real representations in real/virtual spaces
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Tue Jun 26 12:35:01 CEST 2007

[...] It takes a certain time to:

-- find the 'places' where art happens, the nodes of concentration
and focus, (Even if Internet Art "can be viewed at any time and any
location", you have to know where to get your information from:
commissioning-platforms, collaboration-pools, mailinglists, 'high-
end'-blogs, etc.)
-- be able to relate different types of works to each other and to make
personal conclusions,
-- use the technologies (for participation, reproduction, discourse)
bound to the use of the artworks. [...]

§X
[CC] Blockbuster Shows
G. H. Hovagimyan ghh at thing.net
Mon Jun 25 17:23:52 CEST 2007

[...] The blockbuster new media show with the same *names* and
themes has been repeated so many times you begin to wonder if any
curator has a fresh idea. Given that new media is about as unsalable
as video art, I wonder why there is the repeated showing of the same
characters. [...]

63
 $
[CC] business models
G. H. Hovagimyan ghh at thing.net
Mon Jun 25 17:42:40 CEST 2007

[...] Most new media art and art expos are financed by a combination
of industry that wants to promote or introduce their gadgets and
platforms to the public and a government that fund the art. This
makes them more like a trade show for glitzy new products. The
artists are expected to promote the products. The artists are also
expected to have other jobs to earn a living. These jobs are usually
teaching digital art in universities or doing advertising production
work or some other trade associated with mass media.

$*
[CC] business models
xDxD xD xdxd.vs.xdxd at gmail.com
Mon Jun 25 19:05:33 CEST 2007

[...] We described an eco-logical multinational, and placed Art

in its business model: as an *enabling technology*, as a strategic
communication tool, as the production's designer, as the
multinational's business developer. We described Art as one of the
only "entities" that are Zeitgeist-reactive: so much that it represented
practically the only available communication channel that is able
to hack the logic of consumism and to leverage the mental fog that
it causes in the mass, effectively breaking through. I think that this
kind of perception is at the base of what is needed as the "business
model" of contemporary art (not only digital). The current models
(the ones so clearly explained: you produce art, you have a main job
away from it, you teach in universities...) are just not significant, not
contemporary, not Zeitgeist.

$#*
[CC] commerce swallows art
xDxD xD xdxd.vs.xdxd at gmail.com
Wed Jun 27 19:05:57 CEST 2007

[...] A reality in which consumism and similar mass-fetishes (and

instruments for control!) are the only means to really break through, to
reach people's perception of anything. from this perspective there are
only two paths available: to operate inside commercial mechanisms,

64
or to design approaches that use the aesthetics, the communication
channels, the methodologies of the commercial operators to let the
message get through to the masses (a simplistic alternative is to be
just plain fetish, but it isn't suitable for all).

[...] in a way, the problems arised in this discussion are found not in
the new/net/web media, but in the change of attitude. I am not sure
if art is significant in this era in the way that it was, let's say, before
duchamp. Or, as a matter of fact, before the beginning of MTV, or
before situationism. This is not a time for ego, this is a time for the
creation of significant actions [..]

Facing Participation/The Lack of

Collaboration--I-tag-you-tag-me
love & criticism--crowdsour-
cing--face-to-face communica-
tion
!
[CC] (3) facing participation / the lack of collaboration
Carlos Katastrofsky carlos.katastrofsky at cont3xt.net
Fri Jul 6 12:18:40 CEST 2007

Not everyone is always participating in everything. Curators "whose

practice includes facilitating events, screenplayings, temporary
discursive situations, writing/publishing, symposia, conferences,
talks, research, the creation of open archives, and mailing lists"
(1), need to know about how to activate and motivate a potential
audience for collaboration. However, the needs of the audience are
as diverse as "Net Art's audience is a social medley: geographically
dispersed, varying in background, these art enthusiasts are able to
involve their involvement constantly, drawing from roles such as
artist, critic, collaborator or 'lurker' (one who just watches or reads,
without participating)" (2).

-- What are the premises for being able to motivate the public to
participate in the curatorial process? As a curator, as a person, as a
networked being?

65
-- Does the potential participant need to have a benefit like e.g. co-
authorship, to be ecouraged to participate?
-- Are there any emergency-plans if nobody is participating?

(1) Scholz, Trebor (2006): "The Participatory Challenge" in: Krysa,

Joasia (ed.): "Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in
the Age of network Systems", DATA Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia,
Brooklyn/New York.
(2) Greene, Rachel (2004): "Internet Art", Thames & Hudson,
London, pp. 31.

+
[CC] (3) facing participation / the lack of collaboration
Luis Silva silva.luis at netcabo.pt
Fri Jul 6 13:24:00 CEST 2007

[...] So I am starting to believe that participation requires to a large

extent some sort of reward. and by ending as Carlos ended, but on a
more personal note: how can one encourage collaboration?

+#
[CC] (3) facing participation / the lack of collaboration
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Sat Jul 7 10:30:37 CEST 2007

[...] To get something back from a participatory project is essential

whether it is at a personal or at a professional level. I think there
can't be participation without any benefit for the users. Apart from
the initial quality of a project which has to be at a high conceptual
level but as free and open as possible there are many motivations for
"being part of it":

Personal motivations:
-- Getting in contact with other people just for getting in touch (in
Web 2.0-speak: "making friends")
-- Learning about a subject by "listening" (as lurkers often do, me
personally included...)
-- Amusement [...]
Professional motivations:
-- Tactical "making friends" (as an artist in the digital realm it is
as important to know the "right" people/curators/etc. as it is in
fleshspace...)

66
-- Getting publicity, being included in an exhibition ... (as an artist)
-- Getting publicity, being named as a co-author ... (as a curator,
writer, etc.)
-- Money

[...] I think the most effective way to encourage people for collaboration
is the concept of the project and the way you are communicating it:
you have to have a very concrete and transparent idea of what you
are doing. [...] In a second move the infrastructure for participation
has to be as open as possible for interaction and the development of
personal ideas.

+
[CC] (3) facing participation / the lack of collaboration
Joasia Krysa joasia at kurator.org
Mon Jul 9 12:30:33 CEST 2007

Very often it is simply a matter of time availability, too. [...] There is

this constant state of modern 'alertness'; being always 'available' and
always able to 'contribute' that comes with social networks and as part
of one's professional life. And then, there is the type of work that might
require offline focus and uninterrupted intellectual concentration, if
not isolation, being switched off from communication channels for a
while (like for example trying to do some writing...).

+#X
[CC] I-tag-you-tag-me love & criticism
G. H. Hovagimyan ghh at thing.net
Tue Jul 10 22:53:51 CEST 2007

[...] Part of the problem with networked art is the notion of entropic
information. It's hot for a while and then becomes cold like old news
or outdated links. We can all be excited about this tagging project
now because it's hot information. What will happen one month from
now or two months or six months? [...] Does our new information
environment demand that we constantly present ourselves on the net
in order to maintain an identity? If we stop presenting ourselves do
we become useless entropic information? Must we remind the whole
net community all the time that we exist?

Indeed, on the one hand there is an incredible surveillance culture

being created with video cameras, and online data collection, on the

67
other hand we all seem to be disappearing from view like the ghost
detainees of Abu Ghraib, transported to prison but never signed in,
lost in the bureaucratic mechanisms.

X#
[CC] crowdsourcing
Carlos Katastrofsky carlos.katastrofsky at cont3xt.net
Wed Jul 11 10:33:34 CEST 2007

[...] is getting attention from the "big players" in the arts field a digital
divide, too? most of them started to build up their "business" in
pre-internet times. it's still the face to face communication and the
personal relationships that matter. so is the way to communicate,
to work and to make art in the net preventing a connection to the
traditional arts?

X
[CC] face-to-face communication
Jeremy Hight hight at 34n118w.net
Mon Jul 16 04:19:15 CEST 2007

[...] It seems that there is a weird duality where new media at times
is fetishized as this sexy marginalized thing and at times is damned
for that.

Web 2.0--Curatorial Facilities or

Technical Barriers
!
[CC] Web 2.0--curatorial facilities or technical barriers
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Tue Jul 24 22:45:58 CEST 2007

The hype about what is called Web 2.0 and its facilities is still
unbroken. In the context of representing and contextualizing art
on the Internet Joseph Beuys' message "Everyone is an artist" can
be transferred to the person of a curator, too: "When we begin to
share our experiences of exhibited artifacts with other people on
the Internet, we are producing for public use. For instance, we may

68
write about an exhibition on our weblog; post photos about The Last
Supper on Flickr; or add to a Wikipedia article." (1) Total democracy
and freedom in usabilty--often preached with the token "2.0"--are
not appropriate for everyone. It "counters the technological fetishism
and media exclusivity that surrounds too much computer based
art and informs many curatorial practices in the field; and it points
beyond a common but nonetheless misguided and shallow linkage
of techno-formalism and techno-avant-gardism (this is the new art
and it looks like nothing before it because it uses new media) " . (2)
To prevent cooperation and interaction-enhancing tools from being
simple technological tools, a social network that interacts with them
"needs to be able to connect. It needs to allow for co-ownership of
others in its activities. An insistence in exclusive ownership in an
inter-comunal collaboration kills the motivation of co-participants.
It destroys a sense of cooperation and trust" .

--- Where are the boundaries of Web 2.0 in curatorial activities?

--- Should every new tool be immediately adapted for curatorial
activities?
--- What are the premises for a reflective use of Web 2.0 in the
curatorialporcesses?

(1) Mutanen, Ulla Maaria: "On museums and Web 2.0", http://
ullamaaria.typepad.com/hobbyprincess/2006/06/museums_and_web.
html
(2) Lillemose, Jacob: "Some preliminary notes towards a conceptual
approach to Computer-based Art", http://www.digitaalplatform.be/php/
cat_items3.php?cur_id=913&cur_cat=204&main_cat=119
(3) Scholz, Trebor (2006): "The Participatory Challenge", in: Krysa,
Joasia (ed.): "Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in
the Age of network Systems", DATA Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia,
Brooklyn/New York.

#+
[CC] Web 2.0--curatorial facilities or technical barriers
Luis Silva silva.luis at netcabo.pt
Tue Jul 24 23:44:57 CEST 2007

[...] i tend to believe that human artifacts are nothing in themselves.

Instead it is the use we give them, socially determined and created
that has the potencial for being critical/political or to become, for the
purpose of this discussion, a curatorial activity.

69
[...] rather than having Web 2.0 determining new ways or possibilities
for curating, it is the meaningful action of those tools that create the
meaning. it is the action rather than the tool that allows for the effect
to occur.

+*
[CC] Web 2.0--curatorial facilities or technical barriers
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Thu Jul 26 09:09:28 CEST 2007

[...] Apart from that I wanted to point out that 2.0 is not "as easy
and simple" as it is promoted. [...] So, at first, you have to get "into
it" for being able to deal with it. Therefore I don't know if all of the
tools are really useful for curating activities which--at least for me-
-should reach a larger audience than just the "inner netart circle".
Doesn't the use of "new" technologies, even if their application is
meant in a critical, political, whatever reflective way, mind its critical
determination at the same time? [...]

Involvement of (Art) Institu-

tions/The Rise of Significance
!
[CC] (5) Involvement of (art-)institutions / rise of significance
Franz Thalmair franz.thalmair at cont3xt.net
Tue Aug 7 08:04:50 CEST 2007

The concept of what is traditionally understood as curating is still

bound to the institution of the museum and other equivalent exhibition
spaces--and so is not only the image of curating but also its mode: "In
its evolution since the 17th Century, [curating] centers itself around
the 'expert' opinion of the curator as educated conoisseur and archivist
of various works. In so doing, the curator determines the works'
cultural value, as well as, in present days, their mass entertainment
value, which is equally important in the era of ubiquitous free market
democracy (at least in most of the Western world)" (1). Contrary to
the work of a curator on the Internet it is frequently ignored, that
"the global network itself became the educational environment for
those without direct access to institutions. The involvement in free

70
and open projects, from where the power user not only builds up
reputation, but also gains crucial skills, can easily equal the value of
an academic degree" (2).

Problematic within the separation between "real" and "virtual"

art (collecting, curating, etc.) is that neither museums and their
protagonists nor the visitors of the institutions recognise the value
of Internet-based art, its working processes and its possibilities
of applying them within the museum itself. In the context of New
Media Art, the metaphor of the Internet as a huge archive can be
referred to the tasks of museums and other traditional art collections:
"The discursivity of multimedia, and how it can be associated
with a dialectical aesthetic, is characterised by the ways in which
montage--like spatial juxtaposition--achieved through hyperlink
structures and search-ability--is drawn upon for narrative effect. The
functionality of links and databases extends upon already existing
tabular, classificatory forms, such as the collection archive, catalogue,
and methods of spatial arrangement in galleries--all technologies
intimately associated with the historical evolution of the museum.
Adopting a museological aesthetic that understands, and is more
effectively calibrated to digital communication technologies will see
the museum emphasised as a machine for creating juxtaposition,
a generator of conditions for dialogical encounters with the
unforeseen (enabling, even privileging, the experience of surprise,
the unexpected and perhaps the random)" (3). The ongoing neglect
of those similarities leads to the fact that "a broader art audience
may still place more trust in the selection, and therefore validation,
undertaken by a prestigious museum, but in the online environment,
the only signifier of validation may be the brand recognition carried
by the museum's name." (4).

-- Is it--even within the networked environment--really necessary

to have an institution in the background in order to have a better
reputation as a curator?
-- How can institutions be convinced about the advantages of working
with New Media Art (forms) and along that adresses a public that
goes beyond the common art scene?

(1) Lichty, Patrick: "Reconfiguring the Museum. Electronic Media

and Emergent Curatorial Models", http://www.intelligentagent.com/
archive/Vol3_No1_curation_lichty.html
(2) Schultz, Pit (2005): "The Producer as Power User", in: Cox, Geoff

71
/ Krysa, Joasia (eds.): "Engineering Culture: On 'The Author as
(Digital) Producer'", DATA Browser vol. 2, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/
New York, pp. 111-127.
(3) Dziekan, Vince: "Beyond the Museum Walls: Situating Art in
Virtual Space (Polemic Overlay and Three Movements)", http://
journal.fibreculture.org/issue7/issue7_ver2_Beyond%20the%20Museum
%20Walls.pdf
(4) Paul, Christiane (2006): "Flexible Contexts, Democratic Filtering
and Computer-Aided Curating", in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.): "Curating
Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age of Network
Systems", DATA Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York,
pp. 81-103.

72
CONT3XT.NET, "[CC] mailing list, June 2007, Archives by thread" (2007)

73
74
--
theories

curating
media / net / art
75
The Aesthetics of Collabora-
tive Creation on the Internet
By Yueh Hsiu Giffen Cheng

Following the coming of the Web 2.0 Age, sharing and Collaborative
Creation has become the developing mode of net resources; "in
twenty-first-century culture, collaboration seems the order of the
day" (1).

As the relationship between users and net applications moves from

dissemination to participation, from the personal website of a single
path to the blog of mutual feedback, and from the online Encyclopaedia
Britannica to the Wikipedia co-edited by everyone, Web 2.0 has
become the name for collaborative wisdom and collaborative
contribution. "The Web 2.0 age emphasises the development of
de-centralisation, Collaborative Creation, re-mixability, emergent
systems and other attributes of users' experience" (2), so users play
the central role.

The concept of Web 2.0 seems to match Roland Barthes' theories of

"Writerly Text" and "The Death of the Author". The so-called "Writerly
Text" refers to the decentralisation of textuality and intertexuality.
When readers/audience are reading/watching the works, they can
add their opinions to the works, such as open texts which involve
co-editing or Collaborative Creation.

The theory of "The Death of the Author" emphasises that authors

do not exist in the works any more after the works are finished, and
the important thing worth discussion is the interaction between the
works themselves and the audience. According to these two theories,
users/audience become the force driving the works, and this is the
centre of post-modernist and post-structuralist movements, and also
the base and reference for us to admire the aesthetics of Collaborative
Creation Art.

Based on case studies of Collaboration Art projects and Literature

Review Studies, I have analysed four characteristics of Collaborative
Creation on the Internet: "Playing Participation", "The Growth
of the Art Form", "The Verbality of Art", and "The Transferring of
Authorship". According to the outcome of this research, a new way
of appreciating the new form of Net Art has emerged.

76
Playing Participation: Important Net Art Factors Attract User
Participation

Interaction between works and users is a key factor in Net Art. The
integral exploration of a work demands the default path of a creator
and also the complete participation of users. Networks, which
require interaction, ask for a certain period of time for the users to
finish browsing and operating the work. Unfortunately, ordinary
people have limited patience towards art. According to America's
Harper's Bazaar magazine, audience members at an exhibition
only stayed in front of each work for from between five seconds to
three minutes (3). So, the most important consideration for creators
to think about is how to attract users to participate in interaction
with Net Art works. I discovered an interesting fact from examining
numerous Net Art works of collaborative creation, namely that many
works consisted of playing factors; it seems that the creators hope to
attract participants through the inducement of games. In traditional
art education, we learned how to admire a painting, how to see a
sculpture or how to listen to a melody; this kind of education made
people a passive audience. By contrast, in the field of interactive Net
Art, the audience has to be the active agent, otherwise the admiration
of art works cannot proceed. The question is: how to turn a passive
audience into positive participants? I think this is the reason why
many Net Art works make use of games. Through the inducement
of games, passive audiences voluntarily become participants in art
creation. In the process of the game, users spontaneously explore all
messages delivered, so Net Art works can be displayed integrally.

The group of Sulake's "Habbo Hotel" (4) is an online friend-making

website exclusively for young people, and it hopes that young people
can get to know social skills through this virtual social field. This
website takes the game concept as its structure to create a big global
hotel chain. Since 2001, there have been 19 virtual hotels built in the
United States, Great Britain, Australia, Canada, Denmark, France,
Italy, China, Finland, Germany, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Brazil,
Portugal, Singapore and Japan; it is the biggest virtual hotel chain
in the world. Anyone can live in the "Habbo Hotel" after a simple
registration online, and free membership is the reason why it is so
popular. There are various facilities in the hotel, such as lobbies,
billiards, cafés, ballrooms, cafeterias, game rooms, etc. Users can
enter any facility to chat with other users, or join other people's
billiards, swimming, or even dancing competitions. In this hotel,

77
users can use fake names, the false sex, or they can even invent and
shape a perfect person for themselves to meet. Because there is no
identity validation, there is not the personality burden of real life,
which is another reason why the website is very successful. The game
structure and vivid virtual motions in "Habbo Hotel" drive users to
spontaneously make a contribution to the website, and to accept the
social experience acquired from this hotel; the integrity of this work
has been achieved perfectly.

The Growth of the Art Form: The Shape of Works Change with
Users Participation and Contribution

The net is an easy-to-use medium, and art works that take the net
as their medium allow the audience to enter the work easily. Hence,
the net becomes a public space, and art accomplished on the net also
becomes a type of open Public Art. According to the definition from
Wikipedia, so-called Public Art is art works exhibited in a public
space, allowing the public to participate or touch the works. On the
other hand, for Net Art works, interaction and audience participation
are the main factors. If the works can reflect the users' interaction as
a contribution to the works, can they accomplish the ideal of Public
Art itself? Or should it be called another perfect exhibition of online
Public Art?

Jeffrey Shaw, a famous Australian New Media artist, states: "Now

with the mechanisms of the new digital technology, the artwork can
become itself a simulation of reality--an immaterial digital structure
encompassing synthetic spaces which we can literally enter. Here,
the viewer is no longer a consumer in a mausoleum of objects;
rather he/she is a traveller and discoverer in a latent space of sensual
information, whose aesthetics are embodied both in the coordination
of its immaterial form and in the scenarios of its interactivity manifest
form. In this temporal dimension, the interactive artwork, in each
time is restructured and reembodied by the activity of its viewers"
(5). In other words, for an integral work of Collaborative Creation,
the performance of its art shape must change with users' participation
and contribution; the art shape is not controlled by artists only, but
constructed also by contributors to the work. If looking at the status
of Net Collaborative Creation from a psychological aspect, reflecting
the footprint of participants directly on the actual works, it not only
encourages users to visit the work again to find their own footprint,
but also evokes positive emotions for participants having made a

78
contribution. Isn't this the highest honour of an art work and the
greatest hope of an artist?

The comic website "Renga" (6) by Japanese artists Rieko Nakamura

and Toshihiro Anzai, set up in 1992, applies the growth and change
of the art form of Net Collaborative Creation. In Japanese, "Ren"
means "linked" and "Ga" means "images". As the name shows, it is
a work using picture links. The interesting thing is that all links of
the pictures have associated thinking with specific symbols within
them, for example, the association of sun and moon or of light and
petals. The "Renga", considering users' different personal experiences,
allows participants to upload pictures in accordance with individual
cognition, and to link to extant pictures on the website. The pattern
of the whole page is like a climbing vine changing continuously so
that no one can predict the final situation of the display.

The "Dialogue With No Word" is one of the projects designed by

the "Renga". First an artist uploaded a picture, then a participant
uploaded another relevant picture according to the inspiration
he acquired from the first picture. There was a symbolic dialogue
between the two photos and the two authors; a dialogue without
words was accomplished through the process. There were more and
more photos following the increased contribution from uploading
users, and the links between pictures made the developing mode of
the work change at the same time. This matches the art form of Net
Collaborative Creation, which grows and changes all the time.

"Starry Night" (7), created by three Net Art giants, including the
founder of Rhizome.org, Mark Tribe, Alex Galloway and Martin
Wattenberg, is another interesting example of Net Collaborative
Creation. This website connects with the link of Rhizome.org: when
users read the words on Rhizome.org, a corresponding light spot of
"Starry Night" will increase its light. With the words of more readers,
the corresponding light spot shines brighter. Then it looks like a
starry sky filled with thousands of stars, and each star represents the
reading frequency of the words on Rhizome.org. Users can click on
the stars of "Starry Night" to enter Rhizome.org, and when more and
more people join in, the topics with the highest frequencies (more
shining stars) becomes visible. Those stars with little light in the dark
sky are representative of pages with a low clicking frequency. The
change in display of "Starry Night" depends on readers of Rhizome.
org, so the users leaving footprints casually are the contributors to

79
the change in this work. This is the most interesting thing about a
work of Collaborative Creation.

The Verbality of Art: Art does not bring Mysterious Colours

anymore but Experiences Sharing and Dialogue instead. Art
becomes a Verb.

Due to the development of modern technology, the form of art shows a

multi-polarity, especially in those Net Art works relying on technology
as a disseminating platform. There are many types of easily operated
software available on the market for users to create personal image
works, animation, and even websites. Extremely intelligent creation
can be produced by the fool-proof operation of this software--this is
the biggest contribution of technology to art. Hence, art creation is
no longer the privilege of a small group in society, but an opportunity
for everyone. As well as the interactive characteristics of the net, the
definition of art creation is worthy of discussion. As Ben Davis said: "In
a certain sense, the act of finding art on net is a Net Art activity itself."
"Net Art is not something, but an environment." "In the field of net, a
thought field, different aesthetics can be proposed, different concepts
can communicate with each other" (8). Szyhalski Ding, a Net artist
and professor at the Minneapolis College of Art and Design, claims,
"The Internet is a public space; it's just a much more populated and
busier public space. It has its own rhythm and logic. It's wonderful"
(5). From the viewpoint of these scholars, the aesthetics of Net Art
becomes an expression of Conceptual Art. The integrity depends on
users traversing the art work to explore it. Hence, when users visit the
work, both the work and the participants are conducting an art act.
In terms of Collaborative Creation, art creation brings no mysterious
colours anymore, but experience sharing and dialogue instead. Art
becomes a verb.

The "One Word Movie" (9) by Philippe Zimmermann and Beat Brogle
makes participating users at the same time create their own art work.
The "One Word Movie" borrows the function of a net search engine,
turning phrases typed by users into keywords, searching for relevant
pictures on the net, displaying picture after picture like a film. The
longer the searching time, the more pictures there are, and the richer
the film is. These pictures are like frames in a film as the film's main
components. The "One Word Movie" turns users' words into film and
constructs a film with the pictures. The phrase typed first turns into
the film title, and the user turns into the director. The contribution

80
of the pictures comes from the vast Internet sources, and my or your
photos may become the content of someone's film. So, you and I are
participating in someone's Net Collaborative Creation and becoming
someone's actors.

Andy Deck from the United States identifies himself as a "Net

Public artist", whose artworks mostly discuss the possibility of
Net Collaborative Painting. He is a New Media artist devoted to
Collaborative Creation experiments, and "Glyphiti" is one of his
interesting works. This work is like a blank canvas put on the net
public space, welcoming anyone to paint on it or change somebody
elses painting. The big painting on screen is actually composed of
256 frames of 32x32 pixels, and users can choose to paint on any
frame. Because Andy Deck did not set any topic for painting, the
natural inclination of ordinary people to draw something comes into
play. According to this artist's personal statement, "the beauty of it is
watching people find ways to work around its implicit limitations."
(10). So, when a user is drawing on "Glyphiti" using his mouse, he is
experiencing the process of art creation at the same time. Experiencing
and admiring art are in the mode of verbs.

Transferring Authorship: Artists of Collaborative Creations

become the Editors of Projects, and Users Participating in the
Project become Artists at the same time

"When art works are not physical objects any more, the boundary of
authorship becomes more blurred" (5). Especially the theory of "The
Death of the Author" from post-modernism and post-structuralism
compels us to rethink the relationship between authors, works and
participants. When works involve authors as well as participants,
the relationship between authors and works becomes blurred. Who
created the work? Who finished the work? Who are the contributors
behind the screen? Looking from the mode of Net Collaborative
Creation, we can see clearly that the works have been contributed by
net users. In fact, the artists themselves made the least contribution
to the works. Julian H. Scaff argues, "For now, to have the capacity to
view the digital artwork means also to have the capacity to (re)produce
it infinitely, and to change it endlessly. Not only is authenticity in
question, but the idea of authorship is almost obsolete" (11). As Shu
Lea Cheng mentioned in an interview: "In the Net Art projects I have
been doing, the characteristic of 'mass participation/involvement' has
been emphasised a lot. The net is a media through which mass can

81
'enter' the artworks easily, and the artworks are completely a 'public
domain'. Under this concept, I think the so-called 'authors' rights'
is to some degree overthrown" (12). Hence, during the process of
Collaborative Creation, the artists become the editors of projects, and
users participating in the project become artists at the same time.

The "Let's Make Art" (13) [image, p. 85] project by Taiwan's New
Media artist Yu-Chuan Tseng in 2003 made the audience become
contributors to the artwork, and artists of art creation as well. "Let's
Make Art", exhibited in the Taipei Fine Art Museum, invited the
audience to upload their own photo on the Internet. Then, they were
asked to come back to the museum to print out the photos and finally
frame the photos for exhibition in the museum. The uploaded photos
became digital codes after a procedure of computer calculation,
and the audience had to use the computers at the museum to see
the original photos. From virtual net to physical exhibition, "Let's
Make Art" turned the audience's participation into artists' roles in
creation.

"Screening Circle" (14) [image, p. 85] by Andy Deck exhibited in the

Whitney Artport in March 2006, is another Net Art work concerned
with the transferring of authorship. Andy Deck writes on his website
under the title "Public Art, Net Art". Here we can see his ideal of
regarding Net Art as Public Art. Surely most of his artworks satisfy
the requirements of Public Art, namely "exhibiting in a public area
to allow a mass audience to participate in the artwork". "Screening
Circle" also applies the drawing concept of pixels. Users can draw
personal images on the website, or change other people's images.
After users have drawn something, the images are displayed in
whirling images around the screen. This creation concept is similar
to film-making. All images painted by users function like the frames
of a film. When more and more people participate in image painting,
the contents of the film become much richer. This is the standard
concept of Net Collaborative Creation: users can make or change
the artworks left by other people, so every participant who made a
contribution to this website becomes the artist-creator of "Screening
Circle". Besides, "Screening Circle" is fun--from the bright colours
to adorable images, all are in the standard style of computer games,
which corresponds to the "playing participation" mentioned above
and is exactly the style of Andy Deck.

Andy Deck, in an interview with Maia Mau, said: " [...] I can get people

82
to collaborate online who don't have exactly the same expectations
about what they are doing together. People who are participating
in my art projects sometimes generate ideas, and they usually
contribute to the so-called 'gift economy'. We can debate the quality
of the contributions and whether what is produced is coherent and
sophisticated, but there's no question that it's a departure from the
passive viewing of television and advertising. It's this calling forth
of a more active subject that joins the art practice and the activism"
(15).

The process of Collaborative Creation on the Internet is what

actionists are pursuing: the value of an artwork is created simply in
a short time (hour, minute, second) not in long-term preparation (a
month, year or century). Andy Deck's unpredictable action to invite
net users to join in the process of creation realised the immediate
creation style of actionists and explained the aesthetics of Net
Collaborative Creation.

--

Author's Biography
"Throughout the life of art creation, countless ups, downs and unpredictable variables
await; the constant pursuit of breakthroughs for exceeding thyself will therefore never
end. Creating art, writing and educating young people are the three elements that enrich
my life. The creation of art allows me to communicate with my own soul and to inspire
ideas in me about every trifle in my life. Writing to me is a way of simmering down and
sorting out my thoughts. During the process of writing, I am often struck with the fact
that I have so little knowledge. This awareness therefore urges me to never slack off. As
far as I'm concerned, educating young people is like a farmer irrigating the seedlings. It
requires all-time patience and commitment. Although the fruitage might not be perfect, it
is definitely worth committing oneself to educating our younger generations." (Yueh Hsiu
Giffen Cheng)

Yueh Hsiu Giffen Cheng is a Taiwanese New Media artist, researcher and writer based in
Sydney (Australia). She completed a master of "Visual Arts in Digital Art" at the Australian
National University and is now writing a doctoral thesis at the University of Technology,
Sydney (Australia). She has edited a series of books and papers on New Media Art and
contributed to various exhibitions like "Computing Art Works Show" (Australia, November
2000), "You & I" (Australia, March 2001), "To Ponder the Moment" (Taiwan, Februrary
2002) and “The Game of Color Changing” (Taiwan, October 2002). Her online-portfolio is
available on http://giffenspace.blogspot.com.

Notes/References/Links
(1) Inge, M. Thomas (2001): "Theories and Methodologies: Collaboration and Concepts
of Authorship", PMLA, vol. 116, no. 3., pp. 623-630.

83
(2) Xi Zhan, Lin (2006): "2006 Web 100", http://www2.bnext.com.tw/mag/2006_01_
01/2006_01_01_5242.html [on July 26, 2007].

(3) Yeh, Jin Rui (2002): "Net.Art--Exhibition", Art book, Taipei, p. 109.

(4) Habbo Hotel: http://www.habbo.com [on July 26, 2007].

(5) Foote, Jessica (2003): "Net Art: A New Voice in Art. Challenging Perceptions of the
Virtual and Physical", History & Philosophy of Mass Media Final Paper, http://babel.
massart.edu/~jfoote/netartpaper.html [on July 26, 2007].

(6) Renga: http://www.renga.com [on July 26, 2007].

(7) Starry Night: http://nothing.org/starrynight [on July 26, 2007].

(8) Guang Da, Chen (1998), "Art on the Net, is Not Equal to Net Art", The Journalist,
Taipei, p. 81.

(9) One Word Movie: http://www.onewordmovie.com [on July 26, 2007].

(10) Glyphiti: http://artcontext.net/act/06/glyphiti/docs/index.php [on July 26, 2007].

(11) Scaff, Julian H.: "Art and Authenticity in the Age of Digital Reproduction", Digital Arts
Institute, p. 2, http://www.digitalartsinstitute.org/scaff/index.html [on July 26, 2007].

(12) Shu Lea, Cheng (2000): "The Artist who Travels between Virtual and Reality World",
http://goya.bluecircus.net/archives/004358.html [on July 26, 2007].

(13) Let’s Make Art: http://www.yutseng.com/mart02/index.htm [on July 26, 2007].

(14) Screening Circle: http://artcontext.org/wire/art/2006/screeningCircle.html [on July

26, 2007].

(15) Deck, Andy (2005): "Interview with Andy Deck-Questions and comments from Maia
Mau", http://artcontext.org/act/05/interview/index.html [on July 26, 2007].

Curating Ambiguity--Electronic
Literature
Interview with Scott Rettberg
Conducted by Franz Thalmair

In autumn 2006 the Electronic Literature Organisation (1) released

the "Electronic Literature Collection Volume One" (2) [image, p. 93],
including selected works in New Media forms such as Hypertext
Fiction, Kinetic Poetry, generative and combinatory forms, Network
Writing, Codework, 3D, and Narrative Animations.

84
 Yu-Chuan Tseng, "Let's Make Art" (2003)
http://www.yutseng.com/mart02/index.htm

Andy Deck, "Screening Circle" (2006)

http://artcontext.org/act/05/screeningCircle

85
One of the main common characteristics of all Web-based literary
products is that they often can be read (or viewed, listened, played
with, used) in multifaceted ways. Accordingly, the curation of
Electronic Literature is challenged by ambiguity and heterogeneity
on different levels. As broadly termed by the Electronic Literature
Organisation itself, "Electronic Literature" describes a form of
cultural and artistic production on the Internet with important
literary aspects that takes advantage of the contexts provided by
the stand-alone or networked computer. Similar to what is not yet
consistently defined as Digital Art, Netart, net.art, Internet Art, New
Media Art, etc., the production of literary works on the Internet or
by other digital means ranges from terms like Computer Literature,
New Media Poetry to Codework and Hyperfiction, mixing up genres
with subgenres and single descriptions. In this context the methods of
classical Literature Studies are frequently transferred to a networked
and online surrounding without creating innovative categories.

Florian Cramer, a Germany based literary scholar and co-founder of

the curatorial platform "Runme.org", outlines in a very general way
that the Internet is based upon a code which acts on the logic of the
alphabet and therefore is finally based upon text. The Internet, for
the author, is literature in its original meaning, a system of letters
whose poetic value can only be discovered and appreciated by the
reader (3). In addition to this very general point of view, Cramer
also describes various levels of production and dissemination of
literary texts: on the one hand the Internet can purely work as a
medium of distribution for literature, on the other hand it operates
as a platform for Collaborative Writing or as a literary database. Not
until text needs a software interface, is generated automatically or
randomly programmed by rules, it is genuine Computer Literature.
Furthermore, he defines Literature on the Web to be understood
on various levels: poems, written in programming languages like
for example Perl, are readable in three ways. At first as a poem in
a natural language, then as a sequence of machine commands and
finally--once executed--as a poem in natural language again (4).

The "Electronic Literature Collection Volume One" represents an

anthology of sixty works, curated by N. Katherine Hayles, Nick
Montfort, Scott Rettberg and Stephanie Strickland. It was published
both on the Web and on CD-ROM, and is licensed under a Creative
Commons License with the aim to be freely accessible to individuals
and organisations. For the contextualisation and as a didactical

86
element of mediation, each work is accompanied by brief editorial
and author's descriptions. Furthermore, all products are tagged with
descriptive keywords ranging from the well known user-interface
paradigm Hypertext and technological backgrounds like Flash and
HTML/DHTML, up to more historical literature-basics like Memoir,
Combinatorial or Parody/Satire.

Some of the works like "Study Poetry" (2006) by Marko Niemi, a

playful word toy that enables the readers to play poker with words
instead of cards, were especially created for the collection. Only
few of the collected works are dating back to the earlier years of the
Internet, like for example "my body--a Wunderkammer" (1997) by
Shelley Jackson. This autobiographical Hypertext concentrates on
the relationship between human identity and the body's constituent
organs. It uses the form of HTML hypertext to revitalise the Memoir
genre, focusing on two of the most prominent themes in the digital
realm: body and identity.

Most of the works in the collection give a broad overview over the past
six years of literary production on the Internet. "Star Wars, one letter
at a time" (2005) by Brian Kim Stefans for example is the retelling of
a classical story, slowly but steadily introducing each character in the
cast to the viewer and thus blurring the reader's expectations from a
text. "Frequently Asked Questions about 'Hypertext'" (2004) [image,
p. 93] by Richard Holeton parodies a form of academic discourse
that sometimes takes itself too seriously. It springs from a poem
composed of anagrams of the word "hypertext" and plays with the
high seriousness that surrounded much early hypertext criticism.
The "Oulipoems" (2004) by Millie Niss and Martha Deed is a playful
series of pieces which combine concepts of Combinatorial Literature,
as developed by the "Oulipo" in France in the 1960ies. By transferring
this art historical background to the actual situation in the USA,
the authors create a suspense between Electronic Literature and its
predecessors in Experimental Literature.

The ELC1 is an eclectic anthology of sixty works, including many

different literary forms such as Hypertext Fiction, Kinetic Poetry,
Network Writing, Codework and Narrative Animations. What is
the main focus of the collection and what was the criterion for
the selection of the works: genre, textuality, technology, a histori-
cal basis?

87
Scott Rettberg: I can say that our basic criterion for selecting works
was "literary quality", which probably meant different things to
each of the three of us. We also agreed that there would need to be
consensus that a work should be included. We were choosing from
a limited universe of work. While we did encourage some people
to submit, we were working with a pool of submissions. The other
criterion was that we would need to be able to present the work on
both the Web and on CD-ROM. In composing the collection, we
were also thinking about trying to represent multiple modalities of
Electronic Writing, and to achieve a balance among several different
identifiable types of Electronic Writing, to give the reader a sense of
the breadth of the field.

The article "Acid-Free Bits. Recommendations for Long-Lasting

Electronic Literature" (5), published in 2004 by the ELO, is a "plea
for writers to work proactively in archiving their own creations,
and to bear these issues in mind even in the act of composition".
Do you think that preservation is already an integrative part of the
creative process and not exclusively the task of the curator?

Scott Rettberg: Yes, I do, to the extent that people creating Electronic
Literature can take certain steps, or work in certain ways, such as
using valid XHTML if their work is in that format, and documenting
their process, and making sure that their files are backed up and
distributed to multiple others. On the other hand, some writers and
artists have a sort of performance-oriented aesthetics, and don't
particularly care if their work lasts beyond a certain time frame. I do
however think that more and more writers of Electronic Literature
are conscious of the many preservation issues involved in Digital
Media artefacts, and are taking a more active role in seeing to it that
their works last. Curators may or may not rescue works of Electronic
Literature in the future. I think authors can and should do all that
they can to prevent the obsolescence of their work.

Of course, preservation is an important aspect of the ELC1 as a project.

At the very least, we know that there will be a couple thousand copies
of all of the bits of all of the works on the ELC1 widely distributed
and archived. While having many copies of a Digital artefact does
not assure that it will remain readable as technologies and platforms
change, it does mean that those future archivists will most likely be
able to access the files as they exist now.

88
Each single composition is presented with an additional author's
description. Did you select the works in a networked process
with them: did the authors participate in the process of filtering
and presenting? Or do all works derive from the ELO's directory
(6), the descriptive guide to over 2300 Electronic Literature com-
positions?

Scott Rettberg: The authors chose to submit works, and with each
work submitted, we asked them to provide a short description. This
was a separate process from that involved in the ELO Directory. The
editors then provided an additional editorial description for each
work, and we assigned each work a set of appropriate keywords. We
hope that this project will in a way serve as a pilot for a new approach
to classifying works within the Electronic Literature Directory as
well. The field has changed substantially since the directory was
launched, and we'd like to see it shift to a somewhat less hierarchical,
more emergent system of classification, using keywords or tags, as
well. You can read more about the kind of changes we envision for the
Directory in Joseph Tabbi's "Toward a Semantic Literary Web: Setting
a Direction for the Electronic Literature Organisation's Directory"
(7).

One of the principles of the ELO is to promote a non-proprietary

setting for Electronic Literature that facilitates cross-referencing,
mixing, and institutional networking. The collection is released
under a Creative Commons license on the Internet and additio-
nally provided on DVD. Who do you want to read/use the collec-
tion and how do you want it to be read/used?

Scott Rettberg: Essentially, we want everyone who might be

interested to be exposed to this work. In designing the project and in
releasing it under a Creative Commons License, we are encouraging
people to share and redistribute it for noncommercial purposes.
While I would say that the target audience is very broad--"readers"-
- we were thinking in particular of how the project might be utilised
in classrooms, and perhaps included in library collections. That's part
of the reason why it is released on CD-ROM in a case appropriate for
library marking and distribution, in addition to its Web incarnation.
Our hope is that people will enjoy experiencing the works individually,
and will study them in classrooms around the world, and will also
perhaps be inspired to create and share new work of their own.

89
According to Trebor Scholz, on the Internet "curators become
meta-artists. They set up contexts for artists who provide con-
texts" (8). Which different contexts are necessary for Electronic
Literature to be presented in an appropriate way: the original
space, a curator's and/or artist's statement, the source code or
technological background?

Scott Rettberg: That's tough to answer in a general way, as each work,

and each presentation of each work, is different. For instance, there
are at least two types of Electronic Literature that are not included
in the collection--installations and Network-based Art that integrate
real-time data. Many works of Electronic Literature are also presented
as a kind of live performance as well--for instance I've seen Talan
Memmott present "Lexia to Perplexia" using only a chalkboard. So
it's difficult to say what is and what is not appropriate. Most works of
Electronic Literature don't have the same type of life as works of print
literature do, in one or a series of fixed editions. Rather, they typically
are revised over a longer period of time, and presented in a variety
of contexts. Something like the "Electronic Literature Collection" is
more of a snapshot of a moment in time in the life of the field and in
the lives of the individual works included.

I think the types of documentation you mention above are

all important tools for readers. The more context, the more
documentation available to the reader, the better. In the case of the
"Electronic Literature Collection", with each work we include a short
editorial introduction, a short statement by the author, technical
notes, and a descriptive keyword index. While one can imagine more
comprehensive critical editions of individual works of Electronic
Literature, for an anthology of Electronic Literature, I think that's a
pretty good basic set of context-establishing tools.

Do you think that Electronic Literature can be shown in a classi-

cal art institution like a museum, a gallery or even a library? Or is
it rather a form of cultural artefact, exclusively produced on and
for the Web?

Scott Rettberg: Yes, I do. In fact, I have seen Electronic Literature

successfully presented in all of those forums. While the Web is the
main venue for the majority of Electronic Literature, I think that it
is important to see it exhibited in the kinds of venues in which we
have been taught to appreciate other forms of art and literature as

90
well. These works are the products of a dialogue not only with other
forms of digital artefacts, but with historical art and literature as well.
I think many of the pieces in the collection, for instance, owe clear
debts to 20th century movements such as Dada, Surrealism, and
post-modernist movements. It makes sense to see them in the same
contexts as other kinds of art and literature.

Are you already working on "Electronic Literature Collection

Volume Two"? If so: when will it be published and what will be the
difference to "Volume One"?

Scott Rettberg: Right now we're working on getting funding together

to produce and distribute "Volume Two". The editorial board will
rotate with each iteration of the ELC, so I personally won't be involved
in editing it. We hope to produce the ELC on a biennial basis, so
I anticipate that the next one will emerge in 2008. I anticipate the
call for works will go out sometime in the second half of 2007, along
with the announcement of the second editorial board. I'd encourage
people who think the project is worthwhile to join the ELO and make
a contribution in support of it.

Which of the sixty works is your favourite one and why?

Scott Rettberg: I'm fond of a great deal of them, and couldn't pick
a favourite. I value different works for different reasons, but haven't
regretted the time I've spent with any of them. The collection as a
whole is an awesome tool for me as an educator, as it includes several
works that I have taught in the past, and has exposed me to many that
I will teach in the future. It's a kind of semester-in-a-box for those of
us who teach Electronic Literature.

--

Curator's Biography
Scott Rettberg is a Hypertext author and theorist, born in Chicago in 1970. He worked as
an assistant professor of "New Media Studies" at the Richard Stockton College of New
Jersey and is now an associate professor of Humanistic Informatics at the University of
Bergen, Norway. He writes, and writes about New Media and Electronic Literature. As
the co-founder and first executive director of the "Electronic Literature Organisation", the
author has published various experimental literary works. His website: http://retts.net

91
Notes/References/Links
(1) The Electronic Literature Organisation, http://eliterature.org [on August 2, 2007].

(2) The Electronic Literature Collection, Volume One, http://collection.eliterature.org/1 [on

August 2, 2007].

(3) Cramer, Florian (1999): "Literatur im Internet", http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70/essays/

literatur_im_internet/literatur_im_internet.html#1 [on August 2, 2007].

(4) Cramer, Florian (2001): "sub merge {my $enses; ASCII Art, Rekursion, Lyrik in
Programmiersprachen", http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70/essays/ascii_art_rekursion_
programmiersprachen-lyrik/ascii_art_rekursion_programmiersprachen-lyrik.html [on
August 2, 2007].

(5) Montfort, Nick / Wardrip-Fruin, Noah (2004): "Acid-Free Bits. Recommendations

for Long-Lasting Electronic Literature", http://eliterature.org/pad/afb.html [on August 2,
2007].

(6) The Electronic Literature Directory, http://directory.eliterature.org [on August 2,

2007].

(7) Tabbi, Joe (2007): "Toward a Semantic Literary Web: Setting a Direction for the
Electronic Literature Organisation's Directory", http://eliterature.org/pad/slw.html [on
August 2, 2007].

(8) Scholz, Trebor (2006): "Curating New Media Art", http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/

idc/2006-April/000330.html [on August 2, 2007].

Relational Aesthetics in Cura-

ting Internet-Based Art
By Penny Leong Browne

Internet-based Art is at the core productions of code, that not only

relies on the software to create the work, but also the hardware and
bandwidth of users/visitors and/or institutions to distribute their
work. But it is not so much that there are innovative technologies
at work that pose new challenges and strategies of curatorship, but
that these technologies have developed new systems of information
distribution and, above all, new forms of social engagement.

First off, it is necessary to specify what I mean by Internet-based Art.

I define Internet-based Art as any art work, regardless of its original
source, whether it is produced specifically for the Internet or is a

92
Electronic Literature Organisation, "Electronic Literature Collection, Volume One" (2006)
http://collection.eliterature.org/1

Richard Holeton, "Frequently Asked Questions about Hypertext" (2004/2006)

http://collection.eliterature.org/1/works/holeton__frequently_asked_questions_about_
hypertext.html

93
remediation from an existing physical work, that depends on the
networked structures and technologies of the Internet to produce its
meaning.
To begin talking about curatorial strategies specific to Internet Art it
is necessary to understand the ways in which Internet Art operates at
multiple levels, from its very production and distribution and within
the experiential field through which it is received by the viewer.
Examined within the framework of relational aesthetics, a term which
Nicolas Bourriaud, a French philosopher and curator, coined and
defined in his 2002 book, "Esthétique Relationnelle" as an "Aesthetic
theory consisting in judging artworks on the basis of the inter-human
relations which they represent, produce or prompt", the Internet as
virtual gallery space can be seen as an intersubjective experiential
space in which art works produce meaning through the distribution
networks of code (1).

These networks of code, which I define as everything from the cross

platform software that artists use to create their works (i.e. Flash,
Second Life, Audacity, Photoshop), to the code that dictates the way
these art works are categorised and displayed through current Web
protocol technologies and proprietory source code that are behind
what is now the alternative galleries of New Media. Blog platforms
(i.e. WordPress and Blogger), social networking sites (i.e. del.icio.
us) and the photo and video sharing communities (i.e. YouTube and
Flickr) are just some of the virtual spaces that curators are using
today to present new forms of art making and display.

The proliferation of cross-platform software and Internet

technologies have allowed for new methods of curating artwork that
utilises the swarming dynamics of social networking sites and the
parallel processes of social affinity to make connections and meaning
in artwork. The glue of social affinity within social networking
technologies (or what Bourriaud refers to as a "bonding agent" of
moments of subjectivities with singular experiences to make what
is known as art) is so sticky that meanings are produced out of
otherwise discontinuous and fragmented works (2). The compelling
power of collective identities to produce meaning has made the
curatorial strategies of content and contextualisation less effective
and therefore less relevant for online exhibitions. The way Bourriaud
describes this eclipse of process over content/contextualisation is
by considering current artistic practices as "formations" rather than
"forms"; he argues that contemporary art "exists in the encounter and

94
in the dynamic relationship enjoyed by an artistic proposition with
other formations, artistic or otherwise" (2).

The curation of art that privileges process over content and

contextualisation then, has opened up new ways of experiencing
art not as a finite closed object, but as a dynamic living entity that
shape-shifts depending on the way it is encountered through the
collective gaze of the Internet characterised by multiple identities
and intersubjectivities.

The fact that these technologies cannot be separated from the

artwork prefigures the first great challenge to curators of Internet
Art. A multitude of questions abound, of course, but foremost lies the
following question: How does a curator position himself or herself
within this socially networked space largely dictated by current
technologies, in order to facilitate these multiple intersubjective
ways of experiencing an artwork, while at the same time be able to
direct, to some effective degree, the content or contextualisation of an
artwork or exhibition?

The answer to this overarching question lies in the examination of

Internet-based curatorial practices within the framework of relational
aesthetics. Bourriaud defines art as "a game, whose forms, patterns
and functions develop and evolve according to periods and social
contexts; it is not an immutable essence" (2). This statement neatly
sums up the critical departure from which to understand how curators
can position themselves as what I term, "cultural agents of continual
relevance" whose practices are not so much informed by the software
or Internet technologies that define the work but by the processes
of social engagement (facilitated or invented by these technologies)
through which these works come into being. In other words, it is not
so much the content of the artwork itself that matters, but the way in
which the artwork makes meaning through the social networks of
information distribution and how eventually it is received within the
experiential field of the participant/viewer.

What do I mean by the term "social networks of distribution"? "Social

networks" form the quintessential element that gives the Internet its
social attraction: the connections between people and society without
the constraints of time and geography. By "distribution" I mean the
coded processes through which information and data flows between
these connections.

95
The next question may be: What is this experiential field of the
participant/viewer? One of the distinguishing qualities of Internet-
based Art stems from the duo processes of collective creation and
the collective gaze. Regardless of whether or not the artwork is a
digital work produced for the Internet, or if the artwork is a digital
copy of a material object, the moment it enters into the virtual space
of the Internet, the artwork becomes a work of collective creation
through the technology (Web tools and transmission networks) that
enables it into its virtual form. This happens in a place which I call the
"experiential field" through which remote viewers can experience the
process of the work from conception to final realisation, regardless of
time and place.

In a similar sense, the experiential field of Internet-based Art is

the arena in which the collision between the act of the gaze and
the act of creation comes together instantly with the simple click
of a mouse. Through a simple click, a viewer/participator sets in
motion, regardless of the navigational design by the artist, curator
or the technology platform itself, a series of subjective decisions that
determine a multitude of unknowable possibilities and outcomes of
meaning.

Through this slipperiness of meaning, I believe that the Internet

not only functions as a relational aesthetics, it is in itself a relational
aesthetics. Bourriaud poignantly sums up the distinction between
theory and form in terms of how relational aesthetics functions as
a vehicle of semiotic production: "Relational aesthetics does not
represent a theory of art, this would imply the statement of an origin
and a destination, but a theory of form" (2). Coalescing into form
is the Internet, from a boundless space without origin to a site for
collective creation, voyeurism, collaboration, personal confession
and game play.

Consider then, the Internet through which the simple action of a

mouse's click, initiates the processes of fusion, riffing and remixing
to produce an infinite array of connections and possibilities for
meanings to arise. A mouse's click is the hot key of semiotic
production within the Internet, initiating click-throughs that follow
a "trajectory evolving through signs, objects, forms, gestures …" (2).
Along this route onto which art is mapped, or in Bourriaud's words,
onto which artwork is placed like "a dot on a line" (2), is the cursor
clicking away through these dots.

96
This is the turbulent yet fertile territory that a curator of New Media
operates within, discovering wonderful new forms to stage meaning
but at the same time facing unique challenges of presenting cohesive
exhibitions within an open-ended, mobile and virtual space of the
Internet that has very little use for the hegemonic devices of subject
classification (i.e. sociocultural, geographical, historical). The fluidity
of identity within online communities has made sure that social
affinity is developed more from the processes of communication than
from the content of the communication; for example, I was recently
perusing YouTube when I came across a member asking other people
to send video recordings of themselves making sandwiches; on the
surface, one may see this as just another act of absurdist triviality
so pervasive on the Internet, yet it illustrates an important point in
curating Internet Art: it's not so much about the sandwich per se but
the collective act of video-recording and sharing of an experience
that motivated people to participate. If this is indeed characteristic
of Internet behaviour and I believe it is, then it is reasonable to
expect that if curators wish to produce online exhibitions that are
compelling enough to encourage discourse with an Internet-based
audience, they need to consider the actions and processes of social
engagement as integral parts of their curatorial strategy.

Bourriaud's concept of "coexistence criterion" is also useful in

understanding the way social engagement operates within meaning-
production in staging online exhibitions. Bourriaud defines a "co-
existence criterion", which he describes as any artwork producing "a
model of sociability, which transposes reality or might be conveyed
in it" (1). So there is a question we are entitled to ask in front of any
aesthetic production: "Does this work permit me to enter into dialogue
[Could I exist, and how, in the space it defines?]" (1). So it follows
then that curators of Internet Art may ask: does this exhibition allow
for multiple points of entry and if so, how does it facilitate dialogue
across multiple subjectivities? To answer this question, presupposes
another:

Where does a curator fit into this elaborate enterprise of meaning-

production and how can curators as "cultural agents of continual
relevance" operate effectively within the experiential field of the
Internet?

I believe that one of the key strategies a curator of Internet Art can
employ in producing dialogue and thus stage a rich experiential field

97
is to locate as many points of entry as possible through which the
transactions of meaning can be made between an artwork and its
viewer. The challenge is not in finding these points but in gathering
them together in a way that fulfils a desired curatorial mandate or
direction for an exhibition. One of the reasons why these points of
entry are difficult to orchestrate into ontological systems is because
they are not fixed but constantly moving, producing semiotic
pathways that can appear and disappear at the whim of a mouse's
click. While a curator can somewhat control the context of the work
in this manner, (by designing the navigation of an exhibition's site to
offer viewers alternate and multiple points of entry into the displayed
works) in the end, it is up to the viewer himself through his own click
actions to choose if, when, and where to enter the work.

In this way, a curator can only present opportunities for meaning-

making as opposed to coming up with pre-determined stagings of
a work with fixed points of entry that ultimately exclude multiple
subjectivities and discourage discourse.

I therefore suggest that curators can position themselves as effective

"cultural agents of continual relevance" by utilising the Internet's
social distribution network, working within the flow of the established
economic and institutional infrastructures that produce these
technologies of social networking, and at the same time employing
these technologies (without falling prey to presenting artworks
based on the technology itself) in order to facilitate adaptable yet
meaningful connections that can be made from intersubjective
positions of creator and participator/viewer.

This means developing a keen understanding into the way social

networks operate in producing social relations of affinity and
connections. Through this understanding, curators can develop
effective methods of categorisation and contextualisation that not
only allow for, but facilitate the collective productions of meaning.

Bourriaud's ideas of the intersubjective encounter and collective

meaning-production are particularly relevant to the way in which
collective acts of meaning are made. Similarly, they illustrate the
ways in which the social networking activities of blogging, photo and
video sharing and social tagging create alternate systems of ontology
and contextualisation.

98
Today, curators are using social networking sites such as "WordPress"
and "Blogger", photo and video sharing sites such as "YouTube" and
"Flickr", and social tagging sites such as "del.icio.us" and "21Things",
as sites for making and showing Internet-based Art. Through such
technologies as RSS feeds and forums, these sites also become living
labs for experimentation, the testing of curatorial strategies and tools,
and for receiving feedback from viewers/participants.

Examples of experimental curatorial practices can be viewed at

online galleries such as the "Dispatx Art Collective" [image, p. 101]
which defines itself as a "curatorial platform that provides the tools
of a socialised Internet for the development and presentation of
contemporary art and literature" (3). Through the architecture of
the site and the integration of information management and social
networking technologies such as RSS feeds, threaded discussions,
tagging, personal profiling and photo-sharing, Dispatx is presented
as a new kind of art space that encourages the making, viewing and
contextualisation of art as a shared endeavour among curators, artists
and the public.

By investing significantly into the potentiality for distributed social

networks to reshape and redefine the production and experience of
art on the Internet, Dispatx aims to reap its ultimate reward, becoming
a dynamic model of cultural production which the curators describe
as this: "Through the organic process of receptivity and adaptation
the Dispatx site becomes almost a living entity--a porous, shape-
shifting archive adjusting its form over time" (4). Along this frontier
of curatorship, timely questions arise and pose unique challenges
for the curator of Internet Art: How far can these possibilities of
curation take us without confining Internet-based Art as a continual
experiment of processes that may risk precluding other forms of
Internet-based Art? And how can we as cultural agents negotiate
meaning with a faceless, nameless audience without giving in to the
fickle interests and sensibilities of a collective voice dominated by
popular culture?

These questions, and undoubtedly many more questions, will arise,

as curators try to design exhibitions in ways that generate meaningful
transactions of art and sign within the experiential field of the
Internet.

99
Author's Biography
Penny Leong Browne is an artist and writer who works with hybrid, artificial intelligent
systems and Computational Poetics to investigate the interstices of human and
technology interaction. She is interested in exploring the openings and pauses between
the analog and digital, materiality and immateriality, and the virtual and the real. Her work
takes the form of Experimental Narrative, Avatar Performance, and Interactive Video.
One of her current projects is an interactive sculptural work that applies fractal algorithms
to translate people's drawings into 3-D paper sculptures.

She is a member (a.k.a. AliseIborg Zhaoying) of "Second Front" (http://www.slfront.

blogspot.com), an avatar performance group in the virtual world, Second Life, that performs
absurdist interventions informed by Situationist International and Dadaist strategies.
She is also attending "Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design" where she is conducting
research on cyborg and avatar beings, virtual leakage, coded realism and mixed reality.
Her writings and digital work have appeared in various art and literary journals including
"Sub-Terrain", "Fuse", "The Capilano Review", "Dimsum", "Other Voices" and "Front
Magazine". Recent shows include "'i' Cyborg 2.0", which was selected for the Signal
and Noise Festival 2007 (http://www.signalandnoise.ca) ("VIVO Video In/Video Out",
Vancouver, Canada), and "Encounters of the Uncanny", an interactive video installation
in which participants interact with avatars by performing bodily gestures (Media Gallery,
Emily Carr Institute, Vancouver, Canada) and "Martyr Sauce", an Avatar Performance (in
collaboration with Second Front) that interrogated virtual gaming behaviour by invading a
Rausch combat zone within Second Life.

Notes/References/Links
(1) Gair Dunlop: "Bourriaud--Relational Aesthetics--Glossary", http://www.gairspace.org.
uk/htm/bourr.htm [on August 2, 2007], (Originally: Bourriaud, Nicolas (2002): "Relational
Aesthetics", les presses du réel, Dijon).

(2) Creativity and Cognition Studios: "Relational form", http://www.creativityandcognition.

com/blogs/legart/wp-content/uploads/2006/07/Borriaud.pdf [on August 2, 2007],
(Originally: Bourriaud, Nicolas (2002): "Relational Aesthetics", les presses du réel,
Dijon).

(3) Dispatx Art Collective: "About Dispatx", http://www.dispatx.com/basic.php?show=1485

[on August 2, 2007].

(4) Dispatx Art Collective: "My Dispatx", http://www.dispatx.com/mydispatx [on August

2, 2007].

100
Oliver Luker, Vanessa Oniboni, David Stent, "Dispatx Art Collective" (2004)
http://www.dispatx.com/show

101
Web 2.0 and “looping-passing”
Curatorship
By Eva Moraga

The term Web 2.0 strongly arouses hate and passion in equal shares.
Some people consider it a revolutionary change in social and cultural
production, some others do not even believe in its novelty or existence
as a concept. But since Web 2.0 apologists and enemies are able to talk
about it, there must be some subtle underpinning invisible threads
that put together a common agreed basement to start a debate.

The term Web 2.0 comprises multiple polymorphic Internet-based

platforms, websites and applications, although they have countless
and important differences in concept, structure and goals. Blogs,
wikis and social Internet-based applications/websites are the main
objects of discussion in those endless debates about the relevance
of Web 2.0, and their supposed common features have become the
main starting point for reflection. Some degree of consensus seems
to have emerged about various ideological and formal functions and
principles that all Web 2.0 applications (1) seem to share and foster
(2): "Participation, collectivism, virtual communities, amateurism"
(3), "the architecture of participation" (4), "an infrastructure that
allows Web users to easily create, share, tag, and connect content
and knowledge" (5), "sharing, ranking, rating, collective intelligence,
empowering, and Social Software" (6).

Most of these citations stress social and collective aspects of Web

2.0 like participation, collective action (collective content creation,
sharing and categorisation/hierarchisation), community generation
and socialisation, and that is why some critical voices about the
novelty of Web 2.0 have been heard, pointing out that all those
features were already inspiring the Internet from its very beginning
(7). Nowadays the difference is, in my opinion, that those aspects are
not only inspiring visions but real by-products of two factors already
mentioned in the previous quotations: architecture and infrastructure.
I would like to bring attention to these factors because, in my opinion,
they are essential--together with socialisation and collective action--
to our reflection on Web 2.0 and curating.

Wikis were conceived as platforms for collaborative Web editing, as

"a database for creating, browsing and searching information" (8)

102
that can be edited by multiple users. A dynamic functional skeleton is
made available to users to aggregate or modify content. Wikis were a
tool whose architecture was thought for communities. Communities
created wikis and wikis created communities as a typical effect of tell-
a-friend actions or attracting people with topics of common interest.
Their structure and functioning were potentially and in reality true
community generators. Likewise, blogs were only considered to be
part of this Web 2.0 sphere when, as Tom Coates and Tim O’Reilly
said, they turned from being simple personal websites into "a
conversational mess of overlapping communities" (9), thanks to tools
like "permalinks", RSS and trackbacks (10), that allowed users to point
to particular comments on other blogs, track blog modifications and
updates and know when other blogs refer to their blogs and respond
to them.

These reciprocal, circular, multidirectional or looping pointing out

(through structural tools such as links, comments, and tracking
systems) connected people and created groups around common
interests. However, there is a relevant design difference between
wikis and blogs. Wikis stressed collaboration and community
generation in order to reach a common and pragmatic goal, whereas
blogs emphasised communication and individual expression, and
cooperation and group creation came as a result or a side effect
of looping blogging. Nevertheless, those structural differences in
architectural design had a similar underpinning outcome: Web
socialisation and community spirit.

Social Internet-based software and websites were a step forward.

Their architecture was specifically designed for socialisation and
group development. They were offered as unfilled platforms,
empty containers where users can aggregate and share content
as well as communicate with other users. User participation and
communication are encouraged or stimulated through structural
interaction mechanisms. These platforms provide an infrastructure,
an architectural skeleton in which multiple communication and
information sharing tools can be used in numerous and flexible or
sometimes not so flexible ways, giving rise to unexpected uses or
consequences.

User aggregation of varied content is determined by manifold

reasons, and content character shapes the general mood of these
platforms. They normally have a common organisation: first, the user

103
has her own space where she can describe herself or her anonymous
character, and her interests (enhanced user individuality, visibility
and relevance, although in a friendly and pseudo-innocuous way, are
key points for success); second, the user can post comments (blogs),
upload and share files (text, images, video); third, other users can
communicate with her, making comments, sending emails, chatting
etc; fourth, people can describe, classify and organise interesting
information by adding their own categories, tags; and last but not
least, a looping link structure where users link to other users who
link to other users who link to other users who link to… infinitely,
but always inside these "bubble" endogamic websites.

Formerly, content, even in the most dynamic websites, was mainly

ruled by the owners of the website, although there were tools
like forums, public chats and mailing lists that also facilitated
socialisation, participation and community creation. Nowadays there
is a supposed empowerment of user-generated content philosophy
and crowd socialisation coming from the very conception of these
Web 2.0 websites. However, the difference now is that these websites
are specifically designed to foster those features through a particular
architecture/structure in order to become successful businesses.
User-aggregated content and collective socialisation are just market
strategies for getting an increasing number of users/consumers using
certain services.

Wikis and social Internet-based applications (including those that

allow create blogs) could therefore be defined as providers of clean
and empty infrastructures for collective content-aggregation and
socialisation. And this is what I think has been the underpinning
leitmotif in some of the most challenging Online Art platforms set up
since the early beginning of Internet: curatorial platforms as providers
of naked infrastructure. But infrastructure is not equal to context. It
is the content aggregated to this infrastructure which creates context.
The architecture of these online platforms was thought to serve as
metaphorical organic shelves where to place art objects/projects. The
bookshelf is not the context. The books placed next to other books
are the context. Thus, these online curators would not be context
providers for artists who provide contexts, as Trebor Scholz has
suggested (11), but infrastructure providers for collective context
generation, content-aggregation and art community generation.

The first Online Art platforms were all very radical statements

104
against traditional curatorship. Projects as "C@C", "Rhizome.org",
"Turbulence.org", "mad03.net", "runme.org" or "low-fi Net Art
locator" were drawing on programming tools to set up what was
progressively called art platforms (12), and to challenge ways and
models of art production, presentation, curating and distribution.
All of them were created before the buzzword Web 2.0 was launched.
They all presented themselves as naked skeletons to be filled with art
projects by artists, and tried to foster a sense of community between
artists working in the Net Art realm.

In 2003 I was one of the eight artist-curators of "!MAD 03--2nd

International Meeting of Experimental Art" that took place physically
in Madrid and virtually on the net (http://www.mad03.net). We tried
to reflect on and contribute other ways of curating and producing
exhibitions. We were trying to put into question the role of all-powerful
"guru" curators. As artists and curators of "MAD03" we thought that
our mission was not that of offering an a priori interpretation of the
presented works, a metaphorical, literary or philosophical context/
statement, but of providing an opportunity for art works to present
themselves. We were actually challenging what we thought at that
time was considered to be the overall predominant role of curators:
contextualisation, filtering, legitimation and interpretation. We
wanted to be art agitators, art facilitators. We just wanted to offer
infrastructure, platforms, for action and creation. The city, shops,
screens in the underground and the Web were just starting platforms.
And I think this was the common intellectual background behind all
these mentioned art platforms above.

I was in charge of "MAD03NET" section, which I described as "a

platform for projects", where more than 500 Digital Art projects,
from thirty countries of every geographical region in the world, were
shown. There were four open calls to which artists could submit their
work, uploading information, images and links to their work. Unlike
the other lines of work of MAD03, in which the artists (not works)
were pre-selected by the artist-curators (although there were no other
later content filters or action guidelines at all), I refused to select artists
from the beginning, and "MAD03NET" was presented as an area of
open participation, meant to serve as loudspeaker for digital artistic
creation. The works, together with a description and a link to the art
project website, were uploaded into a personal artist webpage as they
were sent in by artists, so that anyone who participated experienced
the same attention from the public and was aware of level and quality

105
of art proposals presented up to that moment. I wanted participating
artists to know at all times about the other participants and works
being presented, in order to stimulate the flow of intercommunication
between projects and artists. The website pretended to serve as a
communication platform for artists. One of "MAD03NET" sections,
"MAD03NET ZIN", was even conceived as a platform for platforms;
with the intention to provide visibility to those websites specifically
set up by groups of artists who work on creating new channels for
distribution and viewing of artistic projects websites also conceived
as art works in their own right, rather than just exhibition sites. My
intention was to foster communication and future collaboration
between people working on these platforms. From my point of
view, these goals were equally supported by all those mentioned art
platforms.

However, apart from these art platforms, most of primary online

curatorial projects translated previous conventional curatorial
mindsets to the Internet, using the Web as a mere "shop window" or
a "virtual gallery space" for selected works and theoretical statements.
Due to technology state-of-the-art at that time, most of Online Art
exhibitions were just static websites (13) with a bunch of links to
Online Art works presented under a speculative statement. There
was almost no functional difference (14) to other websites created
by common people (personal websites), commercial companies or
other professionals (writers, journalists, musicians…).

Unfortunately nowadays, in spite of crucial contribution of those

mentioned art platforms and despite current Internet evolution
through dynamic websites and Social Web philosophy, most of
online curatorial proposals still keep this outdated way of being: a
technologically sophisticated Online Art paper-like catalogue (15).
And although a large amount of theoretical texts by prominent curators
have talked about online curatorship specificities, highlighting how
Internet and other electronic tools (as email, mailing lists…) have
turned our way of working into new collaborative and networked
models (16), changing curator/curator and curator/artist relationships,
transforming the process of filtering, describing and classifying and
introducing democracy and public participation in curatorial process
(17), many online curators are still practising their traditional task of
agency, intervention, clarification and interpretation, perpetuating
long-established curatorial models without challenging them.

106
All those arguments seem more to be mere siren songs than reality,
more beautiful dreams of what can be than what it really is. I can
only recognise a few of these characteristics in these mentioned
art platforms and in some projects I will mention in relation with
Web 2.0 philosophy later. I can hardly see them in most of online
exhibitions.

Today curators have to go beyond art platforms. Art platforms

described by Olga Goriunova as "a platform on which to build an
art trend", "an online platform that enables the building of a cultural
movement entirely through the use of its own mechanisms" that
"describes a Web platform that solicits, induces and produces a cultural
or artistic phenomenon", as "a technical bottlenecks of moderating,
featuring, voting and making comments that channel the collective
effort (that) help(s) create an artistic or cultural phenomenon" (18),
have become obsolete, have to be challenged again.

Building on art platform spirit and on the concept of art platforms as

providers of naked infrastructure for collective context generation,
content-aggregation, and art community generation, new curating
is taking advantage of ready-made Web 2.0 applications that can be
described similarly. Nowadays, artists and curators do not need to
construct a software platform to promote their work or ideas.

Web 2.0 applications are available for use. But how are they being
used? What are these curators or artists trying to question this time?
What are their ideological goals? Are they going beyond what these
art platforms were trying to do? Are they using these technologies in
a different way to institutions (19)? Are they promoting curating in
new ways?

Some of them use "MySpace" or "Facebook" accounts and tools and

typical MySpace/Facebook user strategies:

-- to exhibit works that "critique[s], mimic[s], or otherwise utilise[s]

the structural logic of social networking sites and other Web 2.0
phenomena" (20) (as Concept Trucking, an exhibition venue in
MySpace held by LeisureArts); or

-- building on a recurrent historical utopian dream, "to bring

the artistic way of thinking closer to everyone, trying to make
contemporary art available for all" (21) and to "exhibit art pieces that

107
use the MySpace interface as it's main support" meaning that "the
MySpace profile is the art piece" (22) (as Nano-Corporation, a so-
called art company) (23); or

-- to "feature schedules of art from artists with a presence in

MySpace… endors(ing) the notion that 'everyone is an artist'" (24)
(as Top 8 Gallery, a New Media curatorial project [image, p. 113]);
or

-- to try to be "an experiment in connectivity and networking",

concerned about "a parallel abundance of accessible tools and channels
to distribute creative production, in contradiction to the historical
systems of collectors, dealers, museums and the various strata of
agents who mediate among them and between them and artists" (25)
(as Blogumenta, a so-called "first art gallery in Facebook"); or

-- to put into place "an interactive platform… based on the concepts

of open art-work, cause and/vs. effect, and free association of ideas;
where the last art-work is always inspired to the previous one, in
order to generate an open art-work in continuous evolution that
never completes itself " (26) (as Tobecontinued, a so-called "group
exhibition in progress").

An amazing experiment of physical and online collective curating

and art organising, "Node London" (27), used a wiki system to
articulate curatorial and managerial work and to set up a collaborative
art/curatorial platform in a remarkable way. Other projects mix
mailing lists, blogs, physical and online discussion and physical
gallery exhibition in order to help "peers connect, communicate
and collaborate, creating controversies, structures and culture using
both digital networks and shared physical environments" (28) and to
experiment with collaborative curating (as "DIWO", an E-Mail Art
project [image, p. 113]) (29).

Others combine blogs and collaborative tools as "Platial" (30) in

order to foster public participation (as "Urban Curators") (31). Some
others use blogs as a platform for blogs: a blog which sends the user
to other blogs, without any express curatorial statement (as "Blog Art"
[image, p. 114]) (32) or simply use blogs as the "traditional" online
exhibitions I mentioned before, although their supposed goal is to
"create a flexible and open-ended space to address (their) ideas" (33)
(as "New Climates"). And others explore new Web 2.0 phenomena,

108
like social bookmarking/tagging, to reflect on social curating and
context (as "TAGallery" (34), a project by CONT3XT.NET (35)).

As we see, these curatorial projects work on similar ideological,

conceptual and structural premises as previous art platforms, although
they take advantage of naked commercial or non-commercial ready-
made Web 2.0 infrastructures in order to offer almost empty platforms
for future content. There are almost no theoretical statements about
their goal, purpose or future development or if there are, they are
summarised in two or three lines in order to provide a light guideline
to participants. The curatorial concept evolves at the same time as
content is uploaded to these platforms; and context, depending on
changing fluid content, is in perpetual progress and transformation.
Curating, therefore, becomes an everlasting "passing" ability derived
from a fluctuating and flexible infrastructure. Simultaneously, these
projects foster not only the development of artists' communities
similar to prior art platforms, but also activate artist-public
socialisation (due to be integrated in popular social websites).
Looping link/RSS/trackback mechanisms between friends or network
members (as in MySpace or del.icio.us or in the blogosphere) create
circular claustrophobic collective self-referentialism. In multi-ring
art infrastructures, curating is contaminated with circularity and
cloisterism combined with a certain centrifugal spiralling.

However, other social aspects of Web 2.0 websites, such as collective

rating, voting, and ranking, are hardly used or explored. I think that
a combative spirit against the development of hierarchies and elitism
in the physical art world (where market quotations and rankings,
gallery classification and other power structures create undesirable
hierarchy ranks) is a common trait in these projects. That is the reason
why these tools are hardly ever put in practical use in these platforms,
although I must say that tagging systems in some of these projects
(as "TAGallery") introduce, at least, a certain degree of link hierarchy
and, thus, content hierarchy, with effects worthy of investigation.

Thus, a non-hierarchical "looping-passing" curatorship is lately

making its way. It is still too soon to draw conclusions on the
evolution of online curatorship thanks to Web 2.0 tools. However, a
first approach to these initial proposals shows us that they build on
earlier art platforms philosophy, and that the main ideas of Web 2.0,
its lights and shadows, still have to be deeply challenged and explored
from a curatorial point of view.

109
There is still ground for future research and experimental action
on collective infrastructures and social curating. And other future
questions arise: are online curators really interested in social curating?
Can online social curating be the end of curating?

--

Author's Biography
Eva Moraga is a writer, lecturer, curator, artist lawyer and art consultant. Curator of
"MAD03NET: A Platform for Electronic Art Projects" in "MAD03 Festival of Experimental Arts
in Madrid" (Spain, 2003, http://www.mad03.net). Assistant curator at the Mediamuseum-
-ZKM (Karlsruhe) in two exhibitions: "Stephano Scheda. 'Meteo 2004'" (01/07/06 -
13/08/06) and "Ignasi Aballí. '0-24 h'" (01/09/06 - 15/10/06). Last long research: a study
about the ZKM and learning organisations: "Cultural Learning Organisations: A Model".
Last written catalogue text: "New Media, New Museums" for the exhibition "Sequences
76/2006", organised by the Spanish-American Museum of Contemporary Art of Badajoz
(Spain). Last lecture: "Second Glocal Life: Outsiders and Insiders in a Virtual Art World"
at "Glocal & Outsiders Conference. Interplay between Art, Culture and Technology", 13
July 2007 in Prague, organised by "Center for Global Studies" (Academy of Sciences and
Charles University), "International Centre for Art and New Technologies" (CIANT), New
Media Studies (Charles University) and "Prague Biennale 3".

Forthcoming lectures: "New Media and Web 2.0--Challenges for Cultural Organisations"
at CHArt Conference "Digital Archive Ferver" 8-9 November 2007, London; and "The
Computation Center at Madrid University, 1966-1973: An Example of true Interaction
between Art, Science and Technology" at "Re:place 2007--International Conference on
the Histories of Media, Art, Science and Technology" next November in Berlin, co-chaired
by Andreas Broeckmann and Oliver Grau. Other relevant texts: "Net-Art: Metamorphosis
of Art practice?" in Juan José Gómez Molina (ed.), "Machines and Draw Tools" (2002)
Madrid, Cátedra. MA Art History thesis: "City and Memory: Approaching 'City of News',
active Worlds and Technological and Media Art projects from the Art of Memory". MA in
Museum and Gallery Management (London), MA in Art History (Madrid), BA in Visual Arts
(Madrid), BA in Law (Madrid).

Notes/References/Links
(1) There are multiple lists of Web 2.0 applications on the Internet. See, for example,
http://digg.com/tech_news/Complete_List_of_Web_2.0_Applications (although it doesn’t
seem to have been updated since 2006).

(2) Those characteristics are supposed to be new and innovative regarding previous
Web applications.

(3) Carr, Nicholas: "The Amorality of Web 2.0", http://www.roughtype.com/

archives/2005/10/the_amorality_o.php [on September 2, 2007].

(4) O’Reilly, Tim: "What Is Web 2.0 Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next
Generation of Software", http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/
what-is-web 20.html?page=1 [on September 2, 2007].

(5) In the frontpage of Workshop on Social and Collaborative Construction of Structured

110
Knowledge at 16th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2007) Banff,
Canada, May 8, 2007, http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/ws/ckc2007 [on September 2,
2007].

(6) Willem Velthoven talking about the concept of Scenario Lab 2.0, hosted by Willem
Velthoven in http://www.virtueelplatform.nl/article-4222-en.html [on September 2, 2007].

(7) Anderson, Nate: "Tim Berners-Lee on Web 2.0: 'Nobody Knows What it Means'",
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060901-7650.html [on September 2, 2007].

(8) See in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki#_note-0 [on September 2, 2007].

(9) Coates, Tom: "On Permalinks and Paradigms", http://www.plasticbag.org/

archives/2003/06/on_permalinks_and_paradigms [on September 2, 2007].

(10) O’Reilly, Tim: "What Is Web 2.0 Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next
Generation of Software", http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/
what-is-web-20.html?page=3 [on September 2, 2007].

(11) Scholz, Trebor (2006): "The Participatory Challenge" in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2006):
"Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age of Network Systems", DATA
Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/NewYork.

(12) Olga Goriunova was not the only one who used this term at that time.

(13) As the rest of Internet websites were.

(14) Apart from formal and aesthetic differences.

(15) Just look at Net Art exhibitions on Whitney Artport website and check their formal
structure and concept. Whitney Artport, http://www.whitney.org/arport/resources/
netartexhibitions.shtml [on September 2, 2007].

(16) See, for example, http://switch.sjsu.edu/nextswitch/switch_engine/front/front.

php?cat=27 [on September 2, 2007].

(17) Paul, Christiane (2006): "Flexible Contexts, Democratic Filtering and Computer-
Aided Curating" in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2006): "Curating Immateriality: The Work of the
Curator in the Age of Network Systems", DATA Browser vol. 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/
New York, pp. 85-105.

(18) Guriunova, Olga "Swarm Forms: On Platforms and Creativity", http://www.metamute.

org/en/Swarm-Forms-On-Platforms-and-Creativity [on September 2, 2007].

(19) As The Saatchy Gallery initiative, http://www.saatchi-gallery.co.uk , or the exhibition

"Stewart Bale 2.0 - documenting Liverpool" initiated by National Museums Liverpool
http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/online/exhibitions/stewartbale [on September 2,
2007], using Flickr.

(20) Concept Trucking, http://www.myspace.com/concept_trucking, LeisureArts, http://

leisurearts.blogspot.com [on September 2, 2007].

(21) nano-CORPORATION , http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.

viewprofile&friendid=162742079 [on September 2, 2007].

(22) nano-CORPORATION statement in Top8Gallery project, http://www.myspace.com/

top8gallerythree [on September 2, 2007].

111
(23) nano-CORPORATION , http://www.nano-corp.com [on September 2, 2007].

(24) Top 8 Gallery, http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&fri

endid=84824301 [on September 2, 2007].

(25) Blogumenta, http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2380698481&topic=2607 [on

September 2, 2007].

(26) Tobecontinued, http://www.myspace.com/tobecontinuedigitalart [on September 2,

2007].

(27) Node London, http://nodel.org/orgs.php [on September 2, 2007].

(28/29) Do It With Others (DIWO): E-Mail-Art at NetBehaviour. A project by Ruth Catlow,

Marc Garrett and Lauren Wright for Furtherfield in collaboration with all contributors to
the NetBehaviour email list, http://www.netbehaviour.org/DIWO.htm [on September 2,
2007].

(30) Platial--The People's Atlas, http://www.platial.com/splash [on September 2, 2007].

(31) Urban Curators, http://www.urbancurators.com [on September 2, 2007].

(32) Blog Art, http://blog-art.blogspot.com/2005_08_01_archive.html [on September 2,

2007].

(33) New Climates, http://www.newclimates.com [on September 2, 2007].

(34) TAGallery, http://del.icio.us/TAGallery [on September 2, 2007].

(35) CONT3XT.NET, http://cont3xt.net [on September 2, 2007].

[This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported. To view a copy of
this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0 or send a letter to Creative Commons,

171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.]

Real and Virtual: Curatorial

Practices and Artistic Aesthe-
tics
By John J. Francescutti

What is the role of the curator in contemporary Digital Arts? Is it

that of negotiating the commercialisation and mass diffusion of the
artist's practice or is it the framing of a critical understanding of the
artist's aesthetic, which fluctuates between reality and illusion, real
and virtual?

This paper, based on an interview with Dr. Lanfranco Aceti, an artist

and AHRC Research Fellow at the "Slade School of Fine Art and
Leverhulme", artist in residence at the "Department of Computer
112
 nano_CORPORATION, "Top 8 Gallery" (2007)
http://www.myspace.com/top8gallerythree

Furtherfield, "Do It With Others (DIWO): E-Mail-Art at NetBehaviour" (2007)

http://www.netbehaviour.org/DIWO.htm

113
Marisa Olson / Abe Linkoln, "Blog Art" (2005)
http://blog-art.blogspot.com

114
Science--Virtual Reality Environments", will discuss artworks that
fluctuate between real and virtual spaces.

The modalities of production and comprehension of the research

element present in the new forms of hybridised artistic practices
escape the viewer, who is limited in the aesthetic perception to the
concept of taste. The Kantian debate, which Gadamer re-presents
us with, of the unsatisfactory concept of taste, obliges the curator to
reconsider the concept of genius. The latter concept, which is better
suited to be a principle of universal aesthetic according to Gadamer,
offers to the viewer the possibility of engaging with both the process
of construction as well as the teleological aesthetic propositions.

The paper will discuss how the curatorial frameworks need to be

altered when dealing with contemporary New Media artworks.
Especially in the display of artworks that are based on a transmedia
process, a framework that allows the artwork to flux between real
and virtual, the curator has to offer to the viewer the possibility of
understanding the research and conceptual and aesthetic artistic
frameworks in order to appreciate and knowledgeably engage with
the artist’s production process and final product.

Is Contemporary Art--in particular art that is based on research and

scientific and technological interdisciplinary engagements--by not
giving an insight of the artist's production process, excluding the
casual viewer? And can one argue that the production is limited to
the physical process of creation of an artwork, thereby excluding the
research and conceptualisation that underpins, informs and inspires
the creative aesthetic process?

These are questions that touch the cords of both the artistic creative
process and the curatorial duty to facilitate an engagement between
the audience and the artwork, its aesthetics and the artistic processes
that have produced it.

The audience's engagement becomes more difficult if the object

that is presented is the product of an artistic practice determined by
alteration, liquidity, transmediality, convergence and mutability in a
constant evolutionary process of exchanges between art, science and
technology.

Darren Tofts' analysis of Cyberculture and the transformative role

115
of technology set the premises for this article when stressing the
necessity to explore the "particular traces of technological change
that, in retrospect, seem prescient, foreshadowing the lineaments of
our contemporary moment" (1).

In the presentation of Contemporary Art, particularly the

contemporary artwork that is a product of an hybridisation and
interdisciplinary process between art, science and technology, the
difficulty for the curator is to explain in a few words, often the words
of a caption, what he and the artist have discovered about the artwork
through long e-mail conversations, exchanges of quotations and
suggested readings.

This is the first practical issue of a contemporary digital curator,

the necessity to embrace a series of fields that range widely from
neuroaesthetic to paleobiology, from colour and brushes' techniques
to exotic transmediated pixellation effects. These are some of the fields
that the artists, who are challenging the contemporary boundaries of
Digital Media travel, describe through an itinerary of discovery that
is often serendipitous, volatile and ambiguous.

The second problem is mentioned by Darren Tofts, which is the

problem of framing change. This is a particularly difficult task
because it requires formalising something that is in development,
that because of its contemporaneousness is ungraspable in all of its
implications, both textual and contextual.

The role of the curator, therefore, is a constant attempt to stop

Proteus, the Greek god who constantly changes his shape, in his
transformation. The curator has to frame a protean nature of Digital
and Online artworks and be able to describe, in that brief frozen
frame of time, what the artwork was and what it will be. What sort of
impact its technological applications and aesthetic experimentation
will have in years to come.

"Mutability is not simply about change, but is rather an ongoing

inclination to change, a constancy in human thinking on matters of
technology" (and art, I would like to add) "--a constancy that can be
characterised by the idea of becoming" (1).

It is this becoming that the curator is asked to grasp and share with
the viewer in a field, namely in the field of Digital Media, where the

116
transformation is constant and technological tools adopted to create
artworks are diverse and unusual. This is an artistic field where
the buyers fear the awkwardness of these new digital aesthetics,
participatory forms of authorship and complex research strategies
that imbibe contemporary artworks. A task that is daunting and
would seem almost impossible, if it wasn't at the same time exciting,
challenging and revelatory of the changes affecting society and of the
infinite evolutionary possibilities that technological and aesthetic
Digital Media hold for mankind and for the artists who choose these
paths.

At the same time, the market for Contemporary Art, which is

increasingly expanding in the field of Digital and Internet Fine
Arts, is at odds with the proposed new aesthetics. This difficult and
conflicting relationship is resumed in the words of Stuart Plattner,
who opens his article "A Most Ingenious Paradox: The Market for
Contemporary Fine Art" with the following words: "This article is
about a market where producers do not make work primarily for sale,
where buyers often have no idea of the value of what they buy, and
where middlemen routinely claim reimbursement for sales of things
they have never seen to buyers they have never dealt with. Welcome
to the market for contemporary fine art" (2).

The recent development in the fields of Digital, Virtual and Online

Art would further confirm Plattner's cynicism. These new areas
present artworks that are the production of machines' interactions;
where the viewer is a passive spectator or a source of data, often
with no possibility of critical interactions. Where artworks that are
without authors are produced by the audience through interactions,
through collective labour or through exploitation of the audience's
desire to participate and share in the creative genius. Artworks that
are virtual representations with different aesthetics and modalities
of interaction which, when compared to historical perspectives
and modalities of production in the fine arts, expound the problem
of every aspect of contemporary artistic production in the field of
Computer-based Art.

"It is not only a matter of giving Computer-based Art a historical and

theoretical perspective but also of re-actualising and reinterpreting
Conceptual Art; and of realising multiple common aesthetic agendas
with non-computer-based Contemporary Art, regarding both subject
matters, tactics, production and not least concepts of art" (3).

117
It is in this particular historical context that the aesthetic observations
of Hans-George Gadamer regarding taste become relevant. "Taste
avoids the unusual and the monstrous. It is concerned with the
surface of things; it does not concern itself with what is original
about an artistic production" (4). And it is the Kantian conflicting
relationship between artistic genius and taste that is re-presented and
analysed by Gadamer when he writes: "Thus the critique of taste--
i.e. aesthetics--is a preparation for teleology" (5). This process of
preparing to understand the final goals of the artists' and artworks'
aesthetics is fundamental to provide the viewer with the keys to
unlock the immateriality of the artistic production. It is key to
engage with and share in the aesthetic representation of teleological
universal values. This is the role of the curator, to negotiate the forms
of communication and create and manage a flow of exchanges that are
complex, multi-layered and based on universal aesthetic teleological
representations, modality of productions and interactions between
the artist and the viewer. These are aesthetics that are the product of
continuous historical comparative analyses and contextualisations.
The curator exists in order to facilitate communication between the
artist, the artwork and the viewer (6).

"The art of genius serves to make the free play of the mental faculties
communicable. This is achieved by the aesthetic ideas it invents.
But the aesthetic pleasure of taste, too, was characterised by the
communicability of a state of mind--pleasure" (7). This becomes the
new role of the curator, that of negotiating between artistic genius
and taste, providing the tools for the communicability of a state of
mind, for sharing in the aesthetic experience which, residing in the
virtual and immaterial, escapes the traditional boundaries of the
audience's taste.

This curatorial process of negotiation--to provide audience's access

to the immaterial, the teleological conceptualisations, the aesthetic
creation of genius in order to share in the aesthetic pleasure of taste-
-is a difficult and complex exercise. It is a process of negotiation
between the audience's taste and desire of participation in the artistic
subjective world and the necessity to preserve the solidity and
aesthetic conceptual basis of the artwork. But it is also a process of
negotiation between the work of art itself and the artistic processes of
creation, whereby the participating in the artistic creation equals the
audience to the artists and their subjective worlds. Hegel describes
this process of negotiation.

118
"… [the artwork] if goes too far out of itself to him [to the viewer], it
pleases but is without solidity or at least does not please (as it should)
by solidity of content and the simple treatment and presentation of
that content. In that event this emergence from itself falls into the
contingency of appearance and makes the work of art itself into such
a contingency in which what we recognise is no longer the topic itself
and the form which the nature of the topic determines necessarily, but
the poet and the artist with his subjective aims, his workmanship and
his skills in execution. In this way the public becomes entirely free
from the essential content of the topic and is brought by the work only
into conversation with the artist: for now what is of special importance
is that everyone should understand what the artist intended and how
cunningly and skilfully he has handled and executed his design. To
be brought thus into this subjective community of understanding
and judgement with the artist is the most flattering thing" (8).

This becomes the mediated and globalised process of sharing into

aesthetic forms of production that may also dangerously offer the
illusion of a democratic process of audience's participation. The
sharing in the artistic process, offered as a democratic socio-political
participation, presents the curator with the necessity of grasping
the teleological nature of the immaterial and virtual aesthetics. This
may reflect upon, endorse or negate hidden sets of contextual socio-
political forms of conditioning and behaviours as well as question the
role of the curator in endorsing shared technocultural frameworks of
social exploitation.

Dr. Aceti, a Honorary Research Fellow at the "Slade School of Fine Art
and Leverhulme", artist in residence at the "Department of Computer
Science--Virtual Reality Environments" at University College London,
creates artworks that challenge and question traditional aesthetics as
well as traditional forms of curatorship.

What influence in your artworks has Gadamer's concept of taste

had? And how important is the audience's communicability and
interaction in your artworks?

Lanfranco Aceti: Very important and not at all. This shall be my

answer to both questions. In a less cryptic manner I would say
that this question has a twofold characteristic to it: the first is the
importance of communication between artist and viewer through the
artwork and vice versa, the second is the audience's role in shaping

119
my personal research for a subjective teleological aesthetic. Although
these processes are not happening in an isolated vacuum and there
are blurred boundaries between the two, the issue of communication
with an audience about the aesthetic framework, the conceptual and
philosophical analyses, the historical and contemporary comparative
media frameworks, the technocultural and sociological implication of
an artwork, its participation in the construction of a collective cultural
identity and the research element in the interdisciplinary processes
of hybridisation between art, science and technology … All of these
factors play a fundamental role in the construction of the artwork
and in the way I attempt to communicate with the audience and I
wish the audience to communicate with me. At times the artworks
act as a perfect conduit, other times the engagement is unexpected
or deluding. This is a process of transcoding. I have a good quote on
the subject from Lev Manovich: "In New Media lingo, to 'transcode'
something is to translate it into another format. The computerisation
of culture gradually accomplishes similar transcoding in relation to
all cultural categories and concepts. That is, cultural categories and
concepts are substituted, on the level of meaning and/or language,
by new ones that derive from the computer's ontology, epistemology,
and pragmatics. New Media thus act as a forerunner of this more
general process of cultural reconceptualisation" (9).

In 2006 when I presented "Pandora Boxed" [images, p. 125] at the

exhibition "FRAMED" in London, the challenge was to extrapolate
as a still an image from a virtual reality environment artwork and
present it in a museum context.

I remember that piece. It had to provide the viewer with a great

deal of information while taking the simple form of a print. You
had it without frame, floating against the wall in order to have the
feeling of a work in flux…

Lanfranco Aceti: Yes, and I also remember that people where

enthusiastic about the beauty of the print, but it was very difficult
to explain the whole neuroaesthetic process, colour stimuli and use
of the image to generate emotions, based on scientific parameters.
These were experiments in virtual reality environments and data
analysis sponsored by the Leverhulme Trust. Everything was done
to condition the viewer to feel an aesthetic emotive sensation of
beauty. And all of that was lost for the majority of the audience, and
the piece mostly existed, in the viewers' perception, as a beautiful

120
print. I guessed I had achieved what I wanted. But I am left with the
doubt whether the artwork was viewed as beautiful for the sake of its
physical beauty or recognised as beautiful because of the "scientific"
approach I had used to condition the viewers' aesthetic experience.

What about the second part of the question, that about the audi-
ence participation? You seem to give quite a lot of space to the
audience through your artworks and personal approach. Some
of your explanations to the viewers reach almost the level of an
additional performative artwork.

Lanfranco Aceti: That's probably because I am Italian and worked

in cinema… [Laughter]. My response to this question differs. One
issue is to engage with the audience. A different issue is the audience's
participation, which although fundamental in some of my artwork's
creation, is not always necessary. I have created artworks that the
audience has never seen and have hidden them away in online
formats. I love the mythology of the artwork that can exist beyond
acknowledgement.

That is one of the many reasons why I like the immateriality,

the virtual of some of my artistic production. The other reason is
freedom. Freedom to present or not present the artworks, to share
or not share them, but still having them around the world dotting
with their presence the online world, unbeknown to everyone. One
of these is the recent "I AM SORRY THE EXHIBITION HAS BEEN
CENSORED AT THE VENICE BIENNALE". The artwork exists, but
so far none has seen it. The rules of engagement are on www.myspace.
com/lanfrancoaceti and the audience can contribute. But what I have
been up to is not visible. Not yet, at least.

You quoted Manovich before, and from your description of

"Pandora Boxed", it appears that you are very much interested in
recontextualisation? Would this define your work?

Lanfranco Aceti: No, it wouldn't be enough. If my work consisted of

simply translating from one code to the other, from the material to
the immaterial, the real and the virtual and vice versa, it would be a
simplistic approach. This simplistic process has been defined by Jay
David Bolter, Richard Grusin and Diane Gromala as remediation:
image reprocessing. Actually it is more than that. My artworks,
although abstract and complex, are socio-political statements.

121
"Pandora Boxed" criticised the attempt of restricting human freedom
through invisible and immaterial forms of control, online and digital,
that act by directly conditioning behaviours and perceptions of the
brain. The artwork is there to be discovered, worked out, and at
the same time, as we discussed at the beginning, the artwork has to
be part of a Kantian experience of an aesthetic absolute, where the
viewer and the artist share their world's vision through the artwork.

What do you think is the role of the curator in this process?

Lanfranco Aceti: The role of the curator is that of facilitating this

communication process. It is such a challenging role. It is that of
making visible the invisible, of transporting the viewer from the real
into the virtual and from the virtual back into the real. It is to find
the complex hidden aesthetic "dots" placed by the artist to mark a
visual analysis. These are the dots or marking points of the research,
of the things said and those unsaid, made visible and invisible, both
by the artist and by the artwork. The curators' work is to re-connect
all of them, offering to the viewer an itinerary of discovery that at the
same time does not restrict the freedom of aesthetic exploration and
re-contextualisation in unexpected ways. It is to explain the value of
the artwork itself to an audience looking for easily shareable forms
of participation in common taste and not in aesthetic processes. It
is that of facilitating an interaction without overwhelmingly taking
over and drowning the artistic aesthetic interaction into the sea of
curatorial self-obsession.

Would you say that is a hell of a job?

Lanfranco Aceti: Yes, if it's well done. But that's why I am an artist
and not a curator… [Laughter].

Curating on the Internet, curating Digital Arts and the creative

intersection between art, science and technology is a complex task
for the curator, who is acting not only as a filter between the artist,
the artwork and the viewer, but also as a guide. The responsibility of
a digital curatorship, because it is more transparent, more active and
involved in the process of presentation to the public, in the display
of the artworks, in the artistic input and dissemination, takes the risk
of being non-transparent, by obliging the viewer to go through the
curatorial interpretation in order to connect with both the artwork
and the artist.

122
It is, therefore, the role of the curator that raises new questions
and challenges. "And thus, we must inevitably ask if the regular
interchange between online ventures and art institutions is our
best shot at transforming the nature of traditional collection and
exhibition systems. Is the mere 'outing' the curator enough to have a
sustaining effect on curatorial practice?" (10).

The new curatorial formats, including those of "notebooks" in their

multiple forms of online blogs and showcases of workflow, should
also be open to public interaction, presenting the curator with the
same questions, philosophical and aesthetic, posed to the artist.
Questioning the curatorial, databased and archival negotiation
process means to question the negotiation process between curators'
"genius" and the taste of the audience. This is the next necessary step
in a process of multilayered communications patterns. The viewer's
journey, as a process of participation in the artist's aesthetic, offers
choices that span between a simple superficial viewing or an in
depth archival artistic and curatorial experiential knowledge. It is the
responsibility of the curator to offer maps for both of these itineraries.
It is up to the viewers if and how to engage with them.

--

Author's Biography
John J. Francescutti was born in Detroit and graduated from the London College of
Communications with an MA in "Enterprise and Management for the Creative Arts" and
has been working as a freelance curator in Digital, Internet and Virtual Arts. He has
collaborated with London-based international artists and curated digital shows, focusing
on the issue of presenting online artworks to offline audiences. He is now researching
for his Ph.D. the materiality and immateriality of digital artworks and new forms of
digital curatorship and arts' management. He is also curating a new online exhibition
that focuses on spoof art, social networks and critical theory issues related to artistic
censorship and self-censorship.

Notes/References/Links
(1) Tofts, Darren (2002): "Introduction: On Mutability", in: Darren Tofts, Annemarie Jonson
and Alessio Cavallaro (eds.) (2002): "Prefiguring Cyberculture: An Intellectual History",
The MIT Press, Cambridge/Massachusetts, p. 2.

(2) Plattner, Stuart (1998): "A Most Ingenious Paradox: The Market for Contemporary
Fine Art" in: American Anthropologist: New Series, vol. 100, no. 2, p. 482.

(3) Lillemose, Jacob (2000): "Conceptual Transformation of Art: From Dematerialisation

of the Object to Immateriality in Networks", in: Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2000): "Curating
Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age of Network Systems", DATA Browser
vol. 3, Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York, p.133.

123
(4) Gadamer, Hans-Georg: (2001) "Truth and Method", Sheed and Ward, London, p. 56.

(5) Ibid., p. 54.

(6) Eco, Umberto (1998): "Interpretation and Overinterpretation: Umberto Eco with
Richard Rorty, Jonathan Culler, Christine Brooke Rose", Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, p. 25.

(7) Gadamer, Hans-Georg: (2001) "Truth and Method", Sheed and Ward, London, p. 53.

(8) Hegel, G.W.F. (1998): "Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art", vol. 2, Clarendon Press,
Oxford, pp. 619-620.

(9) Manovich, Lev (2001): "The Language of New Media", The MIT Press, Cambridge/
Massachusetts, p. 47.

(10) Williams, Alena: "Net Art and Process. Some Thoughts on Curatorial Practice", http://
switch.sjsu.edu/nextswitch/switch_engine/front/front.php?artc=99 [on August 20, 2007].

124
 Lanfranco Aceti, "Pandora Boxed: In Limbo" (2006)
Digital print on glossy paper, still from virtual reality environment and mixed media.

Lanfranco Aceti, "Pandora Boxed: Fragments" (2006)

Digital print on glossy paper, still from virtual reality environment and mixed media.

125
126
 --
resources

curating
media / net / art
127
This final section of "circulating contexts--CURATING MEDIA/
NET/ART" consists of a selection of references concerning the
topic of this present book. It provides a list of texts and essays
(available online, as in August 2007), books and readers, databases
and initiatives, which all served as information spaces for this
publication. All entries, selected by CONT3XT.NET, can be found
online via the ongoing research project and information platform
[PUBLIC] CURATING (http://publiccurating.blogspot.com). The
resources are listed in alphabetical order, all short descriptions are
copied from the "about"-sections of the corresponding website.
This selection is to be understood as a "screenshot" of the actual
information material. If the information provided is incomplete
please contact us at curating@cont3xt.net and the list will be extended
online.

SELECTED Texts and Essays

(available online, as in August
2007)
Arns, Inke / Lillemose, Jacob: "It's Contemporary Art, Stupid"
http://www.projects.v2.nl/~arns/Texts/Media/ArticleforArgos-Arns-
Lillemose.pdf

Baker, Camille: "New Media CURATING Hell--part 1"

http://blog.furtherfield.org/?q=node/28

Baker, Camille: "New Media Curating pt 2--follow-up"

http://blog.furtherfield.org/?q=node/60

Balkin, Jack M.: "Cultural Software: A Theory of Ideology"

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/jbalkin/cs/index.htm

Beck, Amanda: "Artists Ponder Future of Digital Mona Lisas"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/19/
AR2007011901084.html

Boxer, Sarah: "Web Works That Insist on Your Full Attention"

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/arts/design/28rhiz.html?ex=1277611
200&en=93a6514efbc5a36e&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

128
Buigues, Ana: "Ars Publica--Curatorial Report"
http://newmediafix.net/daily/?p=1287

Cook, Sarah: "Net Art, Art Criticism, Curating"

http://www.xs4all.nl/~jesis/artcriticism/cream/back_issues/cream6.html

Charman, Suw: "The Democratisation of Everything and the

Curators Who Will Save our Collective Ass"
http://strange.corante.com/archives/2006/11/08/the_democratisation_of_
everything_and_the_curators_who_will_save_our_collective_ass.php

Chan, Sebastian: "Tagging and Searching"

http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/chan/chan.html

Chan, Sebastian / Spadaccini, Jim: "Radical Trust: The State of

the Museum Blogosphere"
http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/spadaccini/spadaccini.html

Chun, Susan / Cherry, Rich / Hiwiller, Doug / Trant, Jennifer /

Wyman, Bruce: "Steve.museum: An Ongoing Experiment in
Social Tagging, Folksonomy, and Museums"
http://www.archimuse.com/mw2006/papers/wyman/wyman.html

Debatty Régine: "Interview with Sarah Cook"

http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/009560.php

Dietz, Steve: "Collecting New Media Art: Just Like Anything Else,
Only Different"
http://neme.org/main/524/collecting-new-media-art

Dietz, Steve: "Curating (On) the Web"

http://www.archimuse.com/mw98/papers/dietz/dietz_curatingtheweb.
html

Dziekan, Vince: "Beyond the Museum Walls: Situating Art in

Virtual Space"
http://journal.fibreculture.org/issue7/issue7_dzekian.html

Filippini-Fantoni, Silvia / Bowen, Jonathan: "Bookmarking in

Museums--Experience Beyond the Visit?"
http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/filippini-fantoni/filippini-
fantoni.html

129
Fisher, Matthew / Twiss-Garrity, Beth A.: "Remixing Exhibits:
Constructing Participatory Narratives with On-Line Tools to
Augment Museum Experiences"
http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/fisher/fisher.html

Fineman, Mia: "Why is it so Hard to Find Video Art Online?"

http://www.slate.com/id/2162382

Gere, Charlie: "Network Art and the Networked Gallery"

http://www.tate.org.uk/netart/networkgallery.htm

Gere, Charlie: "New Media Art and the Gallery in the Digital Age"
http://www.tate.org.uk/research/tateresearch/tatepapers/04autumn/gere.
htm

Gleeson, Regina: "Curating Now"

http://www.culturalfishing.net/curaing_now.html

Gleeson, Regina: "Dislocate, Renegotiate and Flow. Part I:

Globalisation's Impact on Art Practice"
http://www.culturalfishing.net/dislocate1.html

Gleeson, Regina: "Dislocate, Renegotiate and Flow. Part II: The

Practice of Process"
http://www.culturalfishing.net/dislocate2.html

Gleeson, Regina: "Dislocate, Renegotiate and Flow. Part III: The

Mercurial Curatorial"
http://www.culturalfishing.net/dislocate3.html

Granter, Beth: "Essay on Curating New Media"

http://bethgranter.wordpress.com/files/2007/02/curatingnewmediaart-
noappendix.pdf

Harding, Anna: "Everything"

http://www.chanceprojects.com/node/337

Harris, Jonathan: "Control, Alt, Delete?"

http://www.metamute.org/en/Control-Alt-Delete

Hutchinson, Mark / Beech, Dave: "On Expertise, Curation & the

Possibility of the Public"

130
http://www.slashseconds.org/issues/001/003/articles/
mhutchinsondbeech/index.php

Kaplan, Steve: "The Limits of Pedagogy and the Specter of the

Dysfunctional Museum"
http://post.thing.net/node/1097

Levi Strauss, David : "The Bias of the World: Curating After

Szeemann & Hopps"
http://brooklynrail.org/2006/12/art/the-bias-of-the-world

Lewis, Peter: "On Curating"

http://www.slashseconds.org/issues/001/003/articles/01_plewis/index.
php

Lichty, Patrick: "The Role of the Later Career New Media Artist"
http://post.thing.net/node/1223

Lichty, Patrick: "Reconfiguring the Museum. Electronic Media

and Emergent Curatorial Models"
http://www.intelligentagent.com/archive/Vol3_No1_curation_lichty.html

Lillemose, Jacob: "Some Preliminary Notes towards a

Conceptual Approach to Computer-based Art"
http://www.digitaalplatform.be/php/cat_items3.php?cur_id=913&cur_
cat=204&main_cat=119

MacKenzie, Douglas: "What is the Role of the Artefact in a Virtual

Museum?"
http://www.dmcsoft.com/tamh/papers/dmspect.php

MA Curatorial Practice Archive: "Curating Now 01"

http://www.cca.edu/curatingarchive/archives/CuratingNow01.pdf

MA Curatorial Practice Archive: "Curating Now 04"

http://www.cca.edu/curatingarchive/archives/CuratingNow04.pdf

MA Curatorial Practice Archive: "Curating Now 05"

http://sites.cca.edu/curatingarchive/archive/CuratingNow05.pdf

MA Curatorial Practice Archive: "Curating Now 06"

http://sites.cca.edu/curatingarchive/archives/CuratingNow06.pdf

131
Manovich, Lev: "Models of Authorship in New Media"
http://switch.sjsu.edu/nextswitch/switch_engine/front/front.php?artc=65

Mollin, David: "The Curator, So to Speak, Chooses You"

http://www.slashseconds.org/issues/001/003/articles/dmollin/index.php

Morton, Tom: "The Name of the Game. What is a Curator?"

http://www.frieze.com/column_single.asp?c=304

Mutanen, Ulla Maaria: "On Museums and Web 2.0"

http://ullamaaria.typepad.com/hobbyprincess/2006/06/museums_and_
web.html

Obrist, Hans-Ulrich: "Mind Over Matter--Interview with Harald

Szeemann"
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0268/is_n3_v35/ai_18963443/print

Obrist, Hans-Ulrich: "Evolutional Exhibitions"

http://www.attese.it/attese1/article13/index.html

O’Neil, Paul: "Curating: Practice Becoming Common Discourse"

http://www.slashseconds.org/issues/001/003/articles/poneil/index.php

Paul, Christiane: "Collaborative Curatorial Models and Public

Curation"
http://switch.sjsu.edu/nextswitch/switch_engine/front/front.php?artc=70

Paul, Christiane: "Challenges for a Ubiquitous Museum:

Presenting and Preserving New Media"
http://neme.org/main/571/preserving-new-media

Paul, Christiane: "MYTHS OF IMMATERIALITY: Curating, Collect-

ing and Archiving Media Art"
http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/en/department/bildwissenschaft/
veranstaltungen/telelectures/archiv/index.php

Shalem, Efrat / Toister, Yanai: "The Matrix of Curating"

http://www.slashseconds.org/issues/001/003/articles/eshalem/index.php

Schlieben, Katharina: "Curating Per-Form. Reflections on the

Concept of the Performative"

132
http://www.kunstverein-muenchen.de/?dir=03_ueberlegungen_considerat
ions&strShowFile=en_performative_curating.kvm

Schmidt, Barbara U.: "Operating System 'Ars Electronica'

Potentials and Preconditions of Media Art Festivals as
Exemplified by the Ars Electronica in Linz"
http://media.lbg.ac.at/en/content.php?iMenuID=31

Schleiner, Anne-Marie: "Fluidities and Oppositions among Cura-

tors, Filter Feeders and Future Artists"
http://www.intelligentagent.com/archive/Vol3_No1_curation_schleiner.
html

Scholz, Trebor: "Curating New Media Art"

http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/2006-April/001439.html
http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/2006-April/001444.html

Schulz, Pit: "The Producer as Power User"

http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00136.html

Stuart, Keith: "Yesterday's Games could be Gold Dust to

Collectors"
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,2059838,00.
html?gusrc=rss&feed=20

Tate Modern (conference): "Curating, Immateriality, Systems"

http://www.tate.org.uk/onlineevents/archive/CuratingImmaterialitySyste
ms

Tribe, Mark / Jana, Reena: "New Media Art (Wiki)"

https://wiki.brown.edu/confluence/display/MarkTribe/New+Media+Art

Urban, Richard / Marty, Paul / Twidale, Michael: "A Second

Life for Your Museum: 3D Multi-User Virtual Environments and
Museums"
http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/urban/urban.html

Williams, Alena: "Net Art and Process. Some Thoughts on

Curatorial Practice" [image, p. 134]
http://switch.sjsu.edu/nextswitch/switch_engine/front/front.php?artc=99

133
CADRE Laboratory for New Media of the School of Art and Design at San Jose State
University, "SWITCH - [Rivets + Denizens] Collaborative Curatorial Models in Theory
and Practice" (2002) http://switch.sjsu.edu/nextswitch/switch_engine/front/front.
php?cat=27

134
SELECTED Books and Readers
Blais, Joline / Ippolito, Jon (2006): "At the Edge of Art", Thames &
Hudson, London.

Altshuler, Bruce (ed.) (2007): "Collecting the New: Museums and

Contemporary Art", Princeton University Press, Princeton/New
Jersey.

Bourriaud, Nicolas (2002): "Relational Aesthetics", les presses du

réel, Dijon.

Bazzichelli, Tatiana (2006): "The Networking. The Net as an Artwork",

Costa & Nolan, Milan.

Cook, Sarah, et al (eds.) (2002): "Curating New Media (B.Read)",

BALTIC, Visby.

Cox, Geoff / Krysa, Joasia (eds.) (2005): "Engineering Culture:

On 'The Author as (Digital) Producer'", DATA Browser vol. 2,
Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York.

Cox, Geoff / Krysa, Joasia / Lewin, Anya (eds.) (2004): "Economising

Culture: On 'The (Digital) Culture Industry'", DATA Browser vol. 1
Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York.

Krysa, Joasia (ed.) (2006): "Curating Immateriality: The Work of

the Curator in the Age of Network Systems", DATA Browser vol. 3,
Autonomedia, Brooklyn/New York. [image, p. 136]

Gendolla, Peter / Schäfer, Jörgen (eds.) (2007): "The Aethetics

of Net Literature. Writing, Reading and Playing in Programmable
Media", transcript, Bielefeld.

Grau, Oliver (ed.) (2007): "Media Art Histories", The MIT Press,
Cambridge/Massachusetts.

Greene, Rachel (2004): "Internet Art", Thames & Hudson, London.

Gillic, Liam / Lind, Maria (eds.) (2005): "Curating with Light Luggage"
(Kunstverein München), Revolver, Frankfurt/Main.

135
Joasia Krysa (ed.), "Curating Immateriality: The Work of the Curator in the Age of Net-
work Systems" (2006) http://www.data-browser.net/03

136
Morris, Adeleide / Swiss, Thomas (eds.) (2006): "New Media Poetics.
Contexts, Technotexts, and Theories", The MIT Press, Cambridge/
Massachusetts.

O'Neill Paul (ed.) (2007): "Curating Subjects", de Appel & Open

Editions, Amsterdam & London.

Paul, Christiane (2003): "Digital Art", Thames & Hudson, London.

Rush, Michael (2005): "New Media in Art", Thames & Hudson,

London.

SELECTED New Media Art and Cu-

ratorial Resources (available
online, as in August 2007)
ARS Electronica ARCHIVE
http://www.aec.at/en/archives
Ars Electronica possesses one of the world’s most extensive archives
of Digital Media Art from throughout the last 25 years. It consists of
the Catalogue Archive and material documenting the Ars Electronica
Festival (from 1979), the Archive of the Prix Ars Electronica (from
1987), material on Ars Electronica projects as well as biographies of
the artists and theoreticians who took part in them.

Ars Publica
http://arspublica.noemata.net
Ars Publica: Art + Technology = Public domain--Ars Publica is
a nonprofit community that exhibits, sells, publishes, archives,
distributes and lends out artworks from our Net Art collections. Ars
Publica's primary purpose is to support and fund art on the Internet
in the public domain. Ars Publica collaborates with the Net Art site
Noemata in presenting copylefted art since 1984.

Art--Place--Technology (Archives)
http://www.a-r-c.org.uk/liverpool/ocs/about.php
New Media Art is a global phenomenon: a rapidly changing and
dynamic field of creative practice which crosses conventional
categories and disciplinary boundaries challenging our assumptions

137
about art: How do curators engage with New Media Art? What
makes a good curator of New Media Art? What can we learn from
the pioneers of this field? What does the future hold for curating New
Media Art? What common ground exists with other disciplines?

artnetweb
http://www.artnetweb.com
artnetweb is a network of people and projects investigating New
Media in the practice of art founded in 1996. It consists of different
sections like "Inside/Outside" (Foreground/Background), Projects
(on-going creative laboratory for artists to experiment and explore
mapping their ideas to a new terrain), "Resources" (a hotlist to
the Web), "Readings" (a collection of links to text-based objects
and a finger on the quickening pulse of the digital environment),
"Organisations", etc.

CCA Wattis Institute for Contemporary Arts

http://www.wattis.org
Located on the San Francisco campus of California College of the
Arts, the CCA Wattis Institute serves as a forum for the presentation
and discussion of leading-edge local, national, and international
Contemporary Culture.

CCS Bard
http://www.bard.edu/ccs
The Center for Curatorial Studies and Art in Contemporary Culture
is an exhibition and research center dedicated to the study of art
and exhibition practices from the 1960s to the present day. Co-
founded in 1990 by Marieluise Hessel and Richard Black, the Center
initiated its graduate program in curatorial studies in 1994. Since its
inception, the program has awarded the M.A. degree to more than
100 students.

Centre Pompidou Net Art

http://www.centrepompidou.fr/netart
The Centre Pompidou's engagement with a series of "virtual
exhibitions". These exhibitions will be designed to explore themes or
questions that are specific to the Internet and will "borrow" existing
Net Art projects (in the form of a series of hypertext links). The
curatorial texts will attempt to explicate the individual works included
in the exhibitions as well as initiate a living, evolving historiography of
Internet Art practices. In addition to the yearly exhibition program,

138
the Centre Pompidou will also initiate an annual series of Net Art
commissions. These works will be made available on this site at a
future date.

Cream
http://www.laudanum.net/cream
Cream is an irregularly appearing newsletter devoted to criticism and
theory around art in media networks, predominantly the Internet.
Cream could be short for Collaborative Research into Electronic Art
Memes, yet the name Cream is most of all a reaction to the limited
cultural menu offered by a dominant european techno-political New
Media criticism.

CRUMB--Curatorial Resource for Upstart Media Bliss

http://crumb.sunderland.ac.uk/%7Eadmin/beta
Curatorial Resource for Upstart Media Bliss (CRUMB) aims to help
those who "exhibit" New Media Art, including curators, technicians
and artists. The wesbite [image, p. 157] consits of a discussion list,
a large interview section, seminars, resources and a list of links and
bibliographies.

Curating Degree Zero Archive

http://www.curatingdegreezero.org
Curating Degree Zero [image, p. 157] was launched to research,
present and discuss changes in the practice of freelance curators,
artist-curators, New Media curators and curatorial collaborations.
Beginning in 1998 with a three-day symposium and an ensuing
publication, the project now focuses on an expanding archive about
these practices, which is touring as an exhibition, accompanied by a
programme of live events and discussions.

Curating.info
http://curating.info
Curating.info is a weblog about curating Contemporary Art,
written by Michelle Kasprzak. Michelle Kasprzak is an artist, writer
and curator. Her practice in these three areas is primarily focused
on artistic activities that incorporate technology, with coincident
interests in performativity and site-specificity.

Curating NetArt
http://curating-netart.blogspot.com
Ursula Endlicher and Ela Kagel have started their blog on the

139
challenges of curating Net Art in May 2006 in the form of an ongoing
dialogue about various topics surrounding Media Arts. Ela Kagel is
Digital Media producer & curator in Berlin. She is a member of Public
Art Lab Berlin and co-initiator of the Mobile Studios project. Ursula
Endlicher is a Conceptual "Multiple-Media" artist working on the
intersection of Internet, performance and multi-media installations.
She is living and working in New York.

Curatorial Network
http://www.curatorial.net
The Curatorial Network is an online portal and programme of
activities dedicated to the development of curatorial practice through
critical debate, collaborations and exchange. It facilitates the sharing of
ideas and skills, provides professional development opportunites and
offers ongoing peer support for curators across the visual and applied
arts, museum and academic sectors. It aims to develop international
networks and advance collaborative curatorial practice.

Curatorial Practice Archive

http://sites.cca.edu/curatingarchive
The archive is a collection of information about current and past
events, people, publications and classes related to the MA Curatorial
Practice Program at the California College of the Arts, San Francisco.
More specifically, the archive includes: exhibitions, student projects,
events and trips, and class information and descriptions. It also
includes publications of the Curatorial Practice program, and
information on current students, recent alumni and guest lecturers.

Digicult
http://www.digicult.it/en
Digicult is an Italy-based collective of different people, artists and
freelancers that have experience in Digital Culture, Electronic Arts
and New Media.

The Database of Virtual Art

http://www.virtualart.at
The Database of Virtual Art documents the rapidly evolving field of
Digital Installation Art. This complex, research-oriented overview
of Immersive, Interactive, Telematic and Genetic Art has been
developed in cooperation with established Media artists, researchers
and institutions. The Web-based, cost-free instrument allows
individuals to post material themselves.

140
DiaCenter: Artists' Web Projects
http://www.diacenter.org/webproj
Beginning in early 1995, Dia initiated a series of artists' projects for
the Web by commissioning projects from artists who are interested
in exploring the aesthetic and conceptual potentials of this medium.
Since its inception, Dia has defined itself as a vehicle for the
realisation of extraordinary artists' projects that might not otherwise
be supported by more conventional institutions. To this end, it has
sought to facilitate direct and unmediated experiences between the
audience and the artwork.

digitalcraft.org
http://www.digitalcraft.org
digitalcraft.org was founded in 2003 as a spin-off of the "digitalcraft"-
section of the Museum for Applied Art in Frankfurt am Main (2000-
2003). Its mission is to research and document fast-moving trends
in everyday Digital Culture and to present them to the public. Its
work includes interdisciplinary exhibition projects, public lectures
and publications, and consultancies for public institutions and
museums. The subjects it explores reflect the rapid development in
communications technologies and methods and their significance
for modern society.

DEAF--Dutch Electronic Art Festival

http://deaf.v2.nl
DEAF, the Dutch Electronic Art Festival, is a biennial international
and interdisciplinary festival organised by V2_ in Rotterdam (NL)
which showcases crossovers between art, technology and society.
DEAF features: an exhibition of interactive installations and
Internet projects, live performances (sound, music, installations,
film, images), seminars and workshops, talks and presentations,
an academic symposium, a publication/catalog, a festival website
which allows participation and provides practical information and
documentation.

ExhibitFiles
http://www.exhibitfiles.org
The goal of ExhibitFiles, a community site for exhibit designers and
developers, is to provide the people who make museum exhibits
with convenient access to resources that can be used to improve
their work. ExhibitFiles is a creation of the Association of Science-
Technology Centres.

141
[DAM] Digital Art Museum
http://www.dam.org
Digital Art Museum is an online resource for the history and practice
of Digital Fine Art. It exhibits the work of leading artists in this field
since 1956. [DAM] is an online museum with a comprehensive
exhibition of Digital Art supported by a wide range of background
information including biographies, articles, a bibliography and
interviews. [DAM] also includes an essays section with articles by
artists and theorists specially selected to place the works in context
(many of them by special arrangement with Leonardo journal). A
history section lists key events and technologies in date order.

DCC--Digital Curation Centre

http://www.dcc.ac.uk
The scientific record and the documentary heritage created in
digital form are at risk from technology obsolescence, from the
fragility of Digital Media, and from lack of the basics of good
practice, such as adequate documentation for the data. Working
with other practitioners, the Digital Curation Centre will support
UK institutions who store, manage and preserve these data to help
ensure their enhancement and their continuing long-term use.
Digital curation is maintaining and adding value to a trusted body of
digital information for current and future use; specifically, we mean
the active management and appraisal of data over the life-cycle of
scholarly and scientific materials.

e-artcasting
http://e-artcasting.blogspot.com
e-artcasting is a non-profit research project, an information
resource and a professional network to share experiences, exchange
information and develop resources about Sociable Technologies
in art museums from all over the world. It is their belief that these
new ways of communication are valuable tools for art museums
interacting with their audiences. From this point of view, e-artcasting
explores and documents their use, impact and possibilities.

-empyre- (soft_skinned-space)
http://www.subtle.net/empyre
-empyre- facilitates critical perspectives on contemporary cross-
disciplinary issues, practices and events in Networked Media by
inviting guests--key new media artists, curators, theorists, producers
and others to participate in thematic discussions. -empyre- is an

142
Australian-based global community which preserves its autonomy as
a non-hierarchical collaborative entity by engaging with new content
on a monthly basis.

Eyebeam
http://www.eyebeam.org
Eyebeam is an art and technology centre that provides a fertile context
and state-of-the-art tools for digital research and experimentation.
It is a lively incubator of creativity and thought, where artists and
technologists actively engage with culture, addressing the issues and
concerns of our time. Eyebeam challenges convention, celebrates the
hack, educates the next generation, encourages collaboration, freely
offers its contributions to the community, and invites the public to
share in a spirit of openness: open source, open content and open
distribution.

EAI--Electronic Arts Intermix

http://www.eai.org/eai
Electronic Arts Intermix (EAI) is a leading nonprofit resource for
Video Art and Interactive Media. Founded in 1971, EAI's core
program is the distribution and preservation of a major collection of
new and historical Media Art. EAI also offers educational services,
viewing access, exhibitions and public programs. The Online
Catalogue is a comprehensive resource on the 175 artists and 3,000
works in the EAI collection.

ELO--Electronic Literature Organisation

http://eliterature.org
The Electronic Literature Organisation (ELO) is a nonprofit
organisation established in 1999 to promote and facilitate the writing,
publishing, and reading of Electronic Literature. Since its formation,
the Electronic Literature Organisation has worked to assist writers
and publishers in bringing their literary works to a wider, global
readership and to provide them with the infrastructure necessary to
reach one another.

Furtherfield
http://www.furtherfield.org
Furtherfield is an online platform for the creation, promotion, and
criticism of adventurous Digital/Net Art work for public viewing,
experience and interaction. Furtherfield creates imaginative strategies
that actively communicate ideas and issues in a range of digital &

143
terrestrial media contexts; featuring works online and organising
global, contributory projects, simultaneously on the Internet, the
streets and public venues.

Gallery 9--The Walker Art Center

http://gallery9.walkerart.org
Gallery 9 is the Walker Art Center's online exhibition space. Between
1997 and 2003, under the direction of Steve Dietz, Gallery 9 presented
the work of more than 100 artists and became one of the most
recognised online venues for the exhibition and contextualisation of
Internet-based Art.

Generator.x
http://www.generatorx.no
The Generator.x project is a conference, exhibition and weblog
examining the role of software and generative strategies in current
Digital Art and Design.The computer has become an essential tool
in all forms of cultural production, and as such it has become the
constant companion of creatives everywhere. Increasingly, the
computer is both the means of production and the architecture of
presentation. In the case of meta-media like HTML and Flash, the
software is the medium.

Grand Text Auto

http://grandtextauto.gatech.edu
Grand Text Auto is a group blog about computer mediated and
computer generated works of many forms: Interactive Fiction, net.art,
Electronic Poetry, Interactive Drama, Hypertext Fiction, Computer
Games of all sorts, shared virtual environments and more. Andrew,
Michael, Mary, Nick, Noah, and Scott all work both as theorists and
developers, and are interested in authorship, design, and technology,
as well as issues of interaction and reception.

HTTP--House of Technology Termed Praxis

http://www.http.uk.net
HTTP is London's first dedicated gallery for networked and New
Media Art. Working with artists from around the world HTTP
provides a public venue for experimental approaches to exhibiting
artworks simultaneously in physical and virtual space, and for online
projects that explore Participative and Collaborative Art practice.
Artists' projects on DVD, real-time, webcast, Software Art and Live
Art also play a role in the curatorial work of HTTP.

144
iDC--Institute for Distributed Creativity
http://distributedcreativity.org
The research of the Institute for Distributed Creativity (iDC) focuses
on collaboration in Media Art, technology, and theory with an
emphasis on social contexts. The iDC is an international network
with a participatory and flexible institutional structure that combines
advanced creative production, research, events, and documentation.
While the iDC makes appropriate use of emerging low-cost and free
social software (i.e. peer-to-peer technologies, blogs and mailing
lists) it balances these activities with regular face-to-face meetings.

Intute: Arts and Humanities (Curating)

http://www.intute.ac.uk/artsandhumanities/cgi-bin/search.pl?term1=cura
ting&limit=0
Intute is a free online service providing access to the very best
webresources for education and research. The database has got four
sections, one of them is dedicated to Arts and Humanities. The link
above shows the search results for the term "curating".

INCCA/ICN
http://www.incca.org
INCCA is a network of professionals connected to the conservation
of Modern and Contemporary Art and was established to meet the
need for an international platform for knowledge and information
exchange. Conservators, curators, scientists, registrars, archivists, art
historians and researchers are among its members.

Institute of Network Cultures

http://www.networkcultures.org/portal
The Institute of Network Cultures (INC), set up in June 2004, caters
to research, meetings and (online) initiatives in the area of Internet
and New Media. The INC functions as a framework within which
a variety of studies, publications and meetings can be realised.
As indicated by its name, the INC is also active in setting up and
maintaining networks. Not only does it facilitate, but also initiate
and produce its projects. Its goal is to create an open organisational
form with a strong focus on content, within which ideas (emanating
from both individuals and institutions) can be given an institutional
context at an early stage.

145
Inside Installations
http://insideinstallations.org/home/index.php
Inside Installations: Preservation and Presentation of Installation
Art is a three-year research project (2004-2007) into the care and
administration of an art form that is challenging prevailing views of
conservation. Over thirty complex installations have been selected as
case studies and will be re-installed, investigated and documented.
Experience is shared and partners collaborate to develop good
practice on five research topics.

kurator software
http://www.kurator.org/wiki/main/read/Home
kurator is an open source software application designed as an online
curatorial system and a platform for curating source code. The
project is experimental in that it merges the process of programming
with curating to challenge the role of the curator in the process of
selection, contextualisation, presentation ad dissemination of Online
Artworks, by emphasising not the aesthetical or functional properties
but the source code itself. In this way the project recognises recent
practice and discussions around "Software Art" and posits the idea of
"Software Curating". The project speculates upon the production of
software beyond a closed proprietary model to a collaborative open
source model as a tool for future public development.

LBI Media.Art.Research
http://media.lbg.ac.at/en/index.php
The mission of the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute Media.Art.Research
is to archive, publish and perform scholarly work on Media Art
and related media theory including the extensive holdings of the
Ars Electronica Archive. Scientific, artistic, technological and
cultural mediation activities are designed to enhance the process of
encountering our social surroundings in which media play a decisive
role.

LX 2.0--Lisboa 20 Arte Contemporânea

http://www.lisboa20.pt/lx20
In 2007, besides its regular program, Lisbon 20 has created LX 2.0
project, through which we will be comissioning, displaying and
archiving online projects by artists who have been exploring the
medium in a relevant way.

146
The low-fi Net Art Locator
http://www.low-fi.org.uk
The low-fi Net Art locator is a project to increase visibility of
art projects which use the Internet as a medium and to promote
development of Net-based Art.

ljubljana digital media lab == ljudmila

http://www.ljudmila.org
Open-access media laboratory, an initiative of the Open Society
Institute, Slovenia, supporting education and research in many fields
related to net.art.

Media Matters--Tate Gallery

http://www.tate.org.uk/research/tateresearch/majorprojects/mediamat-
ters
Curators, conservators, registrars and media technical managers from
New Art Trust, MoMA, SFMOMA, Tate, have formed a consortium
to establish best practice guidelines for care of Time-based Art (for
example, video, slide, film, audio and Computer-based Installations).
Effective approaches to the stewardship of Electronic Art rely on
the blending of traditional museum practice with new modes of
operating that derive from and respond to the complex nature of
these installations.

Media Art Net (Medien Kunst Netz)

http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/mediaartnet
Media Art Net [image, p. 158] aims at establishing an Internet
structure that offers highly qualified content by granting free
access at the same time. Tendencies of art and media technology
development throughout the twentieth century serve as the
background for promoting historic and contemporary perspectives
on artistic work in and with the media. A combination of diverse
representational modes will offer a condensed, attractively presented
multimedia focus for the interested "surfer", as well as profusely
documented in depth information for users specifically involved in
research. The main objective is, therefore, to establish theoretically
and audio-visually convincing forms of relationships and references
that cross the boundaries of genre. A consistently bilingual version
(German/English) further transmits the international character of
this undertaking.

147
Museums and the Web
http://www.archimuse.com/conferences/mw.html
In the years since the appearance of the first museum websites, most
museums have established some presence on the World Wide Web.
Museums have much to learn from each other, and from developers
using the Web for other applications. To facilitate this exchange of
information, Archives & Museum Informatics organises an annual
international conference devoted exclusively to Museums and the
Web.

Museum Blogs--museum and exhibit blog directory

http://www.museumblogs.org
A comprehensive directory and blog covering the latest news from
art museums, science centers, and other museum related bloggers.

Mute Magazine--Culture and politics after the net

www.metamute.org
Founded in the UK in 1994 by artists Simon Worthington and
Pauline van Mourik Broekman, Mute Magazine started as a platform
for critical engagement with issues relating New Media and art.
Originally published bi-monthly, Mute Magazine was until recently
released twice-yearly in book format. It is now experimenting
with a publishing model incorporating Print On Demand (POD)
technologies and "cluster" issues published more frequently in a
smaller format.

Museum 2.0
http://museumtwo.blogspot.com
Museum 2.0, a blog run by Nina Simon, started in November of 2006
to explore the ways that the philosophies of Web 2.0 can be applied
in museums to make them more engaging, community-based,
vital elements of society. Web 2.0 opens up opportunity, but it also
demonstrates where museums are lacking. The intention of this blog
is to explore these opportunities and shortcomings with regard to
museums and interactive design.

MuseumLab
http://www.museumlab.org
MuseumLab is a weblog with news, developments and observations
on museum innovation. Museumlab.org is edited by Michiel van
Iersel and Juha van 't Zelfde from Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

148
New Media Initiatives Blog--The Walker Art Center
http://blogs.walkerart.org/newmedia
The Walker Art Center, an internationally recognised, singular 21st-
century model of a multidisciplinary arts organisation, is committed
to providing a progressive working environment for employees,
volunteers, and fellows/interns. Within a list of different blogs one
covers the topic of New Media Initiatives.

NeME--exploring meaning
http://www.neme.org
NeMe is a non profit, non government, non sponsored, Cyprus
registered association founded in November 2004. NeMe works on
various platforms which focus on contemporary theories and their
intersection with the arts.

NetBehaviour <---> A Networked Artists Community

http://www.netbehaviour.org
NetBehaviour is an open email list community for sharing ideas,
posting events & opportunities in the area of networked distributed
creativity. Also facilitating collaborations between artists, academics,
soft groups, writers, code geeks, curators, independent thinkers,
relationalists, activists, networkers, net mutualists, New Media types,
New Media performers, net sufis, non nationalists.

Neural
http://www.neural.it
Italian magazine devoted to many issues of (New) Media Art since
1993 (print and online): "activism art biotech book bookshop
cd+ cd-rom code copyright dvd hacking hacktivism interactive
literature magazine media mobile music net neural preservation
psychogeography radio robot science software sound theatre tv video
videogame visual abstract acoustic acoustic/digital ambient audio art
bastard pop breakbeat breakcore circuit bending deep drone electro
electronic dance electronica ethnic …"

newmediaFIX
http://newmediafix.net
newmediaFIX is a portal to online resources and projects; it offers
news, opportunity announcements and occasional reviews, and
periodically releases in depth texts as well as interviews on New
Media Culture. The website is divided into three sections which are
features and reviews, news and events, and texts and interviews.

149
NRPA--New Radio and Performing Arts, Inc.
http://new-radio.org
New Radio and Performing Arts, Inc. (NRPA) was founded in 1981 to
foster the development of new and experimental work for Radio and
Sound Arts. From 1987 to 1998, the organisation commissioned and
distributed over 300 original works for public radio and introduced
American Radio Art to European audiences.

nettime--mailing lists
http://www.nettime.org
Mailing lists for networked cultures, politics, and tactics: nettime-l
(English, moderated), nettime-ann (Announcements, moderated),
nettime-ro (Romanian, moderated), nettime-nl (Dutch,
unmoderated), nettime-see (South Eastern Europe, moderated),
nettime-fr (French, moderated), nettime-zh (Chinese, discontinued),
nettime-lat (Spanish/Portuguese, moderated), nettime-bold
(Discontinued).

netzspannung.org
http://netzspannung.org/index_en_flash.html
netzspannung.org is an Internet platform for artistic production,
media projects, and intermedia research. As an interface between
Media Art, media technology and society, it functions as an
information pool for artists, designers, computer scientists and
cultural scientists. netzspannung.org is a knowledge space. This
means that alongside developing an extensive, up-to-date archive,
the focus is on creating different avenues for exploring the Media Art
field. For this purpose netzspannung.org provides services and tools
that help users process information more easily and can be used for
generating, conveying and appropriating knowledge. The full range
of content, services and tools is available to users free of charge.

PingMag
http://www.pingmag.jp
PingMag is an online design magazine based in Tokyo. Defining the
term "design" as broadly as possible, PingMag writes about ideas and
inspiration coming from both world class designers, and from the
little store on the corner: product design, packaging, architecture,
webdesign, typography, illustration, photography, fashion,
programming, graphics, video, art, toys, traditional crafts, graffiti, set
design …

150
PORT: Navigating Digital Culture
http://www.artnetweb.com/port
PORT was an exhibition of networked digital worlds on the Internet.
Scheduled, time-based Internet projects by individuals and groups
were be projected into the physical gallery space and accessible over
the Internet during the duration of the exhibition.

post media network

http://www.michelethursz.com/site
A post media network represents a physical and virtual structure
composed of editorial, curatorial, and artist projects focusing on the
different perspectives and uses of Electronic and Computer-based
Mediums. Post Media is an action demonstrating the continuous
evolution of the term and uses of media. The network refers to
the actions of collaboration, representation, and the marketable
utilisation of all media. Contents: Featured and downloadable media,
artist portfolios, an exhibition-archive, dialogues with featured artists
as an introduction to the artist's history and process.

Random Magazine
http://www.random-magazine.net
The webzine, founded in 2001 and hosted by the Italian Art Portal
Exibart.com, is an online resource about New Media Art and
Digital Culture. Random comes back with a brand new website, an
autonomous URL and many community tools. Random Magazine
daily explores the intersections between art, technology and society.
It features news, critical writings, reviews and calls for artists. It is
interested in a wide range of different topics, aiming to offer a 360°
view on digital creativity: Video Art, Electronic Music, Net Art,
webdesign, Videogames, Hacktivism, Software Art, Videoclip and
much more.

Rhizome.org
http://rhizome.org
Rhizome.org is an online platform for the global New Media Art
community. Rhizome's programs support the creation, presentation,
discussion and preservation of contemporary art that uses new
technologies in significant ways. Rhizome.org fosters innovation and
inclusiveness in everything they do. All Rhizome's activities serve
emerging artists and the broader New Media Art field: mailing lists,
a forum for the exchange of opportunities, discussions and critical
debate, online publications, etc.

151
runme.org--say it with software art!
http://www.runme.org
Runme.org is a Software Art repository, launched in January 2003.
It is an open, moderated database to which people are welcome to
submit projects they consider to be interesting examples of Software
Art. The aim of Runme.org is to create an exchange interface for
artists and programmers which will work towards a contextualisation
of this new form of cultural activity. Runme.org welcomes projects
regardless of the date and context of their creation. The repository
is happy to host different kinds of projects--ranging from found,
anonymous Software Art to famous projects by established artists
and programmers.

e.space--SFMOMA
http://www.sfmoma.org/espace/espace_overview.html
E.space was created to explore new art forms that exist only on the
Web. These commissioned online projects explore new forms of
storytelling--taking a fresh look at what constitutes an exhibition--
within the unique space of the personal computer screen.

SPECTRE--mailing list
http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre
Initiated in August 2001, SPECTRE offers a channel for practical
information exchange concerning events, projects and initiatives
organised within the field of Media Culture, and hosts discussions
and critical commentary about the development of art, culture and
politics in and beyond Europe. SPECTRE is a channel for people
involved in old and New Media in art and culture. SPECTRE aims to
facilitate real-life meetings and favours real face-to-face cooperation,
test-bed experiences and environments to provoke querying of issues
of cultural identity/identification and difference.

Stunned.org
http://www.stunned.org
Stunned.org is a Dublin-based site dedicated to (mostly)New Media
Art in all it's evolving forms. Started in 1999 by New Media artist
Conor McGarrigle the site has existed in many different forms, run
by voluntary effort, enthusiasm and the occasional Arts Council grant
it has always managed to keep going. This is it's latest configuration
where the blog in keeping with the "Zeitgeist" has moved to the
homepage and is concentrating on art related matters as much as is
possible.

152
springerin--Hefte für Gegenwartskunst
http://www.springerin.at/en
springerin is a quarterly magazine dedicated to the theory and critique
of Contemporary Art and Culture. springerin addresses a public that
perceives cultural phenomena as socially and politically determined.
springerin informs about current events and tendencies in the
cultural field und tries to describe their conditions and meanings. A
special section of every issue ("Netzteil") is examining the potentials
of new technologies and media.

Tactical Museum Tokyo

http://rogermc.blogs.com/tactical
Tactical Museum is maintained by Roger McDonald. A founding
member of Arts Initiative Tokyo [AIT] and an independent curator,
Roger McDonald was born and brought up in Tokyo, Japan. He was
assistant curator for the Yokohama Triennale 2001 and curator for
the Singapore Biennale 2006. AIT was Japan commissioner for the
Bangladesh Biennale 2006. He teaches at Musashino, Tama and
Zokei Art Universities and is one of the Director's of AIT's school
program, MAD.

tank.tv
http://tank.tv
Founded by Tank magazine in 2003, tank.tv is a not for profit
online gallery and an inspirational showcase for innovative work
in film and video. Dedicated to exhibiting and promoting emerging
and established international artists, tank.tv acts as a major online
gallery--a platform and archive for contemporary moving images.
tank.tv curates eight shows a year, often in collaboration with art
institutions.

Tate NetArt
http://www.tate.org.uk/netart
A space for commissioning net.art at Tate Gallery (British and
International Modern and Contemporary Art) including a section
with ciritical texts and theoretical approaches to New Media Art.

TEAS--The Escape Artists Society

http://www.escapeartists.ca
The Escape Artists Society nurtures and connects local and
international artists, artist run centres and galleries and grassroots
communities through ongoing events and projects. By promoting

153
Canadian artists in collaboration with the collective's curators, locally
and internationally, we facilitate multimodal performance works and
engage in discussion with them in and the community.

THE THING
http://post.thing.net
THE THING is a non-profit organisation committed to the
development of New Media Culture, information technology, and
social activism. At its core, THE THING is a social network, made
up of individuals from diverse backgrounds with a wide range of
expert knowledge. From this social hub, THE THING has built an
exceptional array of programs and initiatives, in both technological
and cultural networks. During its first five years, itbecame widely
recognised as one of the founding and leading online centres for
New Media Culture. Its activities include hosting artists' projects and
mailing lists as well as publishing cultural criticism.

Turbulence
http://turbulence.org
Turbulence is a project of New Radio and Performing Arts, Inc.
(NRPA). Celebrating its 11-year anniversary in 2007, Turbulence
has commissioned over 120 works ($500,000) and exhibited and
promoted artists' work through its Artists Studios, Guest Curator,
and Spotlight sections.

The Museum of Conflict

http://www.museumofconflict.eu
The Museum of Conflict--Art as Political Strategy in Post-Communist
Europe was a research conference investigating relations between art,
politics and representation.

V2_: Institute for the Unstable Media

http://www.v2.nl
V2_: Institute for the Unstable Media, is an interdisciplinary centre
for art and media technology in Rotterdam (the Netherlands).
In 25 years, V2_ has become an international organisation for
experimentation, research and development in Art and Media
Technology. V2_'s activities include organising presentations,
exhibitions and workshops, research and development of artworks in
its own media lab, publishing in the field of art and media technology,
and developing an online archive.

154
The Western Front: Media Arts
http://front.bc.ca/mediaarts
The Western Front was founded in 1973 by eight artists who wanted
to create a space for the exploration and creation of new art forms.
It quickly became a centre for poets, dancers, musicians and visual
artists interested in exploration and interdisciplinary practices.
The Media Arts programme supports artist research residencies,
collaborative projects, artist talks, online projects, and an annuall
network festival. It also maintains the audio/video archives of the
Western Front and provides audio/video studio rental services to
artists and arts organisations.

we-make-money-not-art.com
http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com
A full-time blog run by Régine Debatty (BE/DE), a New Media Art
curator who writes about the intersection between art, design and
technology on we-make-money-not-art.com as well as in design and
art magazines such as Art Review (UK). She also speaks at conferences
and festivals about artists, hackers and interaction designers (mis)use
of technology.

Web3Dart
http://www.web3dart.org
Web3Dart is a non-profit initiative with the goal to feature Web-
based Art, artist and their 3D work. It was initiated by Kathy Rae
Huffman and Karel Dudesek in 1998.

Whitney Artport
http://artport.whitney.org
Artport is the Whitney Museum's portal to Net Art and Digital Arts,
and an online gallery space for commissioned Net Art projects. The
site consists of five major areas: The archive of "gate pages", which
function as portals to Net artists' works. The "commissions" area,
which presents original Net Art projects commissioned by the
Whitney Museum. The "exhibitions" space, which provides access
to and information about current and past Net Art and Digital Arts
exhibitions at the Whitney. The "resources'" archive, which links to
galleries, networks and museums on the Web. The "collection" area,
which archives the works of Net Art and Digital Art in the Whitney
Museum's holdings.

155
Web Net Museum
http://webnetmuseum.org
The WEB NET MUSEUM is a dynamic museum with international
vocation, of strictly private nature. Its intention is to replace more
traditional institutions, furthermore to introduce and support artists,
works, experiments and events, in connection with the New Digital
Culture.

156
Curatorial Resource for Upstart Media Bliss (CRUMB)
http://crumb.sunderland.ac.uk/%7Eadmin/beta

Curating Degree Zero Archive

http://www.curatingdegreezero.org

157
Media Art Net (Medien Kunst Netz)
http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/mediaartnet

158
--
CONT3XT.NET
circulating contexts--CURATING MEDIA/NET/ART

159
 Produced with the kind support of the Cultural Department of the
City of Vienna / Net Cultures.

160