[spectre] from media art to open source culture

[Armin Medosch]

Hi Marius

thanks for your feedback. admittedly the economic model for the
individual artist was not foremost on my mind when I wrote this text, I
did not really touch on that issue. But if you want to know my opinion,
i dont see it as negatively as you do, with media artists existing in a
publicly funded ghetto only. I think it is much more diverse and many
people are living a range of mixed and precarious economies. and it is
true that in this regard the situation is very similar for artists and
open source developers, that you dont live from but _for_ your work.   

also, i dont say that the role of the artist becomes redundant, but
regarding the relevancy for the co-evolution of culture and technology,
open source culture as a whole is what matters, not media art. the
avantgarde role that media art once had is now with the politicized free
software movement. but I dont want to polarize between artists and
developers. some artists play an important role in open source culture
and many artists have shown big committment to facilitating platformes
for free expression, etc.  I see a continuing role for artists too, but
we need to be aware that the whole playing field has changed through
FOSS and the Internet. This change is ongoing and we cannot be sure
where it will lead, but with this text I have been trying to understand
the dynamics of that change - to get sort of the bigger picture. the
question of the revenue model will also be settled eventually, but this
is not for me to decide but for society to settle. 

best
Armin

On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 12:27 +0100, Marius Watz wrote:
> Armin,
> 
> Interesting text. The formulation of a high art version of media art is
> particularly relevant at the current moment, as more and more media
> artists are trying to cross over into the commercial art world, getting
> gallerists and selling their work as commodities.
> 
> While I understand your critical view of "high art", I wonder if you
> have considered an economic model for artists to survive without some
> form of commodification. While Open Source is clearly a viable and
> attractive model, most of its proponents live from other means of income
> or are supported by academic institutions. 


> At the moment, many media
> artists are reliant on the media art "ghetto" of publicly funded
> festivals, but it rarely pays enough to support a family or plan a long
> life.
> 
> I do find it ironic that one has to subscribe to the construction of
> value through scarcity, when the digital object is by its nature
> infinitely reproducible. But if value cannot be constructed, how are
> artists supposed to pay their rent without taking "real" jobs? Even if
> YouTube etc. should find a licensing model for paying authors for their
> work, I doubt it will put food on the table for most artists.
> 
> Or should your text be read as saying that the role of "artist" is
> simply redundant , in favor of a more egalitarian model of "culture
> producers" not depending on institutions for support?
> 
> -marius
> 
> 
> Armin Medosch wrote:
> > The Next Layer or: The Emergence of Open Source Culture
> >
> > Draft text for Pixelache publication, Armin Medosch, London/Vienna 2006
> > - 2007
> >
> >
> > First we had media art. In the early days of electronic and digital
> > culture media art was an important way of considering relationships
> > between society and technology, suggesting new practices and cultural
> > techniques. It served as an outlet for the critique of the dark side of
> > computer culture's roots in the military-industrial complex; and it
> > suggested numerous utopian and beautiful ways of engagement with
> > technology, new types of interactivity, sensuous interfaces,
> > participative media practices, for instance. However, the more critical,
> > egalitarian and participative branches of media art tended to be
> > overshadowed by the advocacy of a high-tech and high-art version of it.
> > This high-media art conceptually merged postmodern media theories with
> > the techno-imaginary from computersciences and new wave cybernetics.
> > Uncritical towards capitalisms embrace of technology as provider of
> > economic growth and a weirdly paradoxical notion of progress, high-media
> > art was successful in institutionalizing itself and finding the support
> > of the elites but drew a lot of criticism from other quarters of
> > society. It stuck to the notion of the artist as a solitary genius who
> > creates works of art which exist in an economy of scarcity and for which
> > intellectual ownership rights are declared. 
> > ...........
> >