melon n' lemon

¶ first dropped lines about the conference entitled 'what contemporary art demands from its institutions?'
_i was missing more people. but it was a weekend and the missing ones choosed either sun or a mask. and i was missing more radical ideas deriving from paradigm shifts that occured after web and digital 'revolution'. as luka said: it seems they can see but they are unable to act and properly connect what they see. we were talking about redefinitions but there were almost none (except nicholas bourriaud) who actually uses them in all its sense. everyone at the end ended in classical insufficient terminology frame and they couldn't even see that tate modern is commissioning web art projects because they 'understand' they can't represent web art in the same way as object art. to commision the webart work is to get exclusive position of a web work being on your server as well as on a webpage of a museum (online) which is its only 'natural space'. commision is also the new way to buy it, in terms of buying something virtual which is quite different from buying already existing web art work as it would be an object art. but we that are living and feeling this shift are young and we will have to wait to get old. :-)
_there were four extensive panels in two days and few questions afterwards. the discussion time was mostly too short while the individual presentations were sometimes too long. as far as i know, since i was also part of organisatorial team, the idea for the conference came from ministry of culture and was delivered in cooperation with the museum of modern art. it was expected that the 'future makers' from ministry will be present all the time, but the actual case turned out different. they left everytime after their representation was over - so they weren't there most of the time, although the time-case is just few weeks before new status for art and culture institutions will be written down and eternilized.
_the confernce extensively cleared out the difference between modern and contemporary art. it was obvious that a new institution for representing contemporary art is needed. at that point i was asking does contemporary art includes also techno art (digital art, after lev manovich), which is actually much more modernistic than contemporary (in terms of style descriptive mechanisms) and if yes how than can we be sure that in an institution for contemporary art digital art wont be marginalised, as it is happening now in the relation of modern art to contemporary. in the museum of modern art the contemporary art is definitivly marginalised in terms of archiving and also presenting, since the place itself is already not proper.
_and than there was way too much said about the relation of artists, art production and institutions but almost not a word about the role of the visitor, viewer, how to get them more massivly in.
(20:35)(comment?)

» 17/03/2003

¶ it has been quite a while since i would spend a day online. internet is the biggest illusion one of my camarades said the other day. he sees it as a place where the individual has the illusion his voice is heard. at the first glimpse it can be seen like that but my opinion is that its illusionary spread stops gliterring when you compare it to early beggining. at that time it looked internet will change contemporary democracy pattern. still internet enables voices like this one you read. it is not mastodont gesture but rather neat modesty. here i remember my friend's words: to be rich is to know you have enough. besides internet did manage to shake music industry and we will see what will happen when bandwith will be standard and the world web will be more accesible round the globe.

demand for decentralisation procesess is getting wider and wider.

but...

the 23rd of march is the day when voters localised within slovenian border will have opportunity to say what they think of being part of killing maschine called nato. the answer of majority between 18 and 30 years old is clear NO. no to nato in the name of resistance against coorporative army industry, manipulated mass paranoia and constant war. if you are not paranoid and you are able to see transparent economic interest you will say no to nato and yes to piece.

(22:49)(comment?)

» 25/03/2003

¶ territory of silence.

cant watch or write.

all that we need is a close up.

(23:16)(comment?)

» 27/03/2003

¶
after all.
we still live on this planet.

after couple of days i have turned on the slovene national tv chanell and ended up watching the slovene political establishment with vlasta jelusic and ali h. zerdin. the named two were far most current and socially aware of differences while the rest represented a circus of child wishes and comsumer frustrations. they were ready to abandon all history to live like people do on the illusionary west in crisis. to be so proud and satisfied with the result ending up in european union with nato and close friends us.trades is like dog eating the very last piece of shit.

i love dogs but i hate dog watchers and blind paranoid sheeps. the animal farm is out there. eating the diffrences to throw out democracy of monarch.

i dont agree. but i am faced that society i live in is paranoid, sheep like and conformistic. even slavoj zizek's article shows the impossibility of a theoretician to say clear no to society malfunctions like war and cosumerism. instead he sais we are all americans under the skin.

are we?

unfortunately i dont feel so. and i dont feel like majority that surrounds me.

so i go to foo bar to be closer with nature. (15:40)(comments:2)

» 30/03/2003

¶ happy to see my writings in a proper context.

otherwise spent the day with joze: talkative, provocative and sincere.

the spring is jumping behind our necks.
luka is using his fire fingers to hack (school system '-)

ha ho hi.
ze me vec ni.

(23:57)(comment?)

[04 / 2003] - archives - [02 / 2003]