robertogreco + andrewsempere   3

The App – Summer of Darkness
"Conceived to celebrate the 200th anniversary of the “Year Without Summer,” this iPhone/iPad app tells the story of the famous summer Lord Byron, Percy Shelley, Mary Shelley, and their companions spent in Switzerland — the summer the world was supposed to end.

Beginning in May 2016, the story of the “Year Without Summer” will unfold as a series of notifications appearing on your iPhone or iPad. Notifications will arrive in “real” time concurrent to the dates and times the events actually took place in 1816, from Claire Claremont’s romantic pursuit of Lord Byron to Percy Bysshe Shelley’s writing of Mont Blanc to the famous night when Mary Shelley had a vision of Frankenstein’s monster in response to a ghost story writing challenge issued by Lord Byron.

Each notification will unlock new content. The audience will follow the journeys of the group across a map of the region, encounter the daily weather from 1816, and read original source material: the journals, letters, and literary works of Lord Byron, Percy Bysshe Shelley, Mary Shelley, Claire Clairmont, and Dr. John William Polidori. In this way the audience can experience the travels of Lord Byron and his entourage as if they were contemporaries.

Once the summer is over, you can continue to explore the fully unlocked content at your own pace or choose to reset the story and start over.

*This app does not contain any ads or in-app purchases."

[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/summer-of-darkness/id1102090467 ]

[see also: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/05/12/200-years-ago-the-sky-went-dark-and-there-was-no-summer/ ]
andrewsempere  aninditasempere  history  applications  2016  1816  lordbyron  percybyssheshelley  maryshelley  claireclairmont  johnwilliampolidori  ios 
may 2016 by robertogreco
Minimum Viable Artwork | Feral Research Coalition
"That established cultural institutions are having a hard time relating to art and culture made with contemporary technology is painfully apparent. That they want to remedy this by turning towards the incubator model only shows how desperately regressive they are."



"It is unlikely that any of the artists featured in the exhibitions I mentioned above will be found writing Python code over a cafe midnight at Ritual (unless it’s their day job) because, for the most part, in the ecosystem of the artists I admire who are chasing the meat of art and tech, there couldn’t be three institutions less relevant than New York’s major museums, startup culture and (since I’m barbecuing sacred cows): hacker spaces.

This is not to say that these institutions are inherently evil or bad at what they do, it’s just to say that they are at best not particularly relevant to art production and at worst unintentionally destructive. In all cases this has mostly to do with their formal positions with regards to the dreaded market.

Major museums may wish to have a broad cultural mission and many even succeed on occasion, but they exist largely to condense, wash, clean, process and present the dirty fucked-up art world for preservation and trade. They are in the packaging business. If an artwork appears in MoMA it has been dipped in preservative and the edges have been filed off. This doesn’t mean it isn’t delicious, but Hostess isn’t your neighborhood bakery (which, in any case, is still a business and nothing at all like your grandmother’s home cooking). Museums, while occasionally flying the flag of the freaky creative class, have more in common with financial institutions than artist studios. (Quick: name one heist film that featured burgling a working artist)."



"In the end I don’t want to specifically criticize the New Museum’s venture because I believe it’s a symptom rather than the disease. We have come to believe that art and technology are somehow the same thing, just as we have internalized the idea that creative success and financial success are equivalent.

Art as I know it is messy, complicated, dirty, scary and sharp. It causes problems and fails to measure up and resists categorization. It generates failure. It wastes time and money. It burns through cash and it doesn’t say why.

Museums are archives and represent the endpoint of work, not the wellspring of creativity. If an artwork has solidified out of this primordial state it is not because it represents the “cutting edge” it is because it is finished. As Dave Hickey says: “Whatever happy contingencies fluttered around it disperse, as it departs society and enters “the culture,” where it must necessarily mean less, but to a lot more people. It’s spectator-food, now, scholar-fodder, so you may safely stick a fork in it, tell yourself you’ve won, and go to your room.”

I am not surprised that a major museum as a cultural actor is going to make a safe bet, in particular with regards to technology-based works which are notoriously risky and problematic as art objects. (“It worked five minutes ago” doesn’t fly well among preservationists or collectors). That most of the highly visible contemporary art and technology works currently being displayed are repeatable (if shallow) spectacles is not a major revelation, but it bears a hard look.

It bothers me that the last time I visited the New Museum I ducked into their auxiliary space to be confronted by Nathalie Djurbeg and Hans Berg’s delightfully weird Bird Parade. This was an artist and musician I had never heard of before, and I stayed until the guards kicked me out. Next time, a visit to the same space will require an NDA and likely revealing nothing more interesting than a bunch of white dudes pounding keyboards and energy drinks.

"It bothers me that the notion of artistic risk has been so de-fanged that it can be expressed only in terms of market risk (Serrano’s 1989 Piss Christ was both far more daring and far more beautiful than wasting series A funding, no matter how hot your photo sharing ap might be).

It bothers me that we even consider business strategy as a replacement for encouraging art production. I don’t anticipate the return of public arts funding for individual artists in the United States, but in a world of crowd funding filled with the likes of Kickstarter and Indiegogo and Bandcamp what the art world, (and in particular the art and tech field) needs are a lot fewer “startup incubators” and a lot more Awesome Foundations."

[via: https://twitter.com/matthewward/status/411041722739597313 ]

[See also: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303670804579236523526323820 ]
andrewsempere  inefficiency  newmuseum  davehickey  startupculture  kickstarter  indiegogo  bandcamp  awesomefoundation  2013  art  process  messiness  artproduction  diy  hackerspaces  incubators  culture  culturecreation  waste  time  money  markets  artmarket  finance  juliakaganskiy  artincubators  culturemaking  culturalproduction  andresserrano 
december 2013 by robertogreco
Art Rant #1 (with tweets) · tezcatlipoca · Storify
"there will always be artists and good art, but the mono culture provided a shared "enemy," some common ground and a vocabulary" — https://twitter.com/tezcatlipoca/status/265090655720718336

"I think I want a "show and tell…" a distilled collection of contemporary things people really love and why." — https://twitter.com/tezcatlipoca/status/265099091153928192

"This thought is drifting from original now, but everyone has a favorite song, lyrics that make them cry... How can we make work like that? Not just "oh cool, another arduino demo" … I WANT TO MAKE MY AUDIENCE WEEP." — https://twitter.com/tezcatlipoca/status/265094066310615040 + https://twitter.com/tezcatlipoca/status/265094216605130753 + https://twitter.com/tezcatlipoca/status/265094257549914113

"I actually think novels are way better than music at being meaningful, yet emotional, and building communities." — https://twitter.com/debcha/status/265096111939792896
glvo  emotions  novels  monoculture  writing  eleanorsaitta  storify  culture  media  reaction  music  art  2012  andrewsempere  debchachra  from delicious
november 2012 by robertogreco

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: