<div>Dear Simon:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I find your contribution of the important role of state-funded very valuable.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>However, I am surprised that from a short paragraph by Howard explaining why some people need to work in the market economy for a living; you deduce that he is a hardcore apologist for market only approaches. This is not the Howard that I know; and neither is the anti-intellectualist ...
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>What I think he is referring too is the kind of intellectual who has lived so long with public support; that he can no longer imagine that not everybody gets this support; and hence is forced to use market economy means to support his family.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Conclusion; though I believe Howard does aim to work and live from with the U.S. context, and makes various adaptations to his social situation, that is different from being a hardcore neoliberal apologist,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Michel Bauwens<br><br> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 4/1/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Simon Biggs</b> <<a href="mailto:simon@babar.demon.co.uk">simon@babar.demon.co.uk</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Rheingold's statement is West Coast liberalism at its worst! Furry<br>Capitalism.<br><br>In Europe and elsewhere we have lived for two generations within a rather
<br>benevolent context. If it was not for a socio-economic system where<br>relatively generous arms length state support for the arts, and other<br>non-industrial means of production, was default we would have seen a very
<br>different development in the arts and society since the mid 20th C.<br><br>Post Object art, performance and most media art, much of conceptual art...in<br>fact most of what could be described as post modern practice, would not have
<br>become the dominant forms of our time. That much of the impetus for this has<br>come from Europe is not coincidental. Such paradigms of work are only<br>possible when value is ascribed in ways not afforded by the sort of
<br>socio-economic model on which the US is predicated and which Howard is<br>suggesting should be default not only there but globally. One could also<br>argue this using the example of food production. McDonalds versus artisinal
<br>food production.<br><br>I found Cecil's plaintive call for a different model both sad and uplifting.<br>Sad that after two generations of profound social change in Europe,<br>generally for the better, some of the same calls for change are made now as
<br>in the 1960's. Uplifting, as you do not hear enough of these sorts of calls<br>anymore, perhaps because we have all become so cynical as a result of<br>persistent partial failure. Perhaps we expect to much of our social systems?
<br><br>My life maps almost entirely to the social democratic model. As a young<br>artist my first professional activities were made under the fledgling but<br>nevertheless very beneficial wing of the Australia Council (founded 1972),
<br>Australia's national agency briefed to fund the arts through peer review.<br>The effect the Oz Council had on the creative arts in Australia was<br>profound. Within a few years we had moved from an object based private
<br>gallery dominated model, where a handful of collectors established taste and<br>the careers of a handful of artists, to a situation where thousands of<br>artists were producing all sorts of crazy things (and often nothing at all)
<br>and showing this work in a diversity of artist run and non-profit spaces, or<br>simply in the street or on the beach. It was a very creative and healthy<br>time and in many respects resembled the joyful situation that Cecil calls
<br>for.<br><br>In the UK this sort of system was also in place from even earlier, with the<br>Arts Council of England as a very early example of social beneficience.<br>Other European countries, Canada, New Zealand and a number of unusual
<br>suspects, had similar models in place. Even in the US, at state level, there<br>were similar arrangements and, for a short time, even the NEA managed to<br>make a decent attempt at being a national arts agency run for and by
<br>artists.<br><br>The sort of model that Howard is promoting is based on a mean perception of<br>human nature, predicated on an undertsanding that people are only motivated<br>by their own need and where profit can only be gained at the expense of
<br>others. This is the logic of capitalism. It is also the logic of the<br>criminal mind.<br><br>So, I read Cecil and the innocent idealism makes me cringe; but I read<br>Howard and I get angry because what he espouses is the same ethic that
<br>amoral corporations are trying to export to the world under the moniker of<br>Globalism. An ethic that has brought us to such a bad place in world history<br>and now threatens the social compacts and contracts that have underpinned
<br>the relatively enlightened social models of a number of countries since the<br>Second World War.<br><br>Rheingold articulates an anti-intellectualism that compounds his sins.<br>Anti-intellectualism is of course a common symptom on the right of politics.
<br>I find this interesting as in this Howard is denying his own roots.<br><br>Regards<br><br>Simon<br><br><br><br>On 1/4/07 01:06, "Howard Rheingold" <<a href="mailto:howard@rheingold.com">howard@rheingold.com
</a>> wrote:<br><br>> If people did not produce objects to be sold, we'd all be working<br>> very very hard to food, house, and transport ourselves. All too<br>> often, intellectuals who have never had to meet a payroll -- or face
<br>> failure to meet a payroll -- fail to distinguish between a<br>> multinational corporation and a mom and pop store.<br>><br>><br>> Howard Rheingold<br>> <a href="mailto:howard@rheingold.com">howard@rheingold.com
</a><br>> <a href="http://www.rheingold.com">www.rheingold.com</a> <a href="http://www.smartmobs.com">www.smartmobs.com</a><br>> what it is ---> is --->up to us<br>><br>><br>><br>> On Mar 31, 2007, at 4:15 PM, Cecil Touchon wrote:
<br>><br>>> If artists are to engage in any dialog of a public nature such as<br>>> exhibitions, publications, performances and whatnot, how shall they<br>>> build enough wealth and capital to sustain their activity and carry
<br>>> on a home life (support a family)? Capitalism as in produce objects<br>>> to be sold? The public dole? Maintain poverty? Work for a corporation?<br>>><br>>><br>>> If artists wish to engage in helping to shape the world to come,
<br>>> toward what are they moving in terms of a desired result?<br>>><br>>><br>>> Is it enough just to complain about, point out the problems of, or<br>>> screw with the things you donšt like? Assuming the answer to be no,
<br>>> what else should onešs time be spent doing in order to feel that<br>>> one is making a difference or helping to move the world in a better<br>>> direction?<br>>><br>>><br>>> I notice that universities are training a lot of people to work for
<br>>> corporations and show them how to find ways to screw the general<br>>> public out of small enough amounts of money to avoid calling it<br>>> criminal behavior, yet we all know it is and are being screwed over
<br>>> regularly.<br>>><br>>><br>>> How do we train ourselves and our children to shape the world into<br>>> a place we are not afraid to live in?<br>>><br>>><br>>> How do we establish and honor higher standards of living our lives
<br>>> so as to generate joy and peace?<br>>><br>>><br>>> What ideals should we establish among ourselves that we can all<br>>> support together?<br>>><br>>><br>>> Why should we merely accept the ideals that organizations and
<br>>> governments and corporations want to instill in us for their benefit?<br>>><br>>><br>>> Why do we allow ourselves to be thought of as corporate consumers<br>>> and properties of a state?
<br>>><br>>><br>>> What would it be like if artists decided to shape a world where<br>>> artists would want to live in? What would be important to them? How<br>>> would they do it?<br>>>
<br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>> Cecil Touchon<br>>><br>>> <a href="http://cecil.touchon.com">http://cecil.touchon.com</a><br>>><br>>> 817-944-4000<br>>><br>>><br>>> -----Original Message-----
<br>>> From: <a href="mailto:idc-bounces@mailman.thing.net">idc-bounces@mailman.thing.net</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:idc-">idc-</a><br>>> <a href="mailto:bounces@mailman.thing.net">bounces@mailman.thing.net</a>
] On Behalf Of Alan Clinton<br>>> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 9:02 PM<br>>> To: <a href="mailto:dew.harrison@rgu.ac.uk">dew.harrison@rgu.ac.uk</a><br>>> Cc: <a href="mailto:idc@bbs.thing.net">idc@bbs.thing.net
</a>; <a href="mailto:dewharrison@yahoo.co.uk">dewharrison@yahoo.co.uk</a><br>>> Subject: Re: [iDC] Art, Lifestyle & Globalisation<br>>><br>>><br>>> A couple of thoughts here related to the questions you have posed.
<br>>> First, the rhetoric of purity (is there an outside of capitalism?)<br>>> can be, I think, an endgame producing the sort of corporate artists<br>>> Stallabras describes and those who are overly concerned that they
<br>>> may make a mistake with their art (or their theory)--no one wants<br>>> to be called a hypocrite.<br>>><br>>><br>>> The problem of artists, intellectuals, and capitalism is a real<br>>> one. Should I refuse to teach at the Georgia Institute of
<br>>> Technology because of its ties to the military industrial complex?<br>>> If I had refused, when I was just out of graduate school, I would<br>>> have had little opportunity to critique the system in anything
<br>>> resembling a full-time way--I wouldn't have had those<br>>> impressionable students either. But then, if I had gone too far in<br>>> my critiques, I would have been fired. Artists, it strikes me, are
<br>>> in a similar position. How to survive in an organism long enough<br>>> to destroy or recreate it?<br>>><br>>><br>>> Rather than attempting to start from a position of purity, perhaps<br>
>> we should recognize that people will find themselves starting out<br>>> from various positions of impurity within the system. And, there<br>>> will be many ways of working against this system, of speaking to it
<br>>> in ways that I call, borrowing one of Derrida's metaphors,<br>>> "Tympanic Politics":<br>>><br>>><br>>> "In his elucidation of marginalia as a discipline unto itself,
<br>>> Derrida gives a poetic anatomy of the tympanic membrane and its<br>>> surroundings. The ear is swirling, labyrinthine, and cavelike.<br>>> Penetrating its depths presents a difficult, frightening prospect.
<br>>> In addition to traversing a maze of passages, one must confront the<br>>> wall of the tympanum which has the capability to muffle the loudest<br>>> of noises. If normative discourse/art does not reach the inner ear
<br>>> with the proper sense of volume or urgency, then how is one to<br>>> suggest the political or historical importance of a particular<br>>> issue? For the alternative would be to shock the system in such a
<br>>> way as to puncture the tympanum altogether, effectively dismantling<br>>> the apparatus so that nothing can be heard at all. It would be as<br>>> if Constantin Brancusi, on the verge of rejecting Rodin's method of
<br>>> clay modeling with taille directe, had shattered The Craiova Kiss<br>>> with the first hammer strike into formless stone. Derrida's answer<br>>> to such questions, of course, is always a more specific anatomy of
<br>>> the situation at hand. He suggests that since the tympanum is<br>>> oblique with respect to the ear canal, its subversion requires an<br>>> oblique approach as well (taille indirecte?), some form of
<br>>> rhetorical ambush. How does one 'unhinge' something that cannot be<br>>> shattered?"<br>>><br>>><br>>> Alan Clinton<br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>> On 3/28/07,
<a href="mailto:dew.harrison@rgu.ac.uk">dew.harrison@rgu.ac.uk</a> <<a href="mailto:dew.harrison@rgu.ac.uk">dew.harrison@rgu.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<br>>><br>>> Dear IDCs,<br>>><br>>> I have been enjoying the recent discussion sparked off by the
<br>>> passing of Baudrillard and would like to move the debate at a<br>>> tangent to this, but continuing with ideas surrounding forms of<br>>> social control, power and politics. I am concerned with the
<br>>> domination of the corporate within the cultural and wonder at<br>>> the position I find myself placed in as an artist and academic<br>>> working in an educational instituion.<br>>><br>
>>> Digital media and new technology is reconfiguring our<br>>> relationship with the world and is also affecting how artists<br>>> relate with their public. Now, new locative technology can position<br>
>> art in the everyday of people's lives and activities outside the<br>>> gallery space. Although psychogeography and mobile media enable the<br>>> 'interactive city' for artists to key into, they also promote ideas
<br>>> of corporatised play in an urban space and tend to be<br>>> interventionist and intrusive. 'Big brother' media and cctv<br>>> surveillance allows for few informal, ungoverned social meeting
<br>>> places. This means that artists are having to find interstices<br>>> between the formal constructed and observed social spaces where<br>>> unorthodox art can happen to engage with its audience. Just how is
<br>>> such practice being supported within the neo-liberal economic<br>>> structures of globalistation? Julian Stallabrass suggests that this<br>>> only produces artists (in Brit Art particularly) who posture as
<br>>> edgy, risky individuals but who are in real terms busy establishing<br>>> market positions for themselves. The answer lies somewhere in the<br>>> inter-related issues of art, lifestyle and globalisation.
<br>>>><br>>>> In the 1960s Marshall McLuhan predicted a technologically enabled<br>>> 'global village' and issued the warning -<br>>>> "Instead of tending towards a vast Alexandrian library the world
<br>>> has become a computer, an electronic brain, exactly as an infantile<br>>> piece of science fiction. And as our senses have gone outside us,<br>>> Big Brother goes inside. So, unless aware of this dynamic, we shall
<br>>> at once move into a phase of panic terrors, exactly befitting a<br>>> small world of tribal drums, total interdependence, and<br>>> superimposed co-existence."<br>>>><br>>>> I would be extremely interested in your thoughts on the extent to
<br>>> which we are 'aware of this dynamic' and offer some questions which<br>>> might help probe the territory -<br>>>><br>>>> Corporations are rebranding themselves around lifestyle, is this
<br>>> influencing creative practice or vice-versa?<br>>>> How do the principals and aesthetics of open source and<br>>> democratic media sit alongside corporate products (iPod etc)?<br>>>> How should arts organisations and institutions respond to open
<br>>> networking and ideas exchange, what is a node and a network in<br>>> cultural terms?<br>>>> Are artists the software for the corporation hardware, or the<br>>> activists in sheeps clothing?
<br>>>> Where does government funding for the arts sit in the global<br>>> cultural mix, or is corporate money driving the cultural agenda?<br>>>><br>>> With thanks and kind regards,<br>
>><br>>> Dew Harrison.<br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>> _______________________________________________<br>>> iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity<br>>> (
<a href="http://distributedcreativity.org">distributedcreativity.org</a>)<br>>> <a href="mailto:iDC@mailman.thing.net">iDC@mailman.thing.net</a><br>>> <a href="http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc">
http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc</a><br>>><br>>> List Archive:<br>>> <a href="http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/">http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/</a><br>>><br>>> iDC Photo Stream:
<br>>> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/</a><br>>><br>>><br>>> _______________________________________________<br>>> iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity
<br>>> (<a href="http://distributedcreativity.org">distributedcreativity.org</a>)<br>>> <a href="mailto:iDC@mailman.thing.net">iDC@mailman.thing.net</a><br>>> <a href="http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc">
http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc</a><br>>><br>>> List Archive:<br>>> <a href="http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/">http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/</a><br>>><br>>> iDC Photo Stream:
<br>>> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/</a><br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity
<br>> (<a href="http://distributedcreativity.org">distributedcreativity.org</a>)<br>> <a href="mailto:iDC@mailman.thing.net">iDC@mailman.thing.net</a><br>> <a href="http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc">
http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc</a><br>><br>> List Archive:<br>> <a href="http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/">http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/</a><br>><br>> iDC Photo Stream:
<br>> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/</a><br><br><br><br>Simon Biggs<br><a href="mailto:simon@littlepig.org.uk">simon@littlepig.org.uk</a><br><a href="http://www.littlepig.org.uk/">
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/</a><br>AIM: simonbiggsuk<br>Research Professor in Art, Edinburgh College of Art<br><a href="mailto:s.biggs@eca.ac.uk">s.biggs@eca.ac.uk</a><br><a href="http://www.eca.ac.uk/">http://www.eca.ac.uk/
</a><br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity (<a href="http://distributedcreativity.org">distributedcreativity.org</a>)<br><a href="mailto:iDC@mailman.thing.net">
iDC@mailman.thing.net</a><br><a href="http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc">http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc</a><br><br>List Archive:<br><a href="http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/">
http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/</a><br><br>iDC Photo Stream:<br><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>
-- <br>The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer alternatives.<br><br>Wiki and Encyclopedia, at <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>; Blog, at <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net">
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a>; Newsletter, at <a href="http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p">http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p</a><br><br>Basic essay at <a href="http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499">
http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499</a>; interview at <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html">http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html</a>; video interview, at
<a href="http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2006/09/29/network_collaboration_peer_to_peer.htm">http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2006/09/29/network_collaboration_peer_to_peer.htm</a><br><br>The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by
<a href="http://www.ws-network.com/04_team.htm">http://www.ws-network.com/04_team.htm</a>