[iDC] Re: iDC Digest, Vol 22, Issue 13
Eric_Gordon at emerson.edu
Tue Aug 15 15:24:02 EDT 2006
Hi. I have also been lurking for some time on this list and have
been hesitant to contribute until now. I'm faculty in new media at
Emerson College in Boston and I'm currently working on a book about
new media and the consumption of the American City from 1893 to the
present. One of the premises of the book is that new media, from the
Kodak to Radio to the Internet, have all integrated into urban
culture through the premise of play. The playfulness enacted by
these new forms served to frame the city into a comprehensible and
consumable object. In other words, in the United States, play rarely
broke from the norms of urban consumption; in fact, it was the norm
of urban consumption.
This is all to say that there is little surprising in the tenor of
locative media and the very American interpretation of
psychogeography that has emerged. The overwhelming emphasis on
freedom of movement and the cultivation of social connections that
we've seen in so many projects seems aligned with commercial
applications such as Radar.net, Where.com and the like. This is not
a criticism - only an observation. While there is a lot of value in
this playfulness, both in an artistic and commercial context, it is
not subversive. This artwork, like much of the commercial work, is
engaged in the project of articulating new forms of containing the
urban context for consumption. Leaving one's home, walking down the
street, grabbing a coffee, running into a friend, and off to work, is
the marketable experience of city life - it is promoted in everything
from art to social software to the most recent luxury condo.
So where does this leave us? Some version of Baudelaire's
contemplative wanderer and Debord's playfulness has made it to
mainstream culture. What, then, are the majority of locative media
projects reacting against? What is the context of urbanism from
which these interventions emerge? Does the figure of the flaneur or
the practice of derive necessarily equal an oppositional engagement
with space? As American urban culture continues to successfully
market urban experience to the highest bidder, what kind of urban
experience can we construct that exists outside of this consumer
culture? Might we need new categories to define the work of urban
And finally, as locative media confronts all of these issues, I would
add that one of the best things we can do to ensure the continued
relevance of this work is to take the concept of urbanism seriously.
Instead of creating experiences within a seemingly predefined urban
context, we need to begin focusing on the specifics of urbanism. In
general terms, American urbanism is distinct from European urbanism,
which is distinct from Asian and African urbanisms. And from city to
city, and neighborhood to neighborhood, the logic and flow of public
and private, history and experience, and space and place are distinct.
Thanks for reading.
On Aug 15, 2006, at 10:17 AM, idc-request at bbs.thing.net wrote:
> Send iDC mailing list submissions to
> idc at bbs.thing.net
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> idc-request at bbs.thing.net
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> idc-owner at bbs.thing.net
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of iDC digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. Re: iDC Digest, Vol 22, Issue 12 (Daniel A Perlin)
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:14:25 +0200
> From: Daniel A Perlin <dap265 at nyu.edu>
> Subject: [iDC] Re: iDC Digest, Vol 22, Issue 12
> To: idc at bbs.thing.net
> Message-ID: <d500b3502a89.44e1e4d1 at mail.nyu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> Hi all,
> I have been a reader of iDC for awhile, and many threads have tempted
> me, but this one seems to have touched and articulated so many of my
> exact sentiments regarding locative media in general, so I thought I
> might add my 2.0 cents.
> In my opinion, the following points raised by kanarinka are so
> that they should be asked of each incoming project deemed locative.
>> So, my questions to the artists, the organizers, the attendees and
>> everyone else is - is psychogeography/locative media work simply R&D
>> for a new generation of entertainment spectacle? Or, what are we
>> actually trying to do with these ideas of "play" in urban space? Who
>> gets to play? And what about the interactive cities in Iraq and
>> Lebanon and elsewhere? Why didn't we address war, security,
>> militarization and terrorism as aspects of the contemporary
>> interactive city? For me, running around making the city into a
>> sandbox, a playground or a playing field feels increasingly
>> and irresponsible.
> Somehow, the evasive nature of Debord's psycheogeographic models have
> lent themeselves to the most abusive forms of appropriation (or
> as with anything that is powerful, it is a multi-edged sword).
> Clearly the sandbox idea is a diversion from Debord's concept of the
> detournement. I quote:
> If détournement were extended to urbanistic realizations, not many
> people would remain unaffected by an exact reconstruction in one
> city of
> an entire neighborhood of another. Life can never be too disorienting:
> détournement on this level would really make it beautiful.
> ---Guy Debord, Gil J Wolman, A User’s Guide to Détournement Belgian
> surrealist journal Les Lèvres Nues #8 (May 1956).
> (Translator’s Note: The French word détournement means deflection,
> diversion, rerouting, distortion, misuse, misappropriation, hijacking,
> or otherwise turning aside from the normal course or purpose.)
> It seems to me that the sandbox is not point here for Debord. In fact,
> what might be being begged by Debord, and perhaps some of these new
> works, are new approaches to mapping itself.
> Although we should not privelege cartography as a mapping strategy per
> se, some new ways to make some mess or sense out of our everyday lives
> can be offered by these new technologies. Looking to Frederic Jameson,
> as opposed to simple game theory may be a strategy.
> Jameson states,
> An aesthetic of cognitive mapping – a pedagogical political culture
> which seeks to endow the individual subject with some new heightened
> sense of its place in the global system – will necessarily have to
> respect this now enormously complex representational dialectic and
> invent radically new forms in order to do it justice. –Frederic
> Postmodernism or the Cultural logic of Late Capitalism Verso 1991
> I was and am not at ISEA as I have a residency in Barcelona now
> where I
> am working on a psychogeographic sound project, but it seems to me
> much of the work in the field of locative media is blatant
> technofetishization of the latest gadgets masked as art. Is abject
> depoliticization of work needed to make it fun or marketable (I ask
> of the new york chelsea art gallery system as well)?
> I for one would gladly go to "existentialist hells" to try to uncover
> some spaces which have not been overcommodified by the priveleged
> of bourgois play...
> (Kevin Hamilton:)
>> I'm also suspect of permission
>> granted or grabbed through mobility, for the same reasons that the
>> cities and buildings of Constant look to me like an existentialist
> Here Kevin, while I do love the link-up to Beckett, I feel that
> Constant's New Babylon is anything but existentialist hell. What we
> uncover and unfold from his new bablylon city is the always-already
> existent individual psychogeographies present in the polis. His
> project, of relinking these sites through material and structure are
> only physical manifestations of many of the ideals found in the
> utopian maps: one only need think of Moore's Utopia map from 1517, the
> island where each city represents each other on the island of
> utopia. Is
> this nota possible goal for the nonheirarchical approach designed by
> Is there play in this utopia? Perhaps, but not necessarily "fun".
> Interplay, dialogues, push and pull. Quite the opposite of the simple
> misreadings of may '68 by the current bourgoise technorati. Sure, play
> can be fun. But just becuase its fun doesn't make it play. And just
> because you track it on GPS doesn't make it play or fun for that
> Every missile fired from and to iraq is tracked too. And for some in
> power-plays, this "iraq thing" is just a playground as well.
> (am I alone in begging my fellow makers of things to please ask:)
> "Who controls what and why?"
> Why are these questions always so taboo at these conventions masked as
> conferences...? I probably sound bitter, but I get frustrated when
> i see
> so much potential energy just feeding the beasts.
> daniel perlin
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: idc-request at bbs.thing.net
> Date: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 3:24 am
> Subject: iDC Digest, Vol 22, Issue 12
> -------------- next part --------------
> An embedded message was scrubbed...
> From: idc-request at bbs.thing.net
> Subject: iDC Digest, Vol 22, Issue 12
> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 21:24:54 -0400 (EDT)
> Size: 35870
> Url: http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/attachments/
> iDC mailing list
> iDC at bbs.thing.net
> Institute for Distributed Creativity (iDC)
> The research of the Institute for Distributed Creativity
> (iDC) focuses on collaboration in media art, technology,
> and theory with an emphasis on social contexts.
> End of iDC Digest, Vol 22, Issue 13
More information about the iDC