[thingist] What about a subjective, evolving, archive?

[Keith Sanborn]

My 2 cents:

Has Archive.org been considered as a potential site for a the thing archive? I know Brewster and Rick to have a great range of interests. They don't have the circumscribed cultural interests of a MoMA and are located in SF, which has not really been a site of TT activities, but they have a great record of follow-through. I know nothing of their current finances.

Keith


On Jul 19, 2010, at 1:10 PM, Jerome Joy <joy at thing.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Dear all
> 
> 
> Sorry I didn't read all your messages since one week, because of  
> hectic days and a lot of current work, but while reading the subject  
> and topic, maybe you could be interest in this :
> http://thing.nujus.net/
> 
> just an introduction :
> 
> I wrote this brief history after Summer'07 until Jan'08 because I  
> pointed out we missed a "history" of The Thing, specially in France.  
> I began some short investigations by probing my own archives but this  
> requires now a serious exploration and edition. I stopped this  
> article because of time's lack, but I began some online interviews  
> with Wolfgang, Gh, Blackhawk... and asked for corrections.
> 
> The wiki thing.nujus.net is a basic one but sufficient for sharing  
> edition. My idea is to propose you to share this publication and to  
> add articles concerning The Thing. The process can be simple: only  
> one psw for all thingists....
> I can update the wiki system in order to have more features such as  
> comments on articles, etc. It's hosted on nujus.net maintained by Gh  
> and Peter Sinclair, and I guess Gh can do a nujus.net presentation  
> (http://nujus.net/) on this list.
> 
> 
> 
> My two cents, briefly, concerning past, present, future TT :
> 
> - to publish online archives of The Thing (the main website -  
> articles, forums, etc.), and all the projects hosted on the servers)  
> is more a work for archivists and specialists of net-art  
> conservation. I guess that, after Summer'07, most of TT artists  
> continued online works and had found another hosting server (that was  
> my case). I know that some organizations are very interested in net- 
> art archive, in a scientific framework (such as for instance,  
> Fondation Langlois and DOCAM in Montreal, etc. Wolfgang has got  
> contacts with some of them in Germany and Austria).
> 
> - the public access to TT archives is very important for art fields,  
> practices and research. We can't work without memory, even if the  
> used medium is electronic and networked. The TT period ('91 to '07)  
> corresponded mainly to static edition (websites, forums), and the  
> current evolution goes since '00 to realtime activities and practices  
> (but remember the Empire webcam by WS). For instance, my research and  
> art domain concerns streaming, flux and Internet auditoriums (see  
> Locus Sonus, http://locusonus.org/ and other projects I initiated :  
> Collective JukeBox, nocinema.org, sobralasolas.org, picnic, etc.).  
> The question of archive (or of recording/documentation) is at the  
> core (even if we decide to avoid the question, it's still these),  
> because we join also other art questions present for instance in the  
> beginning of the XXth century (performances, radio, etc.), or in the  
> 60s (live processes, etc.), or finally in the 80s/90s (live  
> programming, intermedia, etc.). The Internet is a very nascent  
> medium, and it's not disconnected from art history.
> 
> - Concerning the now, the questions about critical spaces, online  
> spaces for experimentation, etc. have moved since the TT period. The  
> context is not the same. But these questions remain with little  
> shifts because current techniques permit more appropriation and  
> "tuning" than ten or twenty years ago. But the development of  
> critical spaces is still required, maybe more today than yesterday.
> 
> - The question of future TT is based, on my viewpoint, on questions  
> concerning collective dynamics. TT was based on the practice of a  
> community, even if this one wasn't orthodox. Does this (these)  
> practice(s) is(are) today alive and pertinent ? What new collective  
> forms and protocols can be common today ? A server ? a very large  
> bandwith ? an activity map ? a common tag thru web 2.0, 3.0, etc. ? ...
> 
> 
> So here are so brief notes, written on-the-fly
> but I promise, I'll read and post some feedbacks in reaction to your  
> messages....
> maybe I'll be able to develop in a next post, some ideas and  
> sentences I swiftly wrote into this message...
> 
> And sorry for poor english...
> 
> 
> best
> Jerome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> thingist mailing list
> thingist at mailman.thing.net
> https://mailman.thing.net/mailman/listinfo/thingist