Back to Top
well old andy did it before all the net artists were even able to walk upright. fuck! next thing we’ll find out that duchamp actually composed an opera using zelda’s ocarina of time.

well old andy did it before all the net artists were even able to walk upright. fuck! next thing we’ll find out that duchamp actually composed an opera using zelda’s ocarina of time.

➜ Post-Internet, Social Media, and Net Optimism

interesting article by andrew durbin on post-internet art’s latent brand of positivity. the text articulates pretty well the self-immolating nature of broad post-internet practices to default on “real” politics, though the author stops short of expanding on a fair few of the points he raises. perhaps because following the breadcrumb trail in that regard leads into amateur psychology - what other praxis could deconstruct the brand drive or whatever you’d like to call it?
another slight sticking point with us at GIF HQ is the heavy reliance on thejogging as some kind of intellectual sacrificial lamb of internet culture. okay great, it’s become a case study example but whatever symbolic relevance it’s attained is only visible to those who give enough of a shit to get baptized by it - the neo-hipster net artist types of the last lyon biennale, for example. no post-internet art “thing” on the internet should be held up like that because it ultimately plays into the positive reinforcement attitude, one inscrutably linked to all those dubious late capitalist modes of thinking we all agree are bad yet somehow are confused as to nullify them without usurpation. unless we really are happy with a city boy running the culture department as opposed to someone with creative industry experience. and some post-internet party artist doing a speech at a NY fashion show is not really commendable - isn’t that exactly the same kind of thing an empty-calorie tongue-in-arse DiS photoshoot is, yet clothed in garms different?
anyway, the understanding of cultural internet should be kept flat as possible because whether it’s thejogging or the web page that lets you order recycling bins from lambeth council, it’s all on the same internet.
eben weiss likened it to the difference between "pissing in the toilet or in the shower. both end up in the sewer. if it’s on the new york times or this blog, it’s the same internet."

➜ Is There A Price On Acceptance Of Racism?

in addition for being a great place for money launderers and 1%ers to hang out, the art world is also a great place for disgusting people to say things so revolting that even jim davidson’s haunted arsehole would clench in shame. and go completely unchallenged, thanks to the positively reinforcing environment of humanoid lampreys. politicians often have to fall on certain sizes of metaphorical sword if they get caught saying this kind of thing, but in the world of visual arts, nah.

there is a petition as well which has a bit more information on UCS having zero balls and also apparently being a great place to hang out if you find slavery really lols.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/no-to-650

this snippet of a basil bunting quote about poetry readings in the north of england funnily ties in with the recent excellent programme on bbc radio 4 about the human voice in the age of digital communication, presented by the wonderful aleks krotoski. LISTEN HEREobviously claptrap doesn’t tend to bore the net art cultivated inside joke zombie audience, they bloody live for that kind of stuff.

this snippet of a basil bunting quote about poetry readings in the north of england funnily ties in with the recent excellent programme on bbc radio 4 about the human voice in the age of digital communication, presented by the wonderful aleks krotoski. LISTEN HERE
obviously claptrap doesn’t tend to bore the net art cultivated inside joke zombie audience, they bloody live for that kind of stuff.

at HG HQ we are all very saddened about X Marks the Bökship closing it’s doors at the end of the month. it’s always been an excellently stocked and interesting place run by some very lovely people. we hope that all of those involved land on their feet and aren’t put off any future endeavours by the increasingly shitty rent situation in london. it’s rare an independent bookshop provides a platform for so many genuine literary/art ventures and goes beyond just being a point of sale. bökship will be missed.

at HG HQ we are all very saddened about X Marks the Bökship closing it’s doors at the end of the month. it’s always been an excellently stocked and interesting place run by some very lovely people. we hope that all of those involved land on their feet and aren’t put off any future endeavours by the increasingly shitty rent situation in london. it’s rare an independent bookshop provides a platform for so many genuine literary/art ventures and goes beyond just being a point of sale. bökship will be missed.

a very strange invitation indeed, refreshing honesty

a very strange invitation indeed, refreshing honesty

we give our interns 5 hours to update our mailing list and when we come back all they’ve been doing is playing this videogame! how does any work actually get done in the art world? outside of non-paid, non-unionised labour and secret oil money, of course.

we give our interns 5 hours to update our mailing list and when we come back all they’ve been doing is playing this videogame! how does any work actually get done in the art world? outside of non-paid, non-unionised labour and secret oil money, of course.

new-aesthetic:

Art Of The Bush School | greg.org: the making of, by greg allen

This is as good a time as any to point out that Bush painted his portraits, not just from photographs—a common enough practice as well as a long-established conceptual strategy, though I think only the former pertains here—but from the top search result on Google Images. Many photos were taken from the subject’s Wikipedia entry. Bush based his paintings on the literally first-to-surface, easiest-to-find photos of his subjects.

Is this meaningful in any way? If he had one, it would mean Bush’s studio assistant is very, very lazy. But in all his discussion of it, Bush’s painting practice appears to be a solitary one. He apparently did not tap the enormous archive of photos, taken by the professionals who followed him every day for eight years, which are contained in his giant library. Instead, it seems, he Googled the world leaders he made such impactful relationships with himself, and took the first straight-on headshot he saw. […]

The point is, once again, art matters. Art has surfaced in the most dire circumstances, at a crucial moment in our society’s history, produced by someone whose actions and moral standing confound our engagement with it. And culturally speaking, we don’t care; we’d rather see Bush’s folksy pictures from the internet. Every news story about Bush’s paintings represents ten reports not filed about Bush’s torture. In the art world, meanwhile, we’d rather not see it at all. Better to condemn and dismiss it quickly. Snark and move on. Stoke the indignance that keeps us and our practices unsullied. Ward off any engagement with cowering incantations of connoisseurship and facture.

This is how art appears in our society today. Art works, as they say, and this is what it does: it absolves and redeems and defuses and deflects. Ultimately, George Bush’s paintings are important less for what they show, than for what they obscure. And the art world’s critical structures seem unable or unwilling to meet the challenge posed by the art of the torture & terrorism school.

word

new-aesthetic:

Art Of The Bush School | greg.org: the making of, by greg allen

This is as good a time as any to point out that Bush painted his portraits, not just from photographs—a common enough practice as well as a long-established conceptual strategy, though I think only the former pertains here—but from the top search result on Google Images. Many photos were taken from the subject’s Wikipedia entry. Bush based his paintings on the literally first-to-surface, easiest-to-find photos of his subjects. Is this meaningful in any way? If he had one, it would mean Bush’s studio assistant is very, very lazy. But in all his discussion of it, Bush’s painting practice appears to be a solitary one. He apparently did not tap the enormous archive of photos, taken by the professionals who followed him every day for eight years, which are contained in his giant library. Instead, it seems, he Googled the world leaders he made such impactful relationships with himself, and took the first straight-on headshot he saw. […] The point is, once again, art matters. Art has surfaced in the most dire circumstances, at a crucial moment in our society’s history, produced by someone whose actions and moral standing confound our engagement with it. And culturally speaking, we don’t care; we’d rather see Bush’s folksy pictures from the internet. Every news story about Bush’s paintings represents ten reports not filed about Bush’s torture. In the art world, meanwhile, we’d rather not see it at all. Better to condemn and dismiss it quickly. Snark and move on. Stoke the indignance that keeps us and our practices unsullied. Ward off any engagement with cowering incantations of connoisseurship and facture. This is how art appears in our society today. Art works, as they say, and this is what it does: it absolves and redeems and defuses and deflects. Ultimately, George Bush’s paintings are important less for what they show, than for what they obscure. And the art world’s critical structures seem unable or unwilling to meet the challenge posed by the art of the torture & terrorism school.

word

no disrespect to the jerwood or anything, lovely calm place (cafe is rubbish tho) but when they try to do internet art then you know there is trouble.

no disrespect to the jerwood or anything, lovely calm place (cafe is rubbish tho) but when they try to do internet art then you know there is trouble.

surprisingly, the venga boys were ahead of their time in the post-internet cultural debate - just look at track 14. not so new wave now are ya?

surprisingly, the venga boys were ahead of their time in the post-internet cultural debate - just look at track 14. not so new wave now are ya?