Monday, March 19, 2012

Being [Social] [Media] [Art] (by Mark Amerika)

Ten things I am thinking about before, during, and after my visit to Finsbury Park's new @furtherfield art gallery (in no particular order and with no orderly reproduction of lived-time or thought-time) :

1) This site's subhead was the original title for this blog entry: http://is.gd/bQNavM

2) As always, the multifaceted levels of cultural production @furtherfield signal to those "in the know" that, curatorially speaking, they are the 21st century version of Pound's "antennae" picking up transmissions before most of us can even make a connection ("Artists are the antennae of the race, but the bullet-headed many will never learn to trust their great artists.").

3) The London Executive Director of Arts Council England agrees with that sentence above but addresses it more formally by writing, "Digital technologies have become a fundamental part of modern life and artists are at the forefront of interrogating what this means for their work and broader society ... Furtherfield has been a pioneer of this emerging practice ..."

4) The opening exhibition theme of "Being Social" is a further indication that net art per se was always less about "being digital" than about "being [inter]connected" -- and that personally expressing yourself through the social media network is an evolving form of performance art & remixological practice driven by the circulation of conceptual personae in the networked field of distribution.

Distributing your conceptual personae through the social media field of action is what Karen Eliot and Luther Blissett are are particularly good at. So it's no wonder that their offspring, on exhibit here as Karen Blissett, would be spawned by Web 2.0 media platforms. The multiple Karens who reconfigure themselves into a simultaneous and continuous fusion of personae-as-shareware projects present themselves as a marvelous art-making machine. Everything-they-do-now is a manyfesto of aesthetic différance.

5) "Internet-aware art" is already an outmoded term. Contemporary art is always already Internet-aware. Now the question is: can contemporary art lose its self-awareness as art per se while charging the language of new media to the utmost possible degree?

6) The answer to that last question is no.*

7) We really need to develop more experimental / multimedia / theoretical formats that can "read" and/or interact with (expand upon) the emerging forms of vernacular video that are now fully embedded in social media culture. We need to do this in terms [i.e. in remixological styles] that will propel everything-we-are-doing-now into a higher rhetorical framework.

8) In some ways, the most interesting contemporary artists are already propelling these changes forward just by doing-what-they-do-now (cf. Ryan Trecartin, Michelle Ellsworth, Stanya Kahn, or Oliver Laric).

9) The duo Thomson and Craighead, whose "London Wall" is on exhibit at "Being Social," are perfect examples of how "early net artists" can not only maintain relevance and build their oeuvres for the duration, but can also mature into important artists-as-artists in their own right minus the marginalizing labels (to repeat: we can now drop the "net" part, and yes, the "Internet-aware" flava too -- that phase is officially over. If you identify yourself as a contemporary artist but are not Internet-aware or at the very least network-influenced in your thinking about what it means to actually be an artist today, then you are not contemporary).



The source material for these wall texts is generated using locative technologies that identify tweets being uploaded from around the Finsbury Park area. Apparently, some of the random tweeters have since found their way to the gallery to have their own image taken with the art work.

10) Over a soy latte in the nearby Finsbury Park cafe (with free wifi to boot), I am reading a tweet from London's newest commercial gallery, @CarrollFletcher whose list of artists includes a number of very net-savvy practitioners, and the tweet generously links me to the @furtherfield exhibition website page. Which brings me to the asterisk:

* upon further(field) reflection, it does not really matter how self-aware contemporary art is of its status as art per se, whether Internet-dramatic, -refined, or -exclusive. If one is engaged with their social media art practice as a simultaneous and continuous fusion of remixological performances that take place in unrealtime, then all you need is love. Love, after all, is what fuels the collaborative composition of "Being Social" and, yes, that's a political statement. So is this show.

Keywords: furtherfield, "Being Social", net art, social media practice, Carroll Fletcher

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Video Trailer for The Museum of Glitch Aesthetics (by Mark Amerika)

From the Abandon Normal Devices web site announcing my new commission, The Museum of Glitch Aesthetics:
The Museum of Glitch Aesthetics (MOGA) is the latest work in Mark Amerika's collaborative series of transmedia narratives. MOGA tells the story of The Artist 2.0, an online persona whose personal mythology and body of digital artworks are rapidly being canonised into the annals of art history. The piece traces the life of the artist and his ongoing commitment to a practice of ‘glitch aesthetics’ that leads to the museum of the title. MOGA will feature a wide array of artworks intentionally corrupted by technological processes including net art, digital video art, digitally manipulated still images, game design, stand-up comedy, sound art, and electronic literature. The project will also include a mock museum catalog available in both free e-book and print-on-demand editions.
Here's the video trailer:




Keywords: Mark Amerika, Museum of Glitch Aesthetics, Abandon Normal Devices, video trailer, glitchmuseum.com, glitch art

Wednesday, March 07, 2012

remixthereviews

There is a lot happening these days including the forthcoming Collider-4 exhibition of CODEWORK at the Emily Davis Gallery. This exhibition will also premiere my new concept album made in collaboration with electronic sound artist Chad Mossholder. The album is titled Micro-Cinematic Essays on the Life and Work of Marcel Duchamp dba Conceptual Parts, Ink, and we anticipate the eventual worldwide release of the work some time in late April.

Exactly what is this work?

Micro-Cinematic Essays on the Life and Work of Marcel Duchamp is a collaborative "conceptual art" album featuring my own writing and vocals (much of it recorded using my iPhone Voice Memo app) and the sound design of electronic music composer Chad Mossholder. The work consists of nineteen experimental tracks that we refer to as "close readings" focusing on the work, language, notes, and influence of Marcel Duchamp on contemporary forms of remix practice. Many of the tracks actually remix my own voice with the voice of Duchamp. An exploration into glitch, microtonality, and the spectral analysis of recorded voices over time, Chad and I surgically alter the aesthetic frequency of what is often referred to as "the artist's voice" and, in the process, invite the listener to rethink the interrelationship between critical writing and critical listening.

It should also be noted that this work is made possible thanks to a visiting artist residency for both Chad and I at the Centre for Creative Arts at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Australia.

I am also diving headlong into the final phases of postproduction on The Museum of Glitch Aesthetics, my latest art commission with the Abandon Normal Devices festival in Manchester, UK, as part of their 2012 event held in conjunction with the London 2012 Olympics. The video trailer for this elaborate work of transmedia narrative will premiere at a press conference for the London Cultural Olympiad on Friday (more on this soon).

Meanwhile, here is a sampling of recent reviews for my latest book of experimental contemporary art theory, remixthebook, published with the University of Minnesota Press:

Bookforum:
A theorist and artist, Amerika takes "source material everywhere" as his mantra, and in remixthebook he weaves together works by everyone from Ralph Waldo Emerson to Stephen Colbert into a quasi-poetic theory of "remixology." He argues that our technology-laden consumer culture allows for innovation but kills creativity, forcing artists to approach self-expression in a new way. Rather than creativity, he emphasizes the search for novelty; art that re-presents source material simply to create a sense of newness. Because Amerika considers life an "on-the-fly remix of who we are," it doesn't matter whether that source material is emotion, a walk by a lake, or another artist's work. Regardless of where you find inspiration, or from whom you steal your source material, Amerika is unequivocal: "Somehow you have to find a way to make art."
Art Monthly:
Carrying on from where Nicholas Bourriaud’s 2001 book Postproduction left off, artists not only 'sample' material from other sources, they also 'remix' or 'mashup' cultural content in order to channel it as 'postproduction mediums' – of the spiritualist variety – who draw inspiration from the field of 'open source lifestyle practice', which roughly translates as the domain of everyday life. Amerika, in the performative role of a writer as remixologist, refers to the quotes and citations he uses from writers like Allen Ginsberg and Ronald Sukenick as samples, and the reconstitution of these samples into book chapters as remixes. To apply this logic to artists, Robert Rauschenberg's combines could be seen as paradigmatic examples of remixological art, and Ryan Trecartin's trashy, consumerist net-nightmare films as highly evolved. Things are further convoluted in remixthebook by an almost complete lack of punctuation, the stanzaic and occasionally concrete layout of text, and Amerika's penchant for wild lexical agglomerations like 'chaosmosis' and 'destinarrativity'. The overall effect is akin to reading a sprawling epic poem written for cyberpunks. But it is fun.
RealTime Arts:
remixthebook (and its accompanying and equally important online portal of the same name, of which I will write later) is too lyrical, too poetic, too inclusive and at times too joyous to really be described as a manifesto. In a sense that’s what it is because it makes manifest Amerika’s thinking about the places, practices and (yes) politics of art, creativity and the artist medium in networked digital culture. But it also enacts (performs) Amerika’s practice by doing what it says. That is, rather than being an extended didactic panel that describes (de-scribes, un-writes) his artistic practices, it is inscribed by the practices of which he writes. It is an extended theoretical, creative work whose subject matter is the work itself.
Keywords: remixthebook, Mark Amerika, Art Monthly, RealTime Arts, Bookforum, Marcel Duchamp, postproduction

Monday, February 27, 2012

Auto-Friending (With Benefits)

Who is this sexy bot that has me saying "Who" and not "What"?

It's like being thirteen and in love with an anime character who I just know knows me.

An incorporeal presence checking out the latest in high resolution skinz, she tries on a new persona just to lure any "me" into her demographic domain.

She wears this new skinz, this updated persona, quite well, but in actuality, never leaves the fitting room.

Well, it's really a dressing room, but now that she's feeling all robotic she's obsessed with fitting in.

But first she has to fit into her new persona.

How best to do that, especially since those of us who she attempts to seduce into her all-consuming realm of possibility automatically view her as an all-too-predictable spam-bot?

She decides, "This is who I am," and so: "I need to embrace it."

By embracing it, she fits the part perfectly, as if it were made for her.

Sexy spam-bot extraordinaire.

The persona becomes her.

She does more than just fit in. Now, she owns the room.

But for how long?

Just as I am about to totally second guess myself and commit to something that makes no sense at all but that would be a unique experiment in disembodied transference of vintage demon leakage into an abyss never quite deep enough, she flips the script and morphs into something completely different: a translucent goth chick who is all tattoo and no high-def skinz to speak of.

But then that gets old too, like three days old, and she goes all post-postmodern on me by unwittingly blocking herself from receiving any direct messages (from herself).

It's one of those elongated moments of mystical selflessness, as if she had taken her avatar presence and immersed in an anechoic chamber "until the end of the world."

When I finally hear back from her, it's a quick DM, terse, and to the point: "Why connect when I can just as easily deface myself?"

It's hard to explain what this DM does to me, especially given her track record in identity scalping.

(Besides, the Great Recession is still receding, except for the 14.6%, and there's no telling what her or anybody else's motives are for doing what they do).

Soon she clothes herself in yet another persona, makes a splashy appearance on various social media networks, and everyone gets all frantic reading something different into it.

What do I specifically read into it?

I am not "I," so it's really hard to say (at least I haven't blocked myself from receiving my own direct messages -- not yet).

But the more I find myself attracted to this sexy spam-bot who continually shares with me her readymade pornographic come-ons, the more I realize that something is fighting for its specific subjectivity, even as the data world continues to resist.

This data world is suffused with fate.

Marketing fate.

Demo(graphics) or Die.

OK, how not to succumb to everything the apparatus has to offer her? Can't she just take a long form creative pause?

No, she repeatedly accepts the offer and buys another persona. Another layer of high-def skinz.

This is her (marketing) fate.

She is convinced that this new persona is totally "for reals" (just like all of the other ones still to come, profusely).

Her whole aura is now singularly aesthetic in its appeal to the distributed network that she has successfully rekindled.

"They don't call it buying power for nothing," is what she confides to a robo-mate she's just friended.

(How many robo-mates is she auto-friending and who will defacebook her next? "This," she sends in a follow-up DM, "is Fear Factor incarnate.")

However she distributes her personae, the point is, she's positively reinforcing her ongoing relevance to whoever will follow her.

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Deep Interior Shots (Redux and Remix)

From a June, 1981, note on "the nature of images," Bill Viola writes:
I am interested not so much in the image whose source lies in the phenomenal world, but rather the image as artifact, or result, or imprint, or even wholly determined by some inner realization. It is the image of that inner state and as such must be considered completely accurate and realistic. This is an approach to images from an entirely opposite direction -- from within rather without.
This inner realization that Viola speaks of is explored in the Immobilité project as a series of "deep interior shots" (a playful remix of what in standard Hollywood script-dogma is often referred to as an "interior shot"). In my Director's notebook, The Postproduction of Presence, I refer to these deep interior shots in relation to movement or more specifically an inner choreography that postproduces (in real)time:
There is a deep interior movement or what I now refer to as an inner choreography that becomes para-ritualistic for practicing remixologists who are optimally situating their bodies to convert experiential matter into muscle memory that triggers emergent forms of fictional (literary) presence.
But why a fictional or literary presence?

This must have something to do with persona construction and the way we train ourselves to tap into our creative potential by unconsciously projecting these image-artifacts that Viola refers to and that today, in the digital culture, are easily manipulated and put into play via the networked field of distribution.

A bit further along in the Director's Notebook, I wrote:
Is it true that perception per se consists of a cinematographic process wherein we take snapshots from the passage of time and string them on a becoming that is at once abstract, uniform, and invisible, situated at the back of the apparatus of knowledge?

Does the "streaming togetherness" of instantaneous sections that can freeze into elongated pseudo-photographic moments in postproduction position the work of time-based media in a state of aesthetic paralysis?

Or is that time-based image that now embodies a duration of its own really taking place in a body-brain-apparatus achievement that we hallucinate into the fluid (moving) picture frame?

Creating the impression of a continuity of movement is one thing.

Remixologically synthesizing a sequence of image events in perpetual postproduction is another.

In the first instance, one is merely living with their eyes wide shut.

In the other, one is engaged in the revolution (practice) of everyday life (as a projection of interior shots, meta-tagged with experiential potential).

The durational drift of the remixologist’s bodily rhythms postproduces an intuitively generated lifeform that can be translated into a time-based media fiction [narrative event].

This time-based media fiction unfolds in time while duplicating itself in the virtual.

What You See Is What You Forget.

The postproduced image and its body double.
During the making of Immobilité, we asked ourselves: "Do we need to script reality from the outside-in in order to make an 'indie film' or can we hyperimprovisationally play multiple roles in unscripted realities as a way to mobilize our thoughts outside the movie industry system?"

An email from an artist-writer friend partly reads:
One question I have is about your experience of camera as prosthesis. I have found especially with the Flip that seeing through that lens is a form of virtual touch (since the camera is hand held and so small-- rather than sight, it is like a strange form of blindness in fact -- I wonder if, in a more virtual universe, the production of images becomes a substitute for touch.
To which I respond (in part):
Following up on "camera as prosthesis" I guess the question is what role does proprioception play in all of this? What I found when making Immobilité is that you need to synchronize your rhythms with what Gregory Ulmer refers to as choragraphy.

It's hard to map out via email but imagine

cinematography as the writing of movement

choreography as the writing of dance

choragraphy as the writing of invention

Once you bring a portable if not semi-wearable "camera as prosthesis" into the mix, where you go in blind and hold your eyes in the palm of your hand, then you can begin to enact what dancers refer to as structured improvisation, capturing data as you slide between proprioception and movement-vision. I steal this last insight from Brian Massumi. [...] He refers to movement-vision as "an included disjunction," an "opening onto a space of transformation in which a de-objectified movement fuses with a de-subjectified observer. This larger processuality, this real movement, includes the perspective from which it is seen."

[...]

Your sense of "virtual touch" is right on. This is what I felt not only while using the camera, but while "painting" the scenes. It's weird, I never considered myself in any way connected to the history of painting until I began using video cameras and the mobile phone video camera solidified my deep connection, albeit from a totally different angle. If you look at the last scene of Immobilité with the double rainbow you will see the frame "flick" with minute touches as if using the rainbow image as a palette to bring more color into the scene (it's the camera trying to focus its movement-vision but only materializes because of the virtual touch intuited by the body).

Massumi says "Affects are virtual synthetic perspectives" and maybe what we are finding is that with these miniaturized apparatuses at hand, we are able to locate new potentials in the body as it moves.
These new potentials in the body as it moves are aesthetic in nature (aesthetics in/of nature). The virtual eyes of the remixological synner touch rather than see and in touching feel their way into visionary experience.

The tensions between interiority/exteriority, being in the system or outside of it, or even playfully dancing on the tightrope of our micro-existence so as to challenge ourselves to maintain a balance without giving into the forces of gravity, permeate these kinds of beyond-indie productions.

Our response throughout the entire [post]production process was to just keep moving.

Of course, before mobile phones could pass from our eyes to our hands and into the body of the other, there was Cassavetes, documenting the inner choreography ("choragraphy") of the social species:



Upon further reflection, it could be said that to have literally completed Immobilité as a transmedia narrative project is one thing. To witness it going live in variable forms via scalable exhibition and screening contexts is yet another. But to maintain a balance above it all without giving into the forces of gravity is the greatest challenge of all.




Keywords: Immobilité, postproduction, image, remix aesthetics, Bill Viola, Mark Amerika, inner realization, choragraphy, virtual synthetic pleasures, scalable exhibition, networked field of distribution, "camera as prosthesis"

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

The BUDDHACRAT

It was as if the doctor was finally in the house.

He was ON a mission.

He was IN remission, aesthetic remission.

He was missionary.

An unconsciously motivated free-form trajectory IN commission WITH compassion swerving into discovery.

Discovery of just how MACHINIC he truly was.

How networked he was.

How peripatetic he was.

How paratactically symbiotic he was while perambulating the rolling landscape of his thunderous dreams throwing bolts of lightening like liquid javelins into the hearts of lovers populating the planet he absolutely refused to establish permanent residency in.

What does it mean to establish residency?

He was virtually networked falling into and out of states of presence but never really here.

That is to say, he was neither here nor there.

By not being here, by not being part of this world but living the dream of living in a world INSIDE the dream, he was becoming something like waves of music, undulating, tiding things over IN the UNDERworld.

These in-and-out states of presence the doctor roamed as a transient glow flickering his light form into shape-shifting sculptural space, demanded his patience as he slowly kept moving into yet Higher Phases of Experience.

Losing melting something like Identity, he was phrasing his outgoing riffs as if parsing psychogeographical drifts that fed into his micro-edited mashups of reincarnated forms of both prior and still-to-be-born existences, a multi-layered timeline of parallel lives clustered in 4D media spaces tripping through timeless time, long and light, The Devourer of Images consuming every experience in its way, a liberated mechanism of unlimited force finally emptied of all obstacles so that he can once and for all plant his head deep inside the womb-matrix and swallow it whole.

That's where he was now at.

That's where he could take himself when making.

When making doing becoming mining his own fate.

How do you mine your own fate?

And what creative ore do you expect to extract from the mining process?

These were the kinds of questions you could expect him to ask as soon as he entered the room and began his soul searching.

He wasn't searching for his own soul.

THAT he had already researched to the point of no return.

No, when he now entered the room the soul he was searching for was YOURS and the only way he would be able to access it was if you unconsciously opened up your source code to him.

"What is the source of creativity?" he would start each session and then, after a pause, "what is YOUR source of creativity?"

"What is it - and WHERE is it located?"

The room would inevitably go dead silent as the meta-mediums of artists past permeated the room.

"This is what you can learn from me" (he would say, as he introduced himself to the small group of followers who tapped into his distributed, psychospherical stream).

He never presented himself as the Guru or the Buddha or the Ganja Gandhi gainly employing himself via motivational new age speak.

That isn't to say that he wasn't THAT TOO but there was never any question that he was MUCH MORE than that.

He was a poet, an open sorcerer, a reckless renegade of erotic splendor, the reincarnation of a post-retinal artist transcoding ideas into what he playfully referred to as IMAGE ÉCRITURE.

This image écriture was the script he flipped when scratching his vice into verse, and vice versa.

The trick was to amplify his presence as if he really WERE there.

As if he were really HERE.

A presence.

A permanent resident.

But his guest appearances took on the hue of a ghost appearance, desert apparition of a dream in situ.

As if his tendency toward virtual visitations were all part of the performance, the artist-medium trance-porting unconscious creative energy through the networked space of flows.

Was this performance really nothing more than a 21st century version of the illuminated and illuminating Ghost in the Machine?

He identified himself to the group as both a pataphysician AND auto-affective machine.

After a pause, he would say "Imagine the pataphysician AS machine and imagine what it is you must first BECOME in order to operate this machine."

He was inviting people in the room to tweak his settings so that he would shape-shift into a different version of his persona with each subsequent performance.

"I had a marvelous art-making machine" -- he quoted a famous woman artist who he dreamt was his long time lover -- "my personas. I never knew where it would go."

"What I want to teach you," he would say, but then start over: "What I want you to teach yourself, is how to unconsciously generate solutions to the endless bombardment of problems that you must accept do not really exist."

[transitional sounds]

He said he was a BUDDHACRAT, that Zen-like flow of positive energy who had come to accept his total impermanence in the flux of life itself while recognizing that the devil was always in the details.

It required micro-editing the timeline of existence in order to trick the definitive system into recalibrating its definitiveness.

The idea of being a trickster, one who tricks the definitive system so that it unknowingly recalibrates its definitiveness, coincides with his self-referential tendency to identify himself as a pataphysician, a pataphysician AS machine.

Machine as in MACHINA, the Latin word meaning trickery, that is to say, a device that deceives.

This is also what it means to be a hacker, a player, a gamer who thrives on the will-to-aestheticize.

The doctor was all of these things at once, and this is what fed into his role-playing persona as a substantially present BUDDHACRAT deceiving the definitive system.

"The BUDDHACRAT," he would say, "is incontrovertible evidence of the existence of an unlimited force of aesthetic energy whose job it is to deceive."

"But the doctor," he would say, putting himself back into the third person, far removed from anything close to a falsely rendered "I" -- "the doctor is more than a BUDDHACRAT."

He then quoted himself at length:
The doctor is also a medium.

A simulated form of presence hacking The Now.

And when this simulated form of presence hacking The Now is operating at its highest state of efficiency, when every part of its body is working to unconsciously generate a continuous flow of metamediumistic energy via an optimum ECONOMY OF MOTION, this is when you know you are on your way to the ultimate form of success.

The ultimate form of success.

Success is why we're here, so let's talk about success.
In less than five minutes he would be talking about success and this is when everyone in the small group would come out of the haze of language they had been swimming in and begin focusing their attention on what appeared to be his bodily presence.
Success.

This is what we want now, isn't it?

Is this not what we truly want to find ourselves experiencing?

The ultimate form of success.

Let's talk about what that really means and how we create these abstract concepts that then feed into the way we structure our goals so that we can experience an ongoing stream of satisfactory feelings in pursuit of more complex and fulfilling layers of feeling that make us FEEL successful.

Success cannot be measured numerically.

Success is not a material manifestation of great numerical substance.

Success is not an abstract process of achieving a self-fulfilling prophesy cleverly camouflaging an inevitable endgame.

The masquerade is what must end.

The layers of mascara masking this "sky's the limit" irrational exuberance is the game that must end.

Success [and here he paused, barefoot and pregnant with meaning] -- success can only be experienced as a feeling.

A deep and complex SET of feelings processed by you, the one who EMBODIES these feelings, who embodies these feelings AS success.

They are successive feelings that grow over time and that emerge into Higher Phases of Experience which are then felt as the ultimate form of success.

Do these Higher Phases of Experience which are then felt as the ultimate form of success represent what it means to live in a utopia?

Is it really that simple?

Do you really think that utopia can be sustained for any duration whatsoever?

How long?

And how do you know you've made it?

Made it where?

There?

Here?

It's neither here nor there.

Utopia -- it's all about You, isn't it?

A place like no other, where this deep and complex set of feelings forming into successive states of living INSIDE these Higher Phases of Experience translates into the optimum economy of motion.

The optimum economy of motion.

That reminds me: motion is e-motion.

I'll say it again: motion is e-motion.

A fluctuation of form AS feeling layering itself on top of / in between / deep into other layers of formal feeling creating even more complex modes of experiencing.

You see, feelings form out of formlessness WHILE forming, WHILE leaving the mere traces of success behind for others to inherit and transform into yet MORE feelings of success.

Does this feel good?

What I am saying is that we are all programmed and we are programmed to become feeling machines.

In fact, you could say that we have been SUCCESSFULLY programmed to become feeling machines.

Good job -- whoever wrote that script.

We are programmed to become feeling machines who tap into our unconscious creative potential so that we may trick the scene and in tricking the scene, force the definite system to recalibrate its definitiveness and when we get really good at this, then the mundane media may very well refer to us as a "success story" even though we ourselves know we are something much more valuable than that.

Our goal is not to become a success story.

Our goal is to become an optimally networked feeling machine that uses its embedded algorithms to trick the definitive system into recalibrating its definitiveness even as WE know our enlightened impermanence requires us to disappear altogether.

Do you follow me?

Do you follow me?

Do you follow me?

[Am I still here? …]





Keywords: Mark Amerika, fiction, remixthebook bonus track

Sunday, January 01, 2012

Ascension

For the last six years, I have selected one word on January 1st to unconsciously trigger all of my action-oriented performances throughout the new year.

In 2006, the word was improvisation.

In 2007, the word was intuition.

In 2008, the word was illumination.

For 2009, I was feeling the heat and knew I had to go with intensification.

Looking into my miniscule crystal ball for 2010, I anticipated things remaining as intense as ever but also sensed a noticeable pattern shift occurring in the world all around me, one that I knew was having an effect on all of my new project development, a shift that would ideally enable me to transmute the intensity of daily remix practice into multiple and hybridized forms of actualization. Two years ago, trying to side-step the new age connotations of the term actualization while addressing why it stood out to me as a word indicative of a shift in my perspective [further signaled by the fact that my new words of the year would now begin with the letter 'a' instead of 'i'], I wrote:
By creating more flexible life patterns we may be able to renew our energy (source material) in ways that trigger yet more intense experiences not just for ourselves but for others. Doing this at the level of daily remix practice as part of an intentional strategy to take the creative process deep into ones shape-shifting underground network via a process of mediumistic actualization feels like just the right thing to do.

As Whitehead wrote in Process and Reality, the primordial nature "combines the actuality of what is temporal with the timelessness of what is potential."

How do we network this potential so that it feeds into more intersubjective, remixological practice?

What does it take to enter the primordial source of creativity?

How does one become an artist-medium that positions their daily practice in relation to the greater creative potential of what lies ahead while acting as an accomplice to an ingression performed by timeless entities whose concrescent formation manifests itself as an actual achievement in time?

Is actualization always already just-in-time?

Or is it always on the cusp of "becoming" -- the idealized condition of "being avant-garde"?
Actualization was a term that challenged me two years ago and last year "the secret woid" (Groucho Marx) was agglutination. A year ago, I wrote how my emerging art projects were
... driven by an adherence to my daily remix practice. The bottom line is that I need to maintain my practice as intuitive stick-to-itive-ness. Maybe the word I am looking for is sticktuitive. Setting my mind on autopilot, my aim is to continually remix the patterns into new forms of mosaic. But the mosaic, as fluid as it may be, needs to hold together in order for me to feel the need to proceed. It has to agglutinate.
Therefore, I wrote, "the trigger word for 2011 is agglutination. Even if some elements lose their 'stickiness,' dislodge, and drift away, I will be paying attention to those things that adhere to each other and create greater clusters of potential to actualize."

This year's trigger word is even more difficult for me to write about than actualization. The religious connotations are more severe than some of the new age connotations of prior words. Many of the art projects I am invested in for 2012 have to do with what Whitehead refers to as the "Higher Phases of Experience" and, in some instances, quite literally the concept of soaring. A simple thesaurus check on synonyms reveals only one 'a' word for "soaring" and that is ascend. But ascend is too descriptive and lacks the intensity of what I am feeling right now. So the word-trigger for 2012 is a stretch, even for me. The word is ascension.

Yes, there's something about the mystical act of ascending to another world before dying that appeals to me, and yes I have issues with the whole Jesus thing which is not what I mean by ascension here. But I am into the more literal version of the word. It's more about climbing, flying, soaring. What does it mean to "rise above it all"? To "take it all to another level"? And then some side thoughts: is it possible to rise above it all while staying grounded? What's the relationship between ground and instrument? Instrument and medium?

Or maybe I have simply been influenced by my surroundings, by what opens up to you if you just wake up early enough in the morning, say, the first day of a new year, and open your eyes to what rises before you:



Hau'oli Makahiki Hou.

Keywords: intuition, improvisation, illumination, intensification, actualization, agglutination, ascension

Wednesday, December 07, 2011

Mark Amerika Keynote Mashup: "remixthecontext: the transmedia artist in network culture"

What follows are notes or, if you will, a draft or, even better, a kind of "cheat sheet" that I turned turn to while delivering two recent keynotes, one at the "Regional Narratives" symposium in Rio de Janeiro, the other as part of the three-day "Remix Re-covered" event in Melbourne sponsored by the new Centre for Creative Arts directed by the brilliant Norie Neumark. During the time that elapsed between the two gigs, the notes were modified in pen and then retyped and printed up again.

Although the first book launch party for remixthebook took place in Rio (good timing), the Melbourne event was particularly developed with remixthebook in mind and was one of two texts (the other was Bourriaud's Postproduction: Culture as Screenplay: How Art Reprograms the World) used to stimulate discussion with the 20+ invited guests at the follow-up symposium.

Here is the "cheat sheet":

I would like my presentation this evening to play with two concepts that are converging in my current practice-based research investigations into theoretical performance: the first is remix or what I have even come to call remixology and the second is transmedia narrative which I will touch on in the second part of my presentation.

Now, when I speak of remix, or remixology, I am actually "going meta" with the concept. What I mean is that I am attempting to expand on the idea of sampling different audio and/or video clips from other artists and reconfiguring them into a specific, self-contained sound or video work. I love to play around with rich audio/visual data just like any remix artist, professional or amateur, does. But for me remixology goes much deeper than that. I don't have a standard definition or, perhaps it would be better to say, that for me remixology is a transformative concept or even conceptual persona that operates as a kind of looming presence in all of my creative and critical work as I have come to play it out over the years.

In an interview with a kind of mainstream art publication last week, when they asked me to explain the term remixology, I said:
If it's true that we're all born remixers who unconsciously manipulate the data of everyday life as part of our ongoing social media or performance art practice -- and I think we are -- then remixology is the study of how we do that and the ways we turn this daily, even ritualized remix practice into emergent forms of personal expression.
I have other versions, or readings, or riff-readings on what remix MAY be for the contemporary artist – and here the word artist too is fluid, but tends to relate best to my sense of the practice-based researcher who integrates images, sounds, texts, codes, and various social media practices and performance in the digital fields of a distribution. For example, in my collection of artist writings, META/DATA, published by MIT over four years ago, I not only go so far as to say that we are all BORN remixers, but that thanks to the proprioceptive qualities of the body and its nervous connectivity to the brain, we are biologically wired to unconsciously generate all kinds of remixes as can be seen in the way we unconsciously manipulate the data of everyday life through dreams, memories, and imaginative bursts of live, performative creativity – and that an applied remixology, if it is to have a pronounced effect on the revolution of everyday life, must – out of necessity – create a new state of active consciousness that programmatologically investigates the relationship between the real and the unreal – for, as my dear friend, the late great postmodern impresario Ronald Sukenick once said – and I quote him this in remixthebook – "Without the Unreal, there is no real."

Sukenick also once wrote, in one of his manifestos, that you need to "use your imagination or someone else will use it for you." In remixthebook I alter that simply into "Remix your life or someone else will remix it for you."

I also just a few days ago tweeted a remixed version of remixology that I mashed up with Jarry's pataphysics where I wrote "Remixology...will measure the exttent to which everyone is stuck in the rut of individuality."

I tell you this not just for the sake of being clever, but to suggest that even these terms we employ when riff-reading are nothing but more source material and their usefulness can be measured by how supple they become to our remixological touch as we rhetorically situate our creative practices into the flow of everyday life.

This is what artists do. It is what they do as they seek their way out to clearing. The impulse to create, it ends up, is mediumistic or, what in the remixthebook I term metamediumystic. The book actually opens with a quote from Duchamp's 1957 lecture in Houston, Texas, entitled "The Creative Act." In this very short presentation (which you can listen to at ubu.com), Duchamp says:
If we give the attributes of a medium to the artist, we must then deny him the state of consciousness on the esthetic plane about what he is doing or why he is doing it. All his decisions in the artistic execution of the work rest with pure intuition and cannot be translated into a self-analysis, spoken or written, or even thought out.
And there, on page one of remixthebook, I take this Duchamp quote and remix it which, I should note, I had already remixed on my Professor VJ blog three years earlier:
If we are all artist-mediums, we must then accept the fact that we are all in perpetual postproduction and that our aesthetic fitness relies on our ability to trigger novelty out of our unconscious creative potential. All of the decisions we make while performing our ongoing work of postproduction art rest with pure intuition and are envisioned as part of the creative act.
If you think about it, the source material we intuitively select and the way we remix it into our ongoing construction of what we used to call identity but may really be something more like the social media presence of an artistic medium perpetually postproducing their lives in the networked and mobile space of flows, is what it means to creative – and if we are both OF our time and AHEAD of our time – may also signal what it means to be avant-garde. Which leads me to wonder: if we are all born remixers who are simultaneously OF our time and AHEAD of our time as we participate in these acts of perpetual postproduction, then are we not also born avant-garde and, if so, if that's our biological imperative, then how does that relate to the globally distributed networks of social, economic, and political upheaval that are soundly rejecting whatever it is that is trying to kill the impulse that triggers these life-affirming creative acts – these always live, postproduction sets that naturally born remix artists hope to remixologically inhabit as part a larger creative class struggle to survive in turbo-charged, technocapitalist culture?

In remixthebook, I suggest that we may want to turn to remixology as the core principle of novelty – and here I am remixing Alfred North Whitehead who introduces the term Creativity into the philosophical lexicon in his book Process and Reality – where he writes that "Creativity is the principle of novelty" and that via acts of "concrescent prehension" we are biologically wired to experience "the production of novel togetherness."

What does it take for networked scenes of artists who employ strategic remix methodologies to produce [or, in my version – perpetually postproduce] novel togetherness? How would we want to start measuring the value of the aesthetic traces remix artists leave while proactively navigating our practices through these anti-disciplinary spaces we happen to occupy-when-making [and here the terminology is intentionally loaded – "anti-disciplinary" suggesting a mashup of anti-authoritarian and interdisciplinary – and the idea of "occupying" as remixologically inhabiting -- something absolutely connected to the global occupy performances that were initially started by the magazine collective associated with Adbusters, a culture jamming remix crew if ever there was one].

But even as we may want to make the connection between the way we think and dream and write and speak and remixologically inhabit or creatively occupy abstraction as part of an ongoing remixological process, we can also acknowledge that something else is in the mix, something that was barely present in mainstream life even fifteen years ago and that has become more pervasive and embedded in the practice of everyday life like never before, something that has turned everything we do on its head and that has challenged us to innovate the ways we communicate with each other, the ways we make art, the ways we write, the ways we perform our work in the fields of distribution that are available at our fingertips so that we can quite literally (and literarily) become these "intuitive mediums" that Duchamp refers to in his 1957 speech in Houston […] and here, of course, I am referring to the networked and mobile media communications systems that many of us are now – shall I say-- addicted to? – co-dependent upon? – or how about: using to our creative / economic advantage? I'm talking about the Internet, smart phones, and the collaborative forms of social media network performance – what I sometimes refer to as social media performance art practice – which to me becomes an ongoing, nomadic blur of intuitively generated, postproduction styles that are simultaneously and continuously being remixed in various digital editing environments that I port my transmedia narratives through (and I will speak more on transmedia narrative soon).

So let's just run with this a bit: according to the latest version of contemporary remix art theory being generated in remixthebook, we are all born remixers and know that to be the case just through our ability to constantly process reality as intuitive / remixological mediums who autohallucinate while dreaming or who, through daydream postproduction methods manipulate memory and creatively visualize the future present, all the while tweaking our intuitively generated aesthetic filters that we program ourselves to apply so that we can design our creative lifestyle practices with the ever-shifting contexts we perform our postproduction sets in […] (Sukenick: "use your imagination or someone else will use it for you") – and along with this more general and user-friendly concept of remix or remixology that I am opening up to everyone who consciously and/or unconsciously manipulates the data of everyday life as a way to perform in the digital culture, there are these networked and mobile media communication systems and protocols that many of us are intimately attached to (maybe that's better than "addicted to" – let's just say "intimately attached to"), and – something else to throw into the mix now – this is all happening during a time of global crisis because, whether we wish to acknowledge it or not, we are living in a time of radical social, political, economic and technological upheaval. Some might even suggest that the convergence of these factors, technological and biological in the sense that creativity and remixology are embedded socio-psycho-biological processes – is what's DRIVING of a lot of this upheaval. Could it be that to "occupy" as a "movement" is to collectively network social mediums performing on behalf of Creativity so that it [Creativity – or what I am terming remixology] may survive, so that WE – the embodied agents of creativity -- may survive far into the future.

Now, I am not here to lecture on the contemporary state of global politics and the crisis in Wall Street crony capitalism, although as a remix artist, it does provide some source material for my work, as do other politically hot historical events.




This is an image from a recent social media / conceptual art performance I conducted at Occupy Wall Street down at Liberty Plaza in downtown Manhattan, the seemingly geographical center of the #ows action.

But is there really a geographical center?

McKenzie Wark, who has just published a book, The Beach Beneath the Street, with Verso, and that's about the Situationist movements, writes in a blog entry at the Verso web site that the occupation isn't really about Wall Street since "Wall Street" is an abstraction, and as such, represents pr symbolizes a kind of inhuman power exerted by our new robot overlords only these freaks did not come to Planet Earth from Outer Space and are, in fact, man made. The question Wark asks is, "How do we occupy an abstraction?" One way is to physically be there. But another way, the way that this occupation is spreading like wildfire is, of course, by occupying what Wark calls "social media vector." An occupation, Wark writes, is the opposite of a movement:
[…] a movement aims for some internal consistency within itself but uses space just as a space to park its ranks. An occupation, on the other hand, has no internal consistency in its ranks but chooses meaningful spaces that have significant resonance into the abstract terrain of symbolic geography
.What happens when the applied remixologist enters the abstract terrain of symbolic geography?

Here are a few other images to get a feel for the performance:











Here's a story about the applied remixologist entering the abstract terrain of symbolic geography that you might find interesting:

In 2002, Paul Miller aka DJ Spooky That Subliminal Kid and I were at the high summit Aspen Institute in Colorado for an elaborate program on Art, Science and Spirituality and when we drove back to Boulder so he could visit my with class, he passed on a VHS copy of Situationist Guy Debord's film Society of the Spectacle" [at this point in time, there was no YouTube to view it on nor was there a boomlet of interest in Debord's work so that it was easily accessible via a DVD box set].

My remix crew in Boulder, DJ RABBI (Rick Silva as Cuechamp, Trace Reddell as pHarmanaut, and myself as Kid Hasid), decided to create a digital remix of Society of the Spectacle. We used Google image search inserting words and phrases from Debord's SOS text – itself a plagiarized mashup of thoughts from diverse sources like Marx and Count de Lautréamont -- who once wrote that "Playgiarism is necessary. Progress implies it" – and from these Google searches we generated all of our visual source material to remix with Debord's own found footage, and applied other remix methods to create the audio and subtitles. This happened just a year or so after 9//11 and I think you'll see how the security state and oligarchy that drove all of the political rhetoric of that time becomes the filter for this specific work. Let's look at about the first half of the remix, a five minute clip.

[show SOS]

So, to reiterate this point just for the sake of clarity, this clip you just viewed is from a work of remix art that is at first triggered by the literal "handing off" or passing on or redistribution of source material – the redistribution of source material wealth for those of us who find value in such things -- and that this trigger – or what in remixthebook -- the Beatnik writer Leroi Jones refers to as a trigger-inference – this trigger-inference is really an embedded social gesture, and this social gesture – the transfer of the source from one artist to another – then leads to the development of experimental and collaborative investigation into "ways of filtering" (and here I am remixing Jon Berger's idea of "ways of seeing"] -- investigating "ways of filtering" common source material as well as delivering this postproduced source material via emergent exhibition contexts in the field of distribution. For this piece, the filters were decidedly politicized and informed by the security state and its conceptual use of terror as a fear trigger as well as a complete collapse of the objective media apparatus that was remixing the conceptual language art of the security state to further its own corporate agenda that it would later mash up in conjunction with Wall Street's Big Financial Crisis.

Now, my work is not always using contemporary politics and/or the whims of the traditional media apparatus as primary source material for socially relevant, aesthetic effect. In fact, if we fast forward about three years after the release of the SOS digital remix, we'll see that my research continues this desire to experiment with "ways of filtering" and investigating different exhibition contexts in the field of distribution in a very different way with my work Immobilité and its unintentional relationship to what some refer to as transmedia narrative.

So I am slightly shifting gears here.

Before I briefly discuss Immobilité and show you some aspects of its eventual production and postproduction, perhaps we should ask ourselves what is transmedia narrative and what value does it have for contemporary artists? The traditional art and entertainment industries would have us believe that transmedia is a powerful marketing concept that uses new media technologies to aggregate fragmented audiences by delivering story information across multiple media platforms. [an early example of this would have been the novice website for the film Donnie Darko but also the various transmedia elements produced in conjunction with films like The Matrix or even Avatar]

But as a remix artist who is investigating these "ways of filtering" and who experiments with his conceptual language art practice in the fields of digital distribution as well as in relation to social media performance, I am hoping to – if you will – reclaim the term "transmedia narrative" for my own uses as I try to imagine how fragmented stories being told by amateur-auteurs resist what the commercially minded academics call "convergence." In fact, the idea of convergence doesn't really match up well when discussed in relation to audience or even story fragmentation. It's part of a very old-fashioned modernist agenda that gets theorized by industry-friendly academics where we are asked to buy into the idea that everything will magically come together in this technologically sophisticated utopia. To me, this seems so anachronistic given how distributed and personalized social media networking feels to me (think Hakim Bey's Temporary Autonomous Zones) especially in these times of faux prosperity and real-world, dystopian financial ruin. It is my hope that new media artists, many of whom identify with the historical avant-garde, can now expand the forms of transmedia narrative to foreground this anti-disciplinary approach to encompass both contemporary practice and theory.

Immobilite, is, among other things, an accidental transmedia narrative, one that I composed as part of my hybridized remix / social media art practice. In the summer of 2007, I was invited to be a visiting professor and artist-in-residence at the University College Falmouth in Cornwall, the beautiful, you might say wild, southwest region of the UK. This is a location where we not have access to gorgeous country roads or even luscious hideaway coves but immensely dramatic cliffs overlooking the Atlantic Ocean as well as quite good surfing beaches.

When my Cornish hosts asked me from afar what I would like to do when I got there, I wrote back that I wanted to improvise and remix a feature-length "foreign film" shot entirely on mobile phone. This was 2007 and mobile phone video recording technology, though not high-def, was about to take a dramatic leap. And this idea of a "foreign film" as part of a new series of works is related to what Atom Egoyan once wrote. In the introduction to a book titled "Subtitles," Egoyan writes that "Every film is a foreign film." This concept of the "foreign film" relates to my initial impulse to mashup the DIY amateurism of mobile phone video performers playing with the aesthetics of YouTube styled vernacular video with the predominantly European art-house auteur cinema that as an undergraduate film student at UCLA radically altered my vision of the world. My sense was that this was an area ripe for discovery.

In the US, we call films from other countries "foreign films." When I was a teenager, watching foreign films, which none of my friends wanted to do, changed who I was. It turned me on to this alternative way of processing narrative. First of all, since I only spoke English, I had to READ the films every step of the way. This means that my favorite films, the ones that changed my life, are always films that I have had to read. But by reading, I am operating on many different conscious, subconscious and/or unconscious levels, because I am also seeing and listening and even moving too. I'm filtering. For me, movies, or motion pictures, have always been about moving, the art of riding with or ON someone else's rhythm, and learning to process those rhythms and layer them or remix them into my own ever-shifting rhythms. In remixthebook, I refer to this process of embodying rhythms as moving-remixing and I must say, sampling and remixing foreign movements have completely altered both my style and my life's story. Moving with Antonioni is different than moving with Bergman is different than moving with Marker is different than moving with Varda is different than moving with Cassavettes. And here is where I really disturb the commercial theories and premises of so-called transmedia narrative: for me, this moving-remixing of different rhythms – these always-live postproduction sets I am always intersubjectively navigating while reading other narratives – is what informs the ongoing distribution of my own transmedia narrative over the networked and mobile media environments I circulate in, and so the phrase "foreign film" can now, for me, be applied to much more than film per se. I can apply it to this investigation of -- for example -- choreographing the way we mobilize our states of presence over the network (and if were to put a footnote here, which I'm not, but if I were to put a footnote here I would also reference the concept of "choragraphy" in relation to the internet theories of Gregory Ulmer who tells us that "choragraphy" is a state of mind, or a state of "anticipatory consciousness" where invention takes place – and here I am reminded of Mallarme's notion of nothing having taken place but the place [itself] – this is like saying that nothing will have been remixed but the remix process itself, except in this case, and throughout remixthebook, we find that it's the unconscious readiness potential of the postproduction artist who creates novel forms of togetherness that ultimately triggers this performative gesture).

While in Cornwall, the cast and crew would magically convene via a localized social networking scene and the time limit for research and production was something like five-six weeks. Kate Southworth and the team she directed in iRES, the Interactive Art and Design Research Cluster, were incredibly generous and agreed to my proposition. A then brand new, just released Nokia N95 mobile phone with a first generation mobile-phone ready Carl Weiss lens and something like video recording technology was purchased and waiting for me upon my arrival. Once I was there, I was on literally location and in production.

But this is where I want to get a little philosophical with you and suggest that being "in production" is a ruse because, in fact, we are all always already "in postproduction." The digitally born avant-garde remixer is ALWAYS in postproduction. In fact, they must – out of necessity – acquire an elaborate skills-set focused at the interface of electracy [electricity and literacy) – so that they may constantly manipulate the data of everyday life as a way to creatively struggle through their ongoing transmedia narrative AS a work-in-progress distributed across the networked and mobile media environments their social practice unfolds in. For me, this is what being creative is becoming all about (becoming all about). It's something embedded in our unconscious readiness potential – and by that I mean it's something that is quite naturally triggered when we find ourselves caught in the heat of the creative moment – the simultaneous and continuous fusion of moments that comprise the artfulness of what it means to always be in postproduction, to become an intuitive medium engaged with digital media while caught in the heat of the creative act.

To give you a behind-the-scenes idea of what it's like to make an artwork like Immobilité, let me start by saying that Immobilité self-consciously remixes the rhythms and styles of European art-house directors such as Bergman, Antonioni, Varda, Cassavettes, Marker, and Ackerman, but also the underground film work of artists like Andy Warhol, Carolee Schneeman, Stan Brakhage, Maya Deren, and others [and here it should be noted that during our making of the work, in the summer of 2007, one very late night that went into early morning, we found out that both Bergman and Antonioni died on the same day, and this unquestionable fact also fed into our collective and collaborative conversations and mood as we continued socializing the project as an always in-process performance art event] . What would these deaths do to us? How would they tweak our collective social filters as we collaboratively postproduced our feelings while making the "foreign film"?

Now, as an artwork, Immobilité remixes other media besides film. The work not only remixes the stylistic tendencies or rhythms of filmmakers. As I mentioned, the work was shot on location in Cornwall and the wild and beachy landscapes appear throughout. I shot the scenes with this early version of mobile phone video recording technology [the Nokia N95] and really wanted to see what was possible regarding experimental hand-held techniques and very self-consciously used this small device that I could hold in the palm of my hand as a kind of lens-brush, if you will, one that I could manipulate through all kinds of hand-held gestural moves that I would improvisationally choreograph with the actor-players as part of our collaborative spatial and social practice, something that's hard to explain, but that involves building a small network of actors and crew members who basically just hang out together and make the work by sharing their stories, their books, their websites, their music, their food, and their movement through the project as it develops. [I'm sure many low-budget independent films and underground art rock bands have created new work in this kind of environment as well].

The look and feel of many of the experimental landscape shots are absolutely informed by the painterly rhythms of the post-World War II British Abstract Expressionists who, for the most part, resided in Cornwall, along with Surrealist refugees from the European continent who were themselves escaping their war-torn countries but were also, like all artists who eventually come to learn once they live in Cornwall, are dramatically effected by the light. It ends up the lineage of painterly light artists, from the naïve fishermen of the late 19th century, to the British Abstract Expressionists and temporary Surrealist residents, directly inform many of the abstract landscape imagery found throughout Immobilité. And then there is all of the writerly remixes as well, and here I specifically mean the subtitles, 90% of which are sampled and remixed from other films, novels, poems, and philosophical tracts that were circulating within our social network during the making of the film.

[Show remixes from Immobilité]

So what you just saw are remixes of the the 78-minute, limited edition, feature-length "foreign film." As an aside, I would encourage those who are patient enough to experience these kinds of time-based media works – works that experiment with, among other things, duration, repetition, looping, remixing, and altered states of mind or what I think of as dérive-styled or drifting narratives -- to see it from the beginning to end. It had its premiere exhibition at the Chelsea Art Museum in New York and was included in my comprehensive retrospective titled UNREALTIME at the National Museum of Contemporary Art in Athens, Greece. It has also been exhibited in the Fuse Box at the Denver Art Museum, the Seminario of Cinema and AudioVisual in Salvador, the arte.mov festival throughout parts of Brazil, and other venues.

While shooting Immobilité, I developed an improvised, formally experimental strategy of playing against the mobile phone video camera, of outwitting it, of smuggling human intentions into its program, to force the camera to create the unpredictable, the improbable, the informative, and to in many ways show contempt for the phone-as-camera and in so doing reject photography and videography as set formats but to also immediately fall in love with the freedom it gave me to ramp-up my nomadic art-making machine. [These last phrases are all sampled and remixed from Flusser as well.]

But there are other iterations of the Immobilité project too, versions of the work that have appeared in different contexts and in different formats and that have worked against the traditional distribution apparatuses that have enabled the story itself, the story of Immobilité as an art project, to experimentally circulate within the networked fields of distribution.

Looking back, we might say that Immobilité was unconsciously created as an alternative form of what the movie industry now calls transmedia narrative, but one that plays more with social media practices as a way to create intimate relations among the co-conspirators who make it and that does not have to present itself to the corporate entertainment industry as part of an elaborate commercial strategy designed to monetize the fragmentation of audiences.

In a recent dialogue in Portland, where I spend part of the summer, film producer Christine Vachon said that she was focused on being both length-agnostic and format-agnostic. I couldn't agree with her more. Her basic point was that the most important thing is to create the artwork of your time in whatever media formats and genres were open to receiving your creative energy. Once you accept this as the way it is then, all of a sudden, what I am calling spatial practice or the desire to continually tap into one's unconscious creative potential and let the language speak itself, becomes an incredibly vibrant force in REMIXING a life, and in remixing a life, opening oneself up to a social media -- or what we used to call net art -- practice that you can then turn into a nomadic art-making machine which, for me, is another way of phrasing transmedia narrative.

When I say you can turn your ongoing social media practice, with all necessary iPhone or Android accoutrements, into a nomadic art-making machine, what I am really saying is that we are now positioning ourselves to begin investigating the relationship between mobility and immobility, taking pictures and capturing data, and immersing ourselves in a multitude of digital editing environments while transforming ourselves into postproduction mediums who transmit "persona as shareware" [a lovely idea I have sampled from Paul Miller].

Persona as shareware. Or what I like to think of as digital personae as shareware circulating in the networked fields of distribution.

The visual artist Eleanor Antin once said in relation to her prolific practice: "I had a marvelous art-making machine: my personas. I never knew where it would go."

This also relates to the strange tension between the moving image and the mobile image and the emergence of the post-Duchampian artist-medium as nomadic art-making machine. As mobile medium circulating in the networked space of flows.

Let me now show you a few clips of the Immobilité remixes being projected in urban screen environments.

[Show clips of Immobilité on urban screens in Milan and Bucharest]

Is this too not a kind of transmedia narrative?

Think of how the mobile image has transgressed its normal boundaries.

It starts as a gesture where the medium, the artist, the hacker, unconsciously choreographs movement while circulating in the networked space of flow [that is to say, becomes electracy or a chora-graphic performer), holding on to the mobile phone as a data capturing device, but more than that, as part of a prosthetic-aesthetic, an intuitive gesture that meshes with the muscle memory I associate with proprioception --- that is, in the case of the phone, where you hold your eyes in the palm of your hand, and begin performing what dancers sometimes refer to as structured improvisation, capturing data as you slide between proprioception and machinic-vision. This is what it is was like for me shooting "on location" in Cornwall.

These moving gestures capture the data on to the mobile device and then it gets imported into the laptop where it then gets filtered through all kinds of digital editing environments, and one of the outcomes, in addition to the 78 minute version translated into different languages, is a series of remixes that appear on the Web. A curator then downloads those remixes and arranges for them to be projected in urban spaces, like the ones we just saw, and then a web cam captures the images live in the urban setting as part of a datastream over the Internet which I am simultaneously recording using image-capturing software on my laptop as I watch it in some other part of the world, and which I am now, a couple of years later, projecting in a room in Melbourne [Rio, New York, Denver, Istanbul, Sydney, Tokyo, ___].

This is when the moving image becomes a mobile image and the more we can learn from what this may indicate as an outcome of social media practice, perhaps the more we may begin to expand our concept of what it means to construct our lives as a fictionally generated transmedia narrative.

In this case, the remixologically generated transmedia narrative is partly about how the moving image becomes subsumed by the mobile image, how the moving image itself BECOMES mobile just like remix artists are now becoming networked and mobile mediums investigating the emerging forms of creativity.




Keywords: Mark Amerika, keynote, Rio, Melbourne, remixthebook, remixology, Immobilité, #ows

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Writing in the Age of New Media

This upcoming Saturday I will fly from Melbourne to Perth so I can then boogie to Freemantle to perform at Ctrl-Z: Writing in the Age of New Media. I'm really looking forward to an afternoon of heuretic dialogue with many colleagues including Darren Tofts, Niall Lucy, McKenzie Wark, and my undergraduate honors thesis advisor Gregory Ulmer who figures prominently in remixthebook.

From the press release:
In the age of personal computers, the Internet, mobile phones, Facebook, Twitter, Word, Photoshop, SMS, email, desktop- and e-publishing, blogging and fan fiction, autocorrect and track changes, who -- or what -- is a writer?

Ctrl-Z is an arts symposium aimed at exploring the possibilities of writing in the age of new media. While the means and opportunities for writing are seemingly forever multiplying, can the same be said for the ways in which we think about what we call writing, or what we call a writer? How, today, does writing take shape: how is it produced, published, distributed and read? How might we account for cultural anxieties over the ill-effects or improper uses of new writing technologies (illiteracy, plagiarism, piracy, cyberbullying), and how might we imagine new ways of thinking about creativity, technology and communication?

Featuring panel discussions, video screenings, exhibitions, live music and more, Ctrl-Z will appeal to anyone with a professional or personal interest in writing as a cultural and communicative practice -- from humanities academics, postgraduates and English and Media teachers to authors, artists and creative media practitioners; from arts patrons to general readers. Cutting across academic, professional and public divides, Ctrl-Z will present an engaging and entertaining occasion to reflect on what it means -- now -- to write and to be a writer.
This will be my third trip to Western Australia where locations shoots for FILMTEXT took place back in 2002. In addition to discussing the issues above with a core group of international theorists who I greatly admire, I will undoubtedly try to sneak in another swim in the Indian Ocean on Australia's west coast. Gorgeous.




Keywords: Mark Amerika, Ctrl-Z, Freemantle, writing, digital, new media

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Mark Amerika in Melbourne: remixthecontext

"Remixthecontext: the transmedia artist in network culture" is the title of my upcoming lecture [well, visiting artist presentation] that will take place on Tuesday at the State Library of Victoria in Melbourne, Australia.

From the press release:
The Centre for Creative Arts will hold a free public lecture by La Trobe University’s Principal Research Fellow in the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences and Professor of Art and Art History at the University of Colorado, Mark Amerika, Tuesday 15 November.

The lecture—Remixthecontext: the transmedia artist in network culture—will cover the potentials of remix practice as they relate to creative writing, audiovisual art, and social media activism.

"Remix artists, many of whom identify with the historical avant-garde, are expanding the forms of remix art to foreground an anti-authoritarian and interdisciplinary approach to both contemporary practice and theory," says Professor Amerika.

[more...]
Keywords: Mark Amerika, lecture, transmedia narrative, remixthebook, Melbourne, Australia

Friday, October 28, 2011

Review of remixthebook in Leonardo

remixthebook has been reviewed in Leonardo by Jans Baetens.

The review begins:
The least one can say of remixthebook is that is an unconventional publication, at least, according to current academic standards (after all, it is published with a very prestigious academic press). From a formal point of view, the volume resembles any other, but contentwise it is astonishing, if not explosive. At the same time, Mark Amerika is doing exactly what we are all doing and experiencing today: copying, transferring, reusing, mixing, remixing, mashing-up in a culture whose key words have become detournement, collage/montage, readymade, quotation. The avant-garde's fascination with the remix, in literary as well as in visual culture, has now become totally mainstream: We write like Lautréamont (the first to claim that "plagiarism is necessary"), we paint and sculpt after Duchamp (whose fountain is now the icon of the 20th Century), and no one who writes can ignore Burroughs's cut-up technique (or one of its multiple variants). Mark Amerika has been, and still is, one of the pioneering authors of this remix culture in the digital age, which Lev Manovich has taught us to understand as an expansion of the Soviet montage principles.
Keywords: Mark Amerika, remixthebook, Leonardo, review

Living Books About Life (Including "Creative Evolution" by Mark Amerika)

For those who are interested in the future of academic publishing in the arts, humanities, and media/communication studies, here is an important announcement about an experimental project funded by the JISC that features my newly edited book "Creative Evolution: Natural Selection and the Urge to Remix."

Everyone is invited to contribute.

-------------------------------

Open Humanities Press publishes twenty-one open access Living Books About Life

LIVING BOOKS ABOUT LIFE
http://www.livingbooksaboutlife.org

The pioneering open access humanities publishing initiative, Open Humanities Press (OHP) (http://openhumanitiespress.org), is pleased to announce the release of 21 open access books in its series Living Books About Life.

Funded by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC), and edited by Gary Hall, Joanna Zylinska and Clare Birchall, Living Books About Life is a series of curated, open access books about life -- with life understood both philosophically and biologically -- which provide a bridge between the humanities and the sciences. Produced by a globally-distributed network of writers and editors, the books in the series repackage existing open access science research by clustering it around selected topics whose unifying theme is life: e.g., air, agriculture, bioethics, cosmetic surgery, electronic waste, energy, neurology and pharmacology.

Peter Suber, Open Access Project Director, Public Knowledge, said: ‘This book series would not be possible without open access. On the author side, it takes splendid advantage of the freedom to reuse and repurpose open-access research articles. On the other side, it passes on that freedom to readers. In between, the editors made intelligent selections and wrote original introductions, enhancing each article by placing it in the new context of an ambitious, integrated understanding of life, drawing equally from the sciences and humanities’.

By creating twenty one ‘living books about life’ in just seven months, the series represents an exciting new model for publishing, in a sustainable, low-cost, low-tech manner, many more such books in the future. These books can be freely shared with other academic and non-academic institutions and individuals.

Nicholas Mirzoeff, Professor of Media, Culture and Communication at New York University, commented: ‘This remarkable series transforms the humble Reader into a living form, while breaking down the conceptual barrier between the humanities and the sciences in a time when scholars and activists of all kinds have taken the understanding of life to be central. Brilliant in its simplicity and concept, this series is a leap towards an exciting new future’.

One of the most important aspects of the Living Books About Life series is the impact it has had on the attitudes of the researchers taking part, changing their views on open access and raising awareness of issues around publishers’ licensing and copyright agreements. Many have become open access advocates themselves, keen to disseminate this model among their own scholarly and student communities. As Professor Erica Fudge of the University of Strathclyde and co-editor of the living book on Veterinary Science, put it, ‘I am now evangelical about making work publicly available, and am really encouraging colleagues to put things out there’.

These ‘books about life’ are themselves ‘living’, in the sense they are open to ongoing collaborative processes of writing, editing, updating, remixing and commenting by readers. As well as repackaging open access science research -- together with interactive maps and audio-visual material -- into a series of books, Living Books About Life is thus involved in rethinking ‘the book’ itself as a living, collaborative endeavour in the age of open science, open education, open data, iPad apps and e-book readers such as Kindle.

Tara McPherson, editor of VECTORS, Journal of Culture and Technology in a Dynamic Vernacular, said: ‘It is no hyperbole to say that this series will help us reimagine everything we think we know about academic publishing. It points to a future that is interdisciplinary, open access, and expansive.’

Funded by JISC, Living Books About Life is a collaboration between Open Humanities Press and three academic institutions, Coventry University, Goldsmiths, University of London, and the University of Kent.

Books:

* Astrobiology and the Search for Life on Mars, edited by Sarah Kember (Goldsmiths, University of London)
* Bioethics™: Life, Politics, Economics, edited by Joanna Zylinska (Goldsmiths, University of London)
* Biosemiotics: Nature, Culture, Science, Semiosis, edited by Wendy Wheeler (London Metropolitan University)
* Cognition and Decision in Non-Human Biological Organisms, edited by Steven Shaviro (Wayne State University)
* Cosmetic Surgery: Medicine, Culture, Beauty, edited by Bernadette Wegenstein (Johns Hopkins University)
* Creative Evolution: Natural Selection and the Urge to Remix, edited by Mark Amerika (University of Colorado at Boulder)
* Digitize Me, Visualize Me, Search Me: Open Science and its Discontents, edited by Gary Hall (Coventry University)
* Energy Connections: Living Forces in Creative Inter/Intra-Action, edited by Manuela Rossini (td-net for Transdisciplinary Research, Switzerland)
* Human Genomics: From Hypothetical Genes to Biodigital Materialisations, edited by Kate O’Riordan (Sussex University)
* Medianatures: The Materiality of Information Technology and Electronic Waste, edited by Jussi Parikka (Winchester School of Art, University of Southampton)
* Nerves of Perception: Motor and Sensory Experience in Neuroscience, edited by Anna Munster (University of New South Wales)
* Neurofutures, edited by Timothy Lenoir (Duke University)
* Partial Life, edited by Oron Catts and Ionat Zurr (SymbioticA, University of Western Australia)
* Pharmacology, edited by Dave Boothroyd (University of Kent)
* Symbiosis, edited by Janneke Adema and Pete Woodbridge (Coventry University)
* Another Technoscience is Possible: Agricultural Lessons for the Posthumanities, edited by Gabriela Mendez Cota (Goldsmiths, University of London)
* The In/visible, edited by Clare Birchall (University of Kent)
* The Life of Air: Dwelling, Communicating, Manipulating, edited by Monika Bakke (University of Poznan)
* The Mediations of Consciousness, edited by Alberto López Cuenca (Universidad de las Américas, Puebla)
* Ubiquitous Surveillance, edited by David Parry (University of Texas at Dallas)
* Veterinary Science: Animals, Humans and Health, edited by Erica Fudge (Strathclyde University) and Clare Palmer (Texas A&M University)

Contact the Living Books about Life series editors:
Gary Hall, Joanna Zylinska and Clare Birchall
E: gary.hall@coventry.ac.uk
E: j.zylinska@gold.ac.uk
E: c.s.birchall@kent.ac.uk
W: http://www.livingbooksaboutlife.org

Open Humanities Press is a non-profit, international Open Access publishing collective specializing in critical and cultural theory. OHP was formed by academics to overcome the current crisis in scholarly publishing that threatens intellectual freedom and academic rigor worldwide. OHP journals are academically certified by OHP’s independent board of international scholars. All OHP publications are peer-reviewed, published under open access licenses, and freely and immediately available online at http://openhumanitiespress.org.



Keywords: Living Books About Life, Creative Evolution, remix, Mark Amerika, JISC

Monday, October 24, 2011

Waves of Remix: MA in Sao Paulo Art Magazine SELECT

This article / interview in seLecT with the amazingly insightful Juliana Monachesi has been out for a little while, so now I am going to publish the English version of the Q&A that led to the article.

In addition to the well-researched and thoughtful questions posed by Juliana, the spread has my favorite 2011 picture by far and, it should be noted, I am not very vain when it comes to looking at images of myself (quite the opposite, really). But this image captures the spirit of my life (style /practice) since about 1999 when I first started regularly (post)producing new work in Hawaii :)






J: You have described the web as a “public domain narrative environment”, but people engage in this environment very differently and in various degrees of narrativity: how would you say the advent of this new world scenario has changed our narrative forms, be they fictional, historical or journalistic?

M: Yes, in 1997, almost fifteen years ago when I first released GRAMMATRON (grammatron.com), I was imagining a near-future world where online, role-playing personae used network technologies to teleport themselves into open source narrative environments. This was an intentional experiment in creating a pseudo-utopian speculative fiction that took William Gibson's notion of "cyberspace," one that he developed in novelistic forms, and expanded it into what then felt like the wide-open hypertextual spaces of the World Wide Web. I imagined these online, role-playing personae as artist-agents who created on-the-fly posthistorical narratives in the sense that Flusser uses the term. This meant that writing your story was not going to be about developing a setting, a character, or a plot, but would be more about performing an image of yourself in the social media network.

Back in the mid-late '90s, the idea was to create your multiple role-playing personae by linking them through different hypertextual spaces. Because things were less corporate back then, I was intentionally trying to produce a temporary or even semi-permanent autonomous zone for artists to collaboratively build their shared "storyworld" (we did this at Alt-X, now a living archive at altx.com). We still surf these hypertextual spaces today, but that's just one aspect of a more robust networked and mobile media arts practice. Things have changed dramatically in the last five to ten years. It's less about hypertext and more about embedding the mobile network into our daily rituals, or what Michel de Certeau, in a different context, referred to as the practice of everyday life. Net 2.0 artists, for example, are not trying to figure out the Internet, at least not the way the early Net artists had to spend so much time doing fifteen ago. Now you could say that we are all Net artists, or at the very least Internet-aware artists who remix multiple narrative threads via social, web, and mobile media systems. These are not traditional linear narratives. In electronic environments, our multiple and hybridized personae flow through various multi-linear, multi-dimensional, and super-atomized narrative streams, and they all run parallel to each other. Playing these roles comes naturally to The Artist 2.0. I do this too. For example, I role-play different personae on my Twitter stream @markamerika where I am at times an artist, a serious foodie, a poet, a professor, a comedian, and a beach philosopher (to name just a few).

J: I saw an excerpt of your work for the Montréal Biennial at CIAC’s electronic magazine. “Glitch” and “remix” are two of the concepts and aesthetics you keep rehabilitating through all your practices. In your opinion, is everything really and definitely just a version of something else?

M: Seriously, for me, it's not an opinion, it's just a fact of life. For those of us who create our lives out of what, in my new book [remixthebook.com], I call the Source Material Everywhere, we are always versioning the next manifestation of what it means to be an ever-morphing, digitally networked persona, what my friend Paul Miller [djspooky.com] refers to as "a cut-and-paste as-you-go" multiplex consciousness. This may seem unnecessarily "deep" but really, if you think about it, activating your Net presence means you have to start seeing your conceptual personae as shareware, something that lives in the social fields of distribution. For me, this is just life in the 2010s.

J: As a constantly touring VJ and constant VJ-theorist, how do you describe this art practice at the beginning of a new decade? In Brazil, even though there was a cutting-edge VJing scene mainly at the beginning of the 2000’s, it is sort of a no-scene nowadays (as with de DJ-boom, actually, that today is in the hands of pitch-and-sinc-accommodating-software-aided-iPod-celebrity-DJ’s…); how have things evolve elsewhere?

M: Believe me, I know what you mean about no-scenes. Just because you start a lot of scenes, and are lucky enough like I have been able to fall into and out of many different international scenes, does not mean you have to stay stuck in something forever. This is definitely true of VJ culture. I was heavily involved with my international VJ tour during the years 2000-2005. It was great because not only was I able to travel the world and remix my digital video artwork in front of live audiences, but it also informed what came after my VJ tours, which was a series of large-scale, digital video and surround sound installations in various museum spaces. The aesthetics of VJing is what most appealed to me when I started playing live gigs around the world. First, it enabled me to expand my remix practice into something like "live cinema" but even more importantly for me -- and to my surprise -- it also opened up my creative potential as a visual artist and I started rethinking the relationship of my work to the history of painting, especially abstract expressionist and color field work from the 20th century.

My feeling is that you have to keep moving, to change direction or else you will end up where you are heading. So I stopped VJing in 2005 although, like what happened when I stopped making hypertext and my early experiments in Net art, these practices still resonate with what I am doing today. Having spent a great deal of time working with multi-linear narratives, Net art, live A/V performance, experimental sound art, and postmodern novel writing, has really set the stage for my latest series of transmedia artworks like Immobilité (immobilite.com) and my new work in progress, The Museum of Glitch Aesthetics, a project co-commissioned by the Abandon Normal Devices festival in the UK in conjunction with the London 2012 Olympics, and hopefully the State of Bahia too.
 
J: Collage, appropriation, intertextuality, cover, remix, bootleg, sampling, mashup, assemblage, combine painting, recombination, remediation, pastiche, postmodernism, postproduction, avant-pop, bastard-pop… Is the century-old (and sort of peripheral until the 1990’s) art practice of collage finally the protagonist of art history? And whatever happened to creativity?
 
M: Creativity is in the mix! It's inseparable from remix practice. In fact, this is the core principle that I explore in remixthebook (remixthebook.com). The book opens with a remix of the process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead who is generally considered the main philosopher, with the possible exception of Bergson, to really work the whole concept of creativity into a philosophical platform that reveals how we are all creative entities, creatures who intuitively generate new versions of life by continuously remixing the source material we find ourselves immersed in. The one Whitehead phrase that continually loops throughout remixthebook is "Creativity is the principle of novelty." What I do in the book is string together a connection between Whitehead's notion of creativity, and its relation to novelty, with what it means to be avant-garde (no longer a dirty word), and how being a remix artist who is always ahead of ones time is a kind of necessary condition if one hopes to visualize the next version of "creativity" coming.

So the protagonist of this historical trajectory is not practice-based collage per se, although I see where you are going with that, but the medium itself. In this case, the artist is the medium is the message. The creature as remixological animal.

J: I couldn’t find much on remixthebook, but cannot imagine it’s a theory book, considering the way you work – never dissociating fiction, theory, art and cyberpsychogeography. Is it too written in the form of “action scripting” and by many of your “flux personas” at the same time? Would you tell a bit about this project and how it differs from your other books and projects?

M: This is because I am doing things to theory that are very rarely done. I bastardize and/or compostproduce it so that it comes across as something other than academic theory. One of the main premises of remixthebook is that theory per se has been hijacked by the academic elite who spin their own jargon-laden remixes in very specific scholarly styles that try to shut out everyone else, even innovative theory-artists, so that they can maintain cultural authority over what is and is not considered preordained theory. But why try and maintain the theory status quo even as the world around us has gone through such radical changes and essentially challenges us to invent new forms of theoretical discourse that are relevant to the technological times we live in? Most of the academics who teach theory have, for some reason, chosen not to accept the challenge to reinvent theory for our time, and it's this cultural elitism that makes it impossible for them to maintain their cultural authority. Anyone who pays attention to what's happening, who is actively engaged with networked and mobile media communication technologies, and who reads and composes their own DIY forms of theoretical discourse, is quite naturally remixing theory back into their practice-based research (which is exactly where it belongs).

In the various versions of remixthebook that appear in both the print book and on the Web at remixthebook.com, what you get is the ongoing performance of theory as practice-based art research. The project samples more from artists like Allen Ginsberg, Nam June Paik, Kathy Acker, Ad Reinhardt, and Robert Rauschenberg -- or even comedians like George Carlin, Stephen Colbert and Steve Martin -- than, say, the tantalizing post-structuralists, although I do borrow from them too. I should also mention Vilém Flusser since, to my mind, he is a unique theoretical figure, a kind of fictional artist and media theorist hybrid. He once said that he viewed his media theory more like science fiction than media theory per se. In this regard, I see my own media theory more as avant-pop performance art.
 
J: Is it something of an in-depth research on the “space of engaging co-conspiracy” that you like to call “the world wide web as collectively self-generated collage remix machine”? Do you still see the web that way? Do you still design your Net art works acknowledging the participant a huge role? I mean, reading about your interest in long length movies, I tend to think that you somehow got frustrated or suspicious about the collaborative, crowd-sourcing art making process. Is that so?

M: This is a really good question because I would not want to leave anyone with the impression that I am or have been, for some reason, totally enamored of the concept of an "anything goes" participatory art, especially the kind that champions computer interactivity as some kind of "art form of the future." For me, participation is and always has been less about the user-generated content side of things and much more about the intimate social connectivity of people. When I make a work like Immobilité, it's very transmedia in its design, and so, yes, there is a longer, feature-length version of the work that has been exhibited internationally as a large scale installation, but it has also been remixed into other distribution, exhibition, reading, and screening contexts including large-scale public screenings, an iPhone app, various remixes playing on urban screens across all seven continents, an elaborate Web site with video and audio remixes, and a downloadable artist e-book, etc. For me, the making of the work is where the intimate participation, the social energy, manifests itself. It's really about the creative process, of making things intimately, among close collaborators or even people who I have never met but who are open to taking the shared source material and postproducing a version that is part of their own revolution of everyday life.

J: And would you tell a little about the site of remixthebook? Is it really the entire book remixed by other artists?

M: It's fantastic. Vernacular video as digital theory, e-book as conceptual art, Net art as performance writing. The artists and theorists are all amazing in their own right and what they are doing is remixing different chunks or excerpts of source material from the written text or my audio recordings reading the text remixes or even videos of me faux-lecturing the text as "course material," etc. There is also an entire section that we call The Course where the idea is to look at the history of collage, appropriation, literary cut-up, détournement, DJ/VJ and live audio visual sampling and remixing, activism, and what Nic Bourriaud calls postproduction art. The idea is to take what we used to think of as A Book, and recontextualize it for social media art and culture. This is not that unusual. The 19th century French poet Stéphane Mallarmé was trying to do something similar in his own intermedia way (Mallarmé: "Everything in the world exists in order to end up in a book." My remix: "Everything in the world is Readymade Source Material that exists so it can end up being remixed.") My hope is that students as well as random web visitors to the site will also remix the book.

Keywords: Mark Amerika, theory, select magazine, remixthebook, contemporary art practice, experimental writing, net art, détournement