Leopold Zyka wrote:
> Dear Oudeis friends,
>
> First: It is impossible for me to spend much time on a project where
> there is no money.
> (I am working on a development project and do not earn any mon=
ey
> for living
> since months).
[to Lee] Is this a contradiction?
> Second: We (net.lab) tried to clearify possible concepts in several
> timeconsuming meetings,
> but I got the impression that nobody is really interested in =
the
> basics...
Maybe you were talking to the wrong people. What do you eat, Mr. Zyka, ai=
r? Sounds
like you do a lot of volunteering and still have virtually unlimited band=
width.
How do you do this? Let's talk basics. Do you work for the police? Maybe =
you have
a big garden. This was a good year for my raspberries.
In Canada, we invited painters, composers, and writers to discuss how the=
y might
use this "new" technology to help them sell their work. Oudeis was to be =
a feature
of the evening. Unfortunately, time zones worked against us and the Ars h=
ad to be
dropped.
> OUDEIS critique:
> * I have been at the ARS the last 6 or 7 years and know the environment=
> quite well.
> I find it disappointing that nobody of OUDEIS seems to be interested =
in
> what is happening at the ARS...
> At least I have not seen anybody of the OUDEIS crew at the Symposium,=
at
> the installations, at the performances...
I contacted the Ars Electronica Festival email presence in early July. Tr=
ied to
get promotional materials. Sent email to Sherman, the keynote speaker. Go=
t replies
like "who are you talking to?" and "please contact someone else." Our rec=
eption of
Oudeis was poor; but apart from Oudeis, and despite efforts on our part, =
Ars
Electronica was a non-event.
> Looking at the Prix Ars Electronica and participating in discussions=
> about it, a lot can be learned
> about good and bad installations/performances.
I didn't even know there *was* a Prix. There should be a way that we can
participate in these discussions. The technology for this is *not* trendy=
=2E
> Real Audio is good old Pushmedia, bad developed and bad integrated.
And your recommendation is...
> As already mentioned several times before, there is no way to
> synchronize the graphic with
> RA streams.
We already know this.
> Therefore RA is NOT usable for the final performance if you
> do not want to make
> (bad) BROADCASTING which has nothing todo with the character of the=
net.
I am not sure how we got sidetracked using the Sun for a RealAudio server=
, but it
was certainly a sidetrack. Should have concentrated on Shockwave. Or poss=
ibly
RealVideo. I think what the Oudeis team needs is a little more 'sales res=
istance.'
[To Oudeis members]: Mr Zyka has obviously talked to members of the Oudei=
s team.
Where does he get this impression that we are operating on screwball idea=
s?
> One of the criterias of the jury in the .net category is webbness.=
That
> means if it is
> stuff which would also work on a CD it will not win a price.
> I think this criteria should also be true for OUDEIS.
Good point about CDs. But the net is not the web and the internet is not =
the only
place where electronics is used for art. Big mistakes. The Web excels at =
the
representation of color stills. In fact some interesting effects are poss=
ible
because of the backlit quality of the color. It can simulate other things=
too,
much in the same way that dot matrix printers simulated real type. But th=
is
criterion of Webness plays right into the hands of 'trendy internet' conc=
ept. Out
here, we concentrate on the live performance. If the internet can help th=
at, well
and good. If not, we leave it alone. Or we leave the live perf alone. Tha=
t is what
I did, but I was working on the online perf. So your Webness criterion so=
unds like
a distraction to me. Theatricality would be more like it. If someone put =
this show
in their store window, would you stop to watch? Would you buy a ticket?
> * The Sakamoto/Iwai Concert and the *OR* Dumb Type dance performance
> where good examples
> for an exciting interesting integration of new technologies with
> classical environments.
Listen to what you are saying. "Let's go to the 'Dumb Dance Performance' =
tonight,
dear. Do you have the tickets for the Dumb Dance? Do the Dumb! The Dumb i=
s taking
dancehalls by storm!"
No. I don't think so. Needs more irony. Maybe next year.
You cannot so easily make this kind of mistake if you give language its p=
roper
place and role to play in the organization and delivery of a performance.=
You can
examine language on the Web if you like, but that would be the old chains=
aw to cut
butter problem. And the Web is not really for a literate audience. MOO/Te=
lnet is
adequate technology to prevent this kind of (probably terminal) naming ga=
ff if the
will is there to prevent it.
> Only the Remote Piano (MIDI Piano controled via internet) of Toshio=
> Iwai showed very good
> the limits in practice.
Chacun a son go=FBt.
> * I think it is very common but also a bad practice that a lot of
> installations are bad
> described and very unclear in what is really happening.
We obviously missed the boat here. Doesn't sound as if Mr. Zyka understo=
od what
was going on with Oudeis. This ties in to his point about dramaturgy late=
r on.
> * Instead of sticking with stoneedge tools like telnetsessions which =
are
> mainly used by computerfreaks
> it would be more interesting to look for other possibilities.
> Textoriented collaboration might be something new for theater peopl=
e
> but for sure does not excite
> ARS visitors...
I don't think Oudeis "sticks" with telnet. In fact, at the moment it isn'=
t making
very good use of it. Telnet is not new. But neither is the hammer, and we=
still
use plenty of those around here. At the same time, telnet is practically =
virginal
compared to the Web. It hasn't been containated by the 'nobody home bandw=
agon'
pioneered by Microsoft. The Web is a burnout; telnet is new territory.
> Developments of Avatars, PRoPs (personal robotic presence) or the
> research in software agents of Pettie Maes
> might give some ideas for creating less boreing frameworks.
Less boring, but still boring. Trendy, but boring. Live human beings are
interesting--sometimes. We have an opportunity to link human beings throu=
gh
cultural events, and it is slipping through our fingers. As with the oppo=
rtunity
to feed the hungry, the technology exists. But even when we are working f=
or free,
we seem to lack the will or the vision, the concentration. Something. Nei=
ther is
happening. Basics.
If I want excitiement and entertainment and one-way communication, I can =
rent a
video for $1 apiece. Compete with that. We are working on Avatars, but it=
's a
gimmick, not a priority. Find your local keyboard and communicate with so=
meone for
$1/hr. It could change your life. It could change the world. But not in E=
nglish.
> * finally I think that OUDEIS is still missing a dramaturgy which is =
more
> than the prove of fesibility
> to broadcast some classical contents by the internet.
Good point. Between the concept and the performance falls the shadow.
Thanks for taking the time to provide the Oudeis team with your viewpoint=
, Mr.
Zyka. Hope to hear from you again.
-- Jim Terral South Slocan, BC jterral@netidea.comPS Can we talk about content now?