in/compatible
Haus der Kulturen der Welt, Berlin

transmediale 2012 | www.transmediale.de/content/webvideo-new-netart:

Wednesday, 1 February 2012
15:00 – 17:00
25 years of transmediale | web video – the new net art? | panel with Robert Sakrowski, Constant Dullaart, Petra Cortright, Igor Štromajer
#

#

If net art is cashing in on the utopian promise of video art, what dream does net art have left for itself? Has it come full circle? Is net.art now at its end? And is it true what the net art veteran Mark Amerika proclaims via Twitter, that “video is the new net art”?

Perhaps the confusion in the question stems from a too-narrow understanding of net art thanks to the label “net.art”, which usually refers only to a small group of artists of a particular time (1995-1999). Such a designation could never really be adequate to the phenomenon of net art, because, like photography, painting, or video art, it is an art form – and art forms are above all defined by their medium. The medium of net art, however, is simply the net: whichever particular form net art takes is irrelevant for its definition. Whether its clients are connecting to the net using stationary computers with browsers or mobile devices with apps, whether their bandwidth speed is fast or slow – “net art will never die!”; since a society without the net is itself now inconceivable (just as it once was without the printing press).

#

+ Programme Overview:#

#

Robert Sakrowski (DE)

Robert Sakrowski was born and lives in Berlin. He is an art historian. From  1999–2003 he headed the project netart-datenbank.org at TU Berlin and curated several exhibitions in the field of Net-based art. From 2007–2009 he has been working at the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute Media.Art.Research in Linz. Since 2007 he has created various exhibitions dealing with questions circling art and art practices connected to the web 2.0; these themes are also the main focus of his project CuratingYouTube. Website: www.curatingyoutube.net

Petra Cortright (US)

Petra Cortright is an Internet artist born in 1986 in Santa Barbara, California. She currently lives and works in Santa Barbara, California. Cortright has resided in New York City, Portland, Toyko and Berlin. She has studied at Parsons School of Design in New York and California College of the Arts in San Francisco. She is a member of the Nasty Nets Internet Surfing Club, Loshadka Internet Surfing Club and Computers Club. She has exhibited internationally in galleries including the New Museum and Spencer Brownstone in New York, The Sundance Film International Film Festival, Artnews Projects in Berlin, Preteen Gallery in Mexico City, Gloria Maria Gallery in Milan, and at the Internet Pavilion at the 2009 Venice Biennale.

Constant Dullaart (NL)

Constant Dullaart (b. 1979) studied at the Rijksakademie in Amsterdam and lives and works in Amsterdam and Berlin. Originally trained as a video artist, he now works mainly with the Internet as an alternative presentation space. By editing online forms of presentations and by re-contextualising ‘found’ material he creates a new, found (online) exhibition space with networked performances, digital prints, YouTube  videos, domain names and blog postings. His work has been shown internationally at venues such as the Centre Pompidou in Paris, Art in General, the New Museum  and the MWNM Gallery in New York, the ICA and Rob Tuffnel in London, NIMk, de Appel, W139, the Stedelijk Museum, Ellen de Bruijne Projects and Galerie West in the Netherlands.

Igor Štromajer (SI)

Igor Štromajer’s oeuvre comprises nearly 150 works presented at more than 100 exhibitions, the most known being Ballettikka Internettikka. He has received several awards, and his projects form part of the collections of Le Centre Georges Pompidou in Paris, the Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia in Madrid, the Moderna galerija in Ljubljana, the Computerfinearts Gallery in New York and many more. His multimedia projects research emotional tactics, intimate political guerrilla and low-tech communication strategies. He lectures at universities and art institutes worldwide. www.intima.org

3.30 PM: Tour of the exhibition Controlling_Connectivity with Gretta Louw and Regine Rapp (curator)

4 PM: Artists’ talk Current Artistic Practices on Time and Technology with Gretta Louw, plan b (Sophia New & Daniel Belasco Rogers) and Igor Štromajer; moderation: Christian de Lutz (curator).

In connection with the exhibition Controlling_Connectivity by Gretta Louw and the series Time and Technology Art Laboratory Berlin is presenting an artists’ talk on the theme current art practices on time and technology featuring Gretta Louw and plan b (Sophia New & Daniel Belasco Rogers) as well as the internet artist Igor Štromajer (www.intima.org). The talk will be introduced and moderated by Regine Rapp and Christian de Lutz.

Art Laboratory Berlin, Prinzenallee 34, 13359 Berlin
U-Bhf Pankstr (U8), Osloerstr (U8, U9)
S-Bhf Bornholmerstr (S1, S2, S25, S8)
Prinzenallee/Soldinerstr. Bus M27,
Osloerstr./Prinzenallee Trams M13, 50

http://www.liberation.fr/culture/01012380557-au-portail-du-musee
Au portail du musée
Par Sophian Fanen, Liberation, 31. décembre 2011

The dance theorist Bojana Kunst is spending weeks with a choreographer, artist, or other cultural producer (Danae Theodoridou, performer and researcher, Boyan Manchev, philosopher and theorist, Ivana Müller, choreographer, Igor Štromajer, internet artist), exploring the different aspects of work processes within contemporary art, their relationship to time and the political, economic and performative implications of such experimentation. These “full-time” meetings are being shared with the public, either during conversations, performance, or by individual appointment. These occasions offer to the public the opportunity to engage themselves with the ways Bojana Kunst and her partners address their relationships to time. The material produced during these meetings and public situations provides the basis for a publication, to appear in 2012.

#
Meeting with Bojana Kunst and Igor Štromajer

Saturday, 17 December 2011, encounter between Bojana Kunst and Igor Štromajer

Live Internet Broadcast:
www.ustream.tv/channel/les-labos
Saturday, 17 December, 16:00 – 19:00 (CET +0100 UTC; Paris Time)

+ ask questions via Twitter, use #explab hashtag.

#

On May 2011 Igor Štromajer started to delete his net art projects, created from 1996 to 2007 (Expunction, 2011). The process of deletion opened many questions about temporal fragility of contemporary artistic practice, especially when we talk about new media art works. You are invited to join us at the encounter, where we would like to talk about the disappearance of projects and their temporal traces, about the attempts to keep the projects going on or to delete them, transfer them or archive them, to keep them or to leave them going.

#

#
Appointments on Saturday, 17 December 2011, 4 pm – 7 pm.
Contact Virginie Bobin to set up a meeting, at v.bobin@leslaboratoires.org and +33 153 561 594.

Les Laboratoires d’Aubervilliers
41, rue Lécuyer, 93300 Aubervilliers, France

Metro / Paris: Line 7 Aubervilliers-Pantin Quatre-Chemins (exit Avenue de la République), Bus: 170, 150, 152, 249

With support of the INHA (Institut national de l’Histoire de l’art) research program « Arts et mondialisation », Paris

#

S’il est possible de concevoir, programmer, construire et créer une oeuvre d’art numérique, il est également possible de la supprimer et de la déprogrammer. La suppression de mes oeuvres d’art numériques correspondait à un processus naturel consistant à les enlever de mon serveur. Ce n’était ni un spectacle ni un acte d’agression ou d’exaspération. Elle n’avait rien à voir avec l’artiste en révolte contre la société ou une quelconque religion. Ce n’était qu’une simple procédure, un protocole: quelque chose qu’il faut faire ou suivre. Les choses apparaissent, puis disparaissent. Ma décision était de nature conceptuelle; elle se voulait constructive plutôt que destructrice. J’ai supprimé pour mieux réanimer ou vivifier. Les premières oeuvres d’art sur le Net ont toutes perdu leur «environnement naturel», dans la mesure où Internet 1.0 appartient déjà au passé. Il s’avère impossible de préserver ces oeuvres dans leur forme originale, puisqu’il n’y a plus de forme originale: les navigateurs ont changé, les  liens externes ont été retirés, les serveurs externes auxquels elles renvoient n’existent plus, les fenêtres pop-up sont bloquées, Java fonctionne de manière différente, et ainsi de suite. L’Internet d’aujourd’hui est tellement 2.0!

La mémoire a pour fonction de nous tromper, et non de nous dire comment cela a été.

- Nombre d’oeuvres d’art sur le Net supprimées : 37
- Nombre de fichiers supprimés : 3 288
- Taille des fichiers supprimés : 101,72 MB
- Fréquence de suppression : une (1) oeuvre d’art par jour
- Début de la suppression : 11 mai 2011
- Durée : 37 jours (dernier projet supprimé le 16 juin 2011)
- Sujet : suppression d’oeuvres d’art numériques créées par Igor Štromajer entre 1996 et 2007 par effacement du serveur original www.intima.org.

Définitivement un acte d’amour.

#
En mai 2011, Igor Štromajer a commencé à supprimer les projets multimédia qu’il a créés entre 1996 et 2007. Le processus de suppression ouvre de nombreuses questions sur la fragilité temporelle des pratiques artistiques contemporaines, notamment lorsqu’il s’agit d’oeuvres multimédia. Nous vous invitons à venir à notre rencontre pour se poser ensemble la question de la disparition des projets et de leur traces temporelles, des tentatives de poursuivre un projet ou de le supprimer, le transférer ou l’archiver, le conserver ou le laisser poursuivre son cheminement.

Difusion en direct sur internet:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/les-labos
Samedi 17 décembre 16:00 – 19:00 (CET +0100 UTC; heure de Paris)
+ posez vos questions via Twitter, avec le hashtag #explab

Igor Štromajer (Intima Virtual Base – www.intima.org) est un communicateur de la mobilité et de l’intimité, un artiste multimédia. Son oeuvre comprend près de 150 projets présentés dans plus de 100 expositions à  travers 50 pays, tous continents confondus. Ses deux projets les plus célèbres sont Ballettikka Internettikka et Oppera Internettikka (1997-2011). Il a été plusieurs fois récompensés pour son travail (à Moscou, Hambourg, Dresde, Belfort, Madrid et Maribor), et ses oeuvres font partie des collections permanentes de plusieurs institutions artistiques prestigieuses, parmi lesquelles le Centre national d’art et de Culture Georges Pompidou – Musée national d’art moderne de Paris (France), le Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia à Madrid (Espagne), la Moderna galerija de Ljubljana (Slovenie), la Computerfinearts Gallery – net and media art collection à New York (USA), la Maribor Art Gallery (Slovenie). Ses projets multimedia explorent les tactiques émotionnelles, la guerilla politique intime et les strategies de communication low-tech traumatiques. Il donne des conférences, en tant qu’artiste invité, dans des universités et instituts d’art contemporain en Europe, en Amérique Latine et du Nord, ainsi qu’en Asie.

#

The Project Horizon: On the Temporality of Making
by Bojana Kunst

In the last few decades, one of the most commonly used words among artists, producers and other cultural workers has been the word project. We are all involved in projects, most likely several of them, we are implemented in the finalisation of old projects and are constantly starting new ones, continuously part of relentless projective movements of production. With every project we are moving towards the end of something; from invention to completion, from the start of the process to its end, we are – in a very specific way – progressing to a final projection. The word project is so often uttered in contemporary culture and art that the sheer frequency of its use is already cause for alarm. This overwhelming denomination, which is used for all kinds of cultural products and artistic works, contains a peculiar temporal dimension which has never been stressed and questioned as such. In this short essay I would therefore like to reflect upon how this peculiar temporality is framing the contemporary artistic processes of making, collaborating and creating: project turns out to be the ultimate horizon of making in the present day. There is something very perplexing at work in the projective temporality of the project: regardless of the myriad possibilities it opens up, it nevertheless projects its own completion as the ultimate horizon of work. The problem therefore lies in the fact that, regardless of the openings and transformations inside the projective temporality, the future is still projected as chronological continuity with the past, and the meaning rises from progressive continuation.

It cannot be overlooked that the plain banality and everydayness of the use of the term project speaks to the fact that this term is often used as an empty signifier, a concept which doesn’t imply anything in particular. It denominates nothing, adding nothing to what we actually do. It could be said that this term is used pragmatically for myriads of makings and doings. Am I then not inclined to squeeze too much out of the sheer pragmatic application of this particular word to the artistic work? I am not so sure about that. I remember Myriam van Imschoot writing about another similarly “empty” word we utter when we would like to describe artistic work in everyday communication. She writes about the word “interesting”, which is nowadays often used as a descriptive adjective without any reference to the thing or work which one is referencing. Similar abstraction of language is at work in the word project, where the reference to the temporality of the work is never questioned. Project always denominates not only a specific term, but also a temporal attitude or a temporal mode in which completion is already implied in the projection of the future. A lot of what artists do today seems to be caught up in this unaddressed and never-approached projective time. What we ironically get at the end is an ultimate abstraction, an “interesting project”, which can even work as an undefined speculative value among the community of cultural producers and artists. Something immediately appears in the project when it is being described as an interesting one.

The treacherous abstraction of the word project is one of the reasons why it is necessary to tackle and dismantle this term: it has to be put on the anvil because of its dangerous independence and implementation of everything in its temporal dynamics. The second reason lies in the fact that the projective temporality of work has multiple baffling consequences on the lives of those involved in the continuous creation of projects, especially in cultural and artistic fields. It seems that its abstract omnipresence is literally absorbing the experience of artistic work and work making, and at the same time forming the peculiar temporality of the subjectivity that is involved in its completion. Projective temporality is tightly intertwined with the subjective experience of time; it can be argued that contemporary subjectivities are increasingly experienced as the simultaneity of many projects, be they private, public, social, intimate ones, etc. It seems as if the temporality of the project also influences the rhythm of the transformation of subjectivity, which has to be flexible while at the same time moving towards an accomplishment, a realisation, an implementation. The projective temporality of work and activity is intertwined with the acceleration of that same activity, where the unexpected happens only because of the outburst of crisis, exhaustion and withdrawal. Such continuous movement to completion and consummation is also a rigid and destructive movement of progression. Its flexibility is actually destructive to subjectivity and its collaborative surrounding. Subjectivity is abstracted from the contexts of work, making them more and more the same, erasing the differences between the communities of work and thus disempowering the work’s political strength.

The reason for this is the constant lack of time, a kind of time deprivation – which of course is a paradox – concerning the possibilities the project holds for the future. It seems that the more there is to project in the future and the more possibilities there are to be completed, the less time is at our disposal to maintain and endure, and enable social, discursive, political or intimate relations. The project becomes an ultimate horizon of our experience. Ironically, one of the most commonly used words in cultural production to designate project completion (especially in the academic sphere, but also more and more in the arts) is deadline. A mortal limit seems to stand at the end of the project, a moment of pure completion, the consummation of creative life, with no follow-up experience. At the same time, an illusionary feeling that everything continues on to eternity lightens this tension a bit, because there are so many projects to complete. The project is the ultimate horizon of making because, as is the case with the real horizon, it is always receding as we attempt to pursue it. However that doesn’t mean that consummation is not part of the process. What’s more, in this projective endlessness there are many mortal limits to be crossed and there is a lot to consume: the future seems radically closed-down while offering all its numerous possibilities. Time deprivation obstructs the imagination and the creation of radical gestures, and disables any experimentation with enduring present.

We can say that projective temporality is a main mode of production in today’s art and culture in general. It is also influencing how cultural or artistic value is articulated nowadays, and how, for example, contemporary art and culture are articulating their right to be supported, financed and presented in public. Instead of affirming and articulating the value of creation, the (human) right to imagination, creation of new forms and radical misrepresentations. Instead of affirming its value with constant articulation of human potentialities and togetherness, the value is most often reconfirming the evaluative enumeration of projects and hyper-production. The enumeration of projects and their statistical efficiency and success, the hyper-production of inventions, and interventions in social space, all end very often in a justificatory claim that art and culture are important because they are vital to the contemporary economy and its production of value. However, with that kind of production, a fragmentation of interest, political relations and abstraction of contexts occurs because economic importance is measured and applied using a more and more general model of working – based on the number and visibility of projects. Such affirmation actually deprives artistic creation and works of potentiality, and throws the work of an artist into a competitive battle which art can never win. The problem lies in the fact that art can never project the speculative value of the project as the financial speculation of investment because it deeply belongs to the public and is therefore “availability-towards-nothingness”, as Giorgio Agamben would say. That means it belongs to the public so that it can be surpassed, appropriated and articulated through many different temporalities. There is something fundamentally different in the practice of creation itself when we relate this practice of work to time. What is at stake in art practice is not speculation about its value – a constant selling and dissemination of what it could become – instead we have to speak about the sheer power of imagination, of creation of forms through which our life together can be perceived and actualised, of the modes of invention which are part of the human potentiality to act.

The reason for tensions and feelings of weakness in contemporary cultural production is a deep incongruity between artistic practice and the projective temporality itself: a deep incongruity between work and its projective horizon (and this does not only apply to artistic work, but also work in general). Time between the invention and completion of work is apprehended as progression (a movement towards something which should be completed, a movement towards finalisation). This progression can be full of experimentation and twists of various creative situations and dynamics. However at the same time a project must from the start project its own consummation, it has to anticipate and evaluate its completion from the beginning and work towards its own closure. It is true that whatever we do is always oriented toward the future, at least in the sense that our activity will last for some time, there is always a temporality of doing. But the question is whether the work is really a straightaway related to its consummation, to the completion of the act. Or is the invention something which actually opens up different articulations of coexistence, a practice of re-articulation of language and displacement of activity, a plane of imagination and human actualisation that is not on the accelerated adventure towards its future finalisation?

Even if the constant creation of projects gives the feeling of flexibility and creative dynamism, actually it is not enabling change, but sameness, or better, exhausting sameness. It is important to mention the specific retrospective future of the project, which always enables a lot of possibilities even though everything has to be planned in advance to reach the already-projected future. A project works as a horizon of expectation, with a lot of possibilities but no actual change. The time of the project is not the time of the event, which would open the window of the unexpected, with the time being out of joint. It can be described more as an administrative time, where some possibilities are being realized and some not in the progressive line between the invention and its completion. What is particularly interesting here is to observe how the administrative time of the project literally results in an increase of administrative work and demands multiple managerial skills from the artist and other workers (skills of evaluation, self-evaluation, presentation and application, presentation, etc.). No wonder artists have become a model of creative job insecurity in the last few decades: she/he is so deeply involved in the projective time. This is also deeply changing the social and public role of the artist: the public dimension of his work is projected, not imagined any more. That means that the public dimension of his/her work is most of the time conceived as the finalization of its ends, and the public becomes an outcome of the fact that art is an important part of the economy. Artistic practice should be understood as public because it is a practice of work, an antagonistic practice of doing and making.

I would like to conclude this essay of introduction to my residency at Les Laboratoires d’Aubervilliers with the statement that there exists no empty or neutral use of the term project, its utterance already implies a specific temporality of the artistic work: a project is somehow a dangerous and overwhelming form of contemporary work. Of course every work and activity is temporal. Whatever we do is always related to the time yet to come, at least in the sense that our activity will last for some time. However there exists a large difference between understandings of the work which are durational, meaning it lasts through the working activity, and those which are projective, meaning it is moving towards its own completion. This difference can be compared with the difference between adventure and quest: a project is much more similar to an adventure (it has a myriad of open possibilities, however they have to lead to the consuming end if the adventure is to be adventurous) whereas, in a quest, time is consummated in the activity itself, in its endurance. One way to deal with and critically address the problematic projective understanding of the artistic work is through the disclosure of the durable and enduring nature of work, and therefore to address this peculiar relation between work and time. This can be seen in numerous attempts by artists to explore duration in the last few decades as a powerful strategy to overturn the ruling formation of temporality. Another way to address the overwhelming projective temporality could be to intervene directly in the rhythm of production and actually continuously and excessively produce plenty so that every “(non)significant” moment in the project is overproducing myriads of traces, evidences, suggestions, discourses, etc.; somehow the project itself may be overrun with the sheer power of activity. Or it may also be possible to subversively affirm the projective nature of contemporary work in art and culture, and literally take the projection as the only condition in which it is possible to work nowadays. With this approach, the project is taken so utterly seriously that the nature of the free-floating possibility to complete the project is actually disclosed as ultimate and rigid limitation.

Text published in Le Journal des Laboratoires, Sep-Dec 2011

13 December 2011 at The Gallery 001, Tobačna Factory, Ljubljana
+ live online!
Igor Štromajer participating as: Online Agent

Transmittance explores collaboration which is local, global, networked and broadcasted. It involves an artistic group of performers, visual artists, musicians and computer programmers to research performative possibilities of streaming, broadcasting and telepresence forging new types of performance and audience. With focus on critical and socially-aware artistic languages this work is based on asking questions about body, self and society – opening non-dualistic perspectives.

Transmittance is available as research, educational and/or performance model including a preparation time and performance event that is streamed on-line.

Production: Emanat

http://transmittance.si

Visit our blog and Projects/Transmittance for more.

On Tuesday, 13 December 2011 at 8 pm (UTC/GMT+1), Barbara Wesentel, Bojana Kunst and Igor Štromajer made love together. The action took place in Hamburg, Germany.

Their const-perf-act was audio-streamed live via Skype – from Hamburg (DE) to Ljubljana (SI). It was mixed and streamed online by radioCona in Ljubljana (88.8 Mhz FM Stereo) in the frame of the Radio Arts Space international FM  / online / gallery exhibition event (7–16 Dec 2011, ŠKUC Gallery Ljubljana) organized by CONA Institute for Contemporary Arts Processing (as part of the live Skype performance with Brane Zorman and selected artists).

Live audio stream was available at ustre.am/FvvY

Barbara Wesentel, Bojana Kunst and Igor Štromajer are making love – live
(omissive art)
Hamburg / Ljubljana / Internet, 13 December 2011 at 8 pm

ISSI – Intimate Skype Sound Intervention by Igor Štromajer, mixed and streamed by radioCona

FR | DE + Download the programme booklet and the poster (PDF)

24 Nov 2011 at 16:15 | Igor Štromajer presenting: Expunction (Deleting www.intima.org Net Art Works, May – June 2011)

Artists who create digital artworks face the problem of preservation much sooner than artists who work with more traditional materials. Artists who wish their work to endure always ready for exhibition, must give some thought to preservation strategies from the moment the artwork is created. The choices of standard tools, documentation and modes of distribution are all part of this process.

An interest in the historical value of digital artworks also encourages the institutions that exhibit them to make this particular value visible, in addition to the appropriate conservation of the work. This leads us to reconsider the conservation strategies which advocate the systematic and continuous updating of non-functioning or obsolete devices.

This symposium aims to give an overview of certain strategies that have been implemented over the past few years by presenting the intertwined approaches and practices of theorists, artists, programmers and preservation specialists.

Speakers
Cécile Dazord, theorist, Center for research and restoration at the Musées de France
Raffael Dörig, theorist, House of Electronic Arts Basel
Jean-Philippe Humblot, theorist, programmer, National Library of France
Hervé Graumann, artist, in conversation with Nelly Masséra, artist
Perla Innocenti, theorist, University of Glasgow
Jodi, artists, in conversation with Anne Laforet, theorist
Florian Kaufmann, artist, programmer
Paul Jansen Klomp, artist, programmer
Emanuel Lorrain, theorist, PACKED vzw
Aymeric Mansoux and Marloes de Valk, artists, programmers
Gideon May, artist, programmer
Arnaud Obermann, preservation manager, ZKM | Center for Art and Media Karlsruhe
Jussi Parikka, theorist, Winchester School of Art
Hans Pufal, programmer, association ACONIT
Francisco Ruiz de Infante and Jérôme Thomas, artists, École supérieure des arts décoratifs de Strasbourg
Bernhard Serexhe, project leader, digital art conservation, ZKM | Center for Art and Media Karlsruhe
Igor Štromajer, artist (presenting: Expunction)
Otto Teichert, director, École supérieure des arts décoratifs de Strasbourg

#

Digital technology was introduced to art and culture in order to prevent the disappearance of analogue works. However, the fact that born-digital works are even more fragile than, for example, analogue video, conditions how we are rethinking the many intricate relationships between digital art and its conservation. Artists who create digital artworks face the problem of preservation much sooner than artists who work with more traditional materials. These digital artists are more actively drawn into the discourse, not only because of their artworks’ inherent fragility, but because the digital art ecosystem doesn’t yet offer them specialized professionals. Artists who wish their work to endure, always ready for exhibition, must give some thought to preservation strategies from the moment the artwork is created. The choices of standard tools, documentation and modes of distribution are all part of this process.

Materials, just as much as machines and software, are subject to the rapid industrial development of technology that is characteristic of capitalist societies, and which evolves at a different rhythm from that of art, memory and archive. This relentless evolution allows us to appreciate in part the historical value of digital artworks. These can no longer be considered as belonging to a homogenous genre of «digital art»—we must distinguish the earliest works, which thus acquire a different status, from those currently produced. As we begin to recognize the value of age itself, the relationship between the idea of the work and its realization creates a specific interest in this passage of time. The material aspect of these works, regarding the devices as much as the softwares and interfaces, gains an importance it may not have had previously, when it was perceived as transparent, while the concepts behind the work may seem less spectacular. Interest in the historical value of digital artworks also encourage the institutions that exhibit them to make this particular value visible, in addition to the appropriate conservation of the work. This leads us to reconsider the conservation strategies which advocate the systematic and continuous updating of non-functioning or obsolete devices. Media Archaeology and a renewed culture of repair join research on the emulation, virtualization or preservation potential of open software and copyleft.

One single strategy cannot apply for all types of digital artworks; new ideas emerge from hybrid initiatives. This symposium aims to give an overview of certain strategies that have been implemented over the past years by crossing approaches and practices of theorists, artists, programmers and preservation specialists.

The international symposium, which takes place at the École supérieure des arts décoratifs de Strasbourg, is an occasion to show the work of students and teachers involved with this research project through an exhibition and an evening of performances and screenings. The works presented question the notions of interpretation, notation and documentation, as well as the role of the artist in the context of art institutions’ approaches to conservation.
This second symposium, after «The Digital Oblivion» in 2010, is part of the inter-regional «digital art conservation» research project, which brings together partners in Germany, Switzerland and France. The symposium reflects the diversity of problems posed by the works in the project case studies, which can be found in the exhibition «Digital Art Works. The Challenges of Conservation» at the ZKM in Karlsruhe, at the Espace Multimedia Gantner in Bourogne and at the CEAAC in Strasbourg in 2011 and 2012.

Die Die Die Beauty (online streaming video by Igor Štromajer, 2007; a part of Breaking Solitude series by Annie Abrahams) is shown in the context of the exhibition called Talk to Me by the Townhouse Gallery for contemporary art in Cairo, Egypt.

Talk to Me is an exhibition that looks at interpersonal communication and the possibility to create intimacy through virtual spaces. It’s taking place in the context of an event series called d1sc0nN3ct, which explores different ways of presenting digital/new media work.

7012: Die Die Die Beauty

Beauté De Matrice De Matrice De Matrice
Meurs Meurs Meurs Beauté
Cette Cette Cette Beauté

Live Internet Performance

# in the frame of the Breaking Solitude by Annie Abrahams; Montpellier, France
26 November 2007; Duration: 20 minutes

Invited Artist: Igor Štromajer
e-Performing Artists: Martina Ruhsam, Vlado Gotvan Repnik

Co-produced by Intima Virtual Base (Slovenia) and Association Panoplie (France) in collaboration with bram.org (France)

20 Nov 2011: “As you may have seen in the news, the situation in Cairo has become unstable. Because Townhouse Gallery of contemporary art is right down the street from Tahrir Square, we are in close proximity to the clashes and have had to temporarily close, and we are not sure when we will be able to resume normal programming. The ‘Talk to Me’ show at the internet cafe will therefore have to be postponed, hopefully to a date next week, depending on the situation here. Thank you for your understanding.” — New event date: 4 December 2011

+ Action [Flick Photo Set]
+ Preparations [Flick Photo Set]

[VIDEO] www.intima.org/3060908

VIDEO: www.intima.org/os

vimeo.com/31335644
youtu.be/wMJ7EvM8OA8

Maribor Art Gallery: Robot Museum; group exhibition
29 September – 6 November 2011
www.ugm.si/en/exhibition-events/exhibition/n/museum-of-robots-1824

Štromajer has placed Emobot, an emotional robot, in the gallery. Emobot is not a work of art nor does it produce art. Its only artistic value is absence (of production) of art. Emobot produces art by not producing it, by active omission of production. It is (and it isn’t) an artistic action, performed by not being performed. In other words – it is created by not being created. Emobot is an art work actively absent from the exhibition: the most radical artistic action is the one performed by not performing it. Emobot functions by not functioning, by omitting its functioning. And when it is active, we are not aware how it functions, and actually we don’t want to know. Emobot is omissive art: “Philosophers have so far only changed the world, this is about interpreting the world!”
The work was created in the context of exploring omissive art, the status of art in contemporary society as well as of the value and impact of an artistic action.

Concept of the exhibition: Jože Slaček, Curator: Meta Kordiš
Authors at the exhibition: Srečo Dragan, Stefan Doepner, Luka Drinovec, Luka Frelih, Sanela Jahić, Zoran Srdić Janežič, Boštjan Kavčič, Nika Oblak & Primož Novak, Borut Savski, Sašo Sedlaček, Maja Smrekar, son:DA, Robertina Šebjanič, Igor Štromajer, Branko Zupan

Opening: Thursday, 29 September 2011

Ida Hiršenfelder (guided tour of the exhibition) standing next to “Emobot”
http://flic.kr/p/ayT7GZ
© All rights reserved by Umetnostna galerija Maribor

The exhibition Robot Museum includes fields such as interactivity, robotics, informatics and multimedia. It’s the first comprehensive exhibition of this part of contemporary Slovenian art. The project involves exploration, production and exhibition of robots and their cultural content, as well as software-art, intermedia installations and performance. The word robot means a machine controlled by computer and programmed to move or perform specific tasks. This universal term was first used by Czech writer Karel Čapek (suggested by his brother Josef Čapek) in his play R.U.R (Rossum’s Universal Robots, 1920). In industry robots perform repetitive tasks or carry heavy loads. Some are designed to work in dangerous situations or they explore space and sea depths. They are equipped with sensors or video cameras and are even programmed to make decisions.

Until recently Slovenia hasn’t devoted much attention to robots and their contextualization in fine arts. This exhibition is based on previous researches and theoretical placements, and presents a transition from kinetic to cybernetic art. It will also raise questions about placement of robots as new media products in the field of arts. At the same time it will establish a bridge between science and art which are subjects of separate disciplines, but in the case of robots they represent an indispensable link.

In the Slovenian arts for the last twenty years robots appeared in artwork of artists like Srečo Dragan, Dušan Bučar, Luka Drinovec, Borut Savski, Stefan Doepner, Boštjan Kavčič… So far there have been fifteen projects related to robots (Sašo Sedlaček, Robertina Šebjanič, Luka Frelih, Maja Smrekar, Igor Štromajer, Nika Oblak & Primož Novak, Zoran Srdić Janežič, Branko Zupan, Sanela Jahić…). Most of the artists were participants of the International Festival of Computer Arts (1995-2008) and unfortunately some of their older artwork is lost.

With this project Maribor Art Gallery and MKC Maribor would like to present phenomena of robots in the arts and culture. The exhibition aims to encourage connection and dialogue between technical culture, its development and artwork, while developing innovative transfer of knowledge and skills.

Concept by: Jože Slaček
Curator: Meta Kordiš
Co-production: MKC Maribor

Igor Štromajer @ ISEA2011 Nuru Ziya Lounge (Photo: Anne Roquigny)

One of the special ISEA2011 Nuru Ziya Lounge guests, Igor Štromajer, discusses the intrinsic and intimate entwinement of the virtual in everyday materiality.
Istanbul, Turkey – 18 September 2011

isea2011.sabanciuniv.edu/other-event/nuru-ziya-isea2011-lounge

ISEA2011 Istanbul presents the Nuru Ziya Lounge hosted by Nuru Ziya Suites. The Nuru Ziya Lounge is directed by Stephen Kovats and act as a place for conversation and business. It favors art gatherings with a view to forge new alliances and synergies. It is possible to network, discuss new projects and develop ideas, with artists and curators convening in one single place for a rest and a chat during the busy schedule of ISEA2011 Istanbul.

by Igor Štromajer (ISEA2011 panel: Voicing Electronic Arts)

Abstract:

 0 html – 0 head – 0 title – 3 0 /title – 0 meta http-equiv=”Content-Type” content =”text/html; charset=iso-8859-1″ – 0 meta http-equiv= “Pragma” content=”no-cache” / – 0 meta name=”robots” content=”index,follow” – 0 script – function clearText (thefield) { if  (thefield.default Value==thefield.value) thefield.value = “” } 0 /script – 0 /head – 0 body – 3 0 /body – 0 /html -

Text:

0!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Str!ct//EN” “:w.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-str!ct.dtd”0 0html xmlns=”:w.w3.org/1999/xhtml” xml:lang=”en” lang=”en”0 0head0 0s c=”meta entry-meta” data=’{}’0 0a c=”entry-date” rel=”bookmark” href=”:tw!tter.c/!nt!ma/t/13326381807″0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Mon May 03 21:16:22 +0000 2010′}”0about 11 hours ago0/s00/a0 0s0v!a 0ah=”:w.p!ng.fm/” rel=”nofollow”0P!ng.fm0/a00/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_13303128086″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_13303128086″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0s c=”entry-n”0RT @0a c=”tweet-url username” href=”/hansbernhard” rel=”nofollow”0hansbernhard0/a0: “No Fun” by Eva and Franco Mattes 0100101110101101.org , ! l!ke !t. c=”meta entry-meta” data=’{}’0 0a c=”entry-date” rel=”bookmark” href=”:tw!tter.c/!nt!ma/t/13303128086″0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Mon May 03 12:40:24 +0000 2010′}”0about 19 hours ago0/s00/a0 0s0v!a 0ah=”:mob!leways.de/grav!ty” rel=”nofollow”0Grav!ty0/a00/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_13064519505″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_13064519505″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0s c=”entry-n”0Found an odd book for her – !n a Japanese toy-shop !n HH! 0ah=”:tw!tp!c.c/1jcsvo” c=”tweet-url web” rel=”nofollow” target=”_blank”0:tw!tp!c.c/1jcsvo0/a00/s0 0/s0 0s c=”meta entry-meta” data=’{}’0 0a c=”entry-date” rel=”bookmark” href=”:tw!tter.c/!nt!ma/t/13064519505″0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Thu Apr 29 11:58:01 +0000 2010′}”01:58 PM Apr 29th0/s00/a0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Thu Apr 29 10:00:23 +0000 2010′}”012:00 PM Apr 29th0/s00/a0 0s0v!a 0ah=”:w.soc!aloomph.c” rel=”nofollow”0Soc!alOomph0/a00/s0 0/s0 0s c=”meta entry-meta retweet-meta”0 0s c=”shared-n”0Retweeted by you0/s0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l!0 0s0 0s c=”retweet-!con !con”00/s0 Retweeted (0a c=”undo” href=”#” !d=”share_13063743263″ t!tle=”Undo”0Undo0/a0) 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12968344689″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_12968344689″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0ah=”:w.p!ng.fm/” rel=”nofollow”0P!ng.fm0/a00/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12756584534″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_12756584534″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12707667701″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_12707667701″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0s c=”entry-n”0Sunny terrace, Franz!skaner beer, everyth!ng !s qu!et, no art around. Heaven on Earth.0/s0 0/s0 0s c=”meta entry-meta” data=’{}’0 0a c=”entry-date” rel=”bookmark” href=”:tw!tter.c/!nt!ma/t/12707667701″0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Fr! Apr 23 15:16:42 +0000 2010′}”05:16 PM Apr 23rd0/s00/a0 0s0v!a 0ah=”:w.p!ng.fm/” rel=”nofollow”0P!ng.fm0/a00/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12634418728″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_12634418728″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0s0v!a web0/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12627718220″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12507709483″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_12507709483″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0s c=”entry-n”0Never m!nd the cloud – ce to Oslo: “One f!ne day, all th!s w!ll be yours” by Dellbrügge & Moll (23 Apr, 18:00) 0ah=”:w.cmonlands.net” c=”tweet-url web” rel=”nofollow” target=”_blank”0:w.cmonlands.net0/a00/s0 0/s0 0s c=”meta entry-meta” data=’{}’0 0a c=”entry-date” rel=”bookmark” href=”:tw!tter.c/!nt!ma/t/12507709483″0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Tue Apr 20 09:53:38 +0000 2010′}”011:53 AM Apr 20th0/s00/a0 0s0v!a web0/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12476819178″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_12476819178″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0s c=”entry-n”0RadarV!rtuel.c – real-t!me l!ve fl!ght/a!rcraft traff!c (w!th the volcano ashes layer) 0ah=”:w.radarv!rtuel.c” c=”tweet-url web” rel=”nofollow” target=”_blank”0:w.radarv!rtuel.c0/a00/s0 0/s0 0s c=”meta entry-meta” data=’{}’0 0a c=”entry-date” rel=”bookmark” href=”:tw!tter.c/!nt!ma/t/12476819178″0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Mon Apr 19 21:28:07 +0000 2010′}”011:28 PM Apr 19th0/s00/a0 0s0v!a web0/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12446865114″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_12446865114″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0s c=”entry-n”0[repose from to!l]0/s0 0/s0 0s c=”meta entry-meta” data=’{}’0 0a c=”entry-date” rel=”bookmark” href=”:tw!tter.c/!nt!ma/t/12446865114″0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Mon Apr 19 09:27:48 +0000 2010′}”011:27 AM Apr 19th0/s00/a0 0s0v!a 0ah=”:w.p!ng.fm/” rel=”nofollow”0P!ng.fm0/a00/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12413728534″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0a !d=”t_star_12413728534″ c=”fav-act!on non-fav” t!tle=”favor!te th!s tweet”0  0/a0 0/d!v00/s0 0s c=”entry-n”0Ballet mecan!que (1924) Fernand Leger / Part 1: 0ah=”:b!t.ly/ICBF2″ c=”tweet-url web” rel=”nofollow” target=”_blank”0:b!t.ly/ICBF20/a0 & Part 2: 0ah=”:b!t.ly/6sCbtD” c=”tweet-url web” rel=”nofollow” target=”_blank”0:b!t.ly/6sCbtD0/a00/s0 0/s0 0s c=”meta entry-meta” data=’{}’0 0a c=”entry-date” rel=”bookmark” href=”:tw!tter.c/!nt!ma/t/12413728534″0 0s c=”publ!shed t!mestamp” data=”{t!me:’Sun Apr 18 19:31:47 +0000 2010′}”09:31 PM Apr 18th0/s00/a0 0s0v!a web0/s0 0/s0 0ul c=”act!ons-hover”0 0l!0 0s c=”del”0 0s c=”delete-!con !con”00/s0 0ah=”#” t!tle=”delete th!s tweet”0Delete0/a0 0/s0 0/l!0 0/ul0 0/s0 0/l!0 0l! c=”hentry u-!nt!ma m!ne t” !d=”t_12298164403″ 0 0s c=”t-body”0 0s c=”t-n”0 0s c=”act!ons”00d!v0 0/body0 0/html0

References and Notes:

1. Jussi Parrikka
2. Alexander R Galloway
3. Wendy Chun
4. Jussi Parrikka, “@juspar,” Twitter, October 22, 2010, http://twitter.com/#!/juspar/status/28433378847 (accessed August 21, 2011).

ISEA2011 panel:
Voicing Electronic Arts
isea2011.sabanciuniv.edu/panel/voicing-electronic-arts

The panel will address complexities of voice in the current digital and networked moment of electronic art by bringing to the fore the dynamic relationship between technique and technology and culture, by including theorists and artists in the panel discussion.

Chair: Prof. Norie Neumark
Presenters: Nermin Saybasili, Igor Štromajer, Isabelle Arvers

Date: Friday, 16 September, 2011 (09:00 – 10:30)
Location: Sabanci Center Room 1, Levent

Igor Štromajer ISEA2011 Profile Page:
isea2011.sabanciuniv.edu/.stromajer

ISEA2011 Istanbul – The 17th International Symposium on Electronic Art, 14-21 September 2011

The panel will address complexities of voice in the current digital and networked moment of electronic art by bringing to the fore the dynamic relationship between technique and technology and culture, by including theorists and artists in the panel discussion.

Chair: Prof. Norie Neumark
Presenters: Nermin Saybasili, Igor Štromajer, Isabelle Arvers

Date: Friday, 16 September, 2011 (09:00 – 10:30)
Location: Sabanci Center Room 1, Levent

Igor Štromajer ISEA2011 Profile Page:
isea2011.sabanciuniv.edu/.stromajer

ISEA2011 Istanbul – The 17th International Symposium on Electronic Art, 14-21 September 2011

There is an uncanny quality to voice in electronic arts, viscerally carrying bodily intimacies to the listener through physical spaces, yet dislocated from the speaker’s body through reproduction and transmission. The digital voice is paradoxically human and machinic – intimate and intense,  as it connects subjectivities on the one hand and the digitally abstract on the other hand,  as it passes through machines on to the other. Whether voices call to us across the internet, or across the smaller space of an installation, or from the small screen of machinima, media artists have found this paradoxical and uncanny quality alluring and have worked with it across a range of media and emotional ranges. While voice is often discussed in a political and metaphorical sense (giving people a voice through media) the aim of this panel is to address the aesthetics of voice in media art. Voice, with all its paradoxes and ambiguities, is over-ripe for the theoretical and arttistic engagement that Roland Barthes invited with his now very familiar concept of grain of the voice.  And voice with its intimacies, its intensities, its aesthetic richness, is all the more diverse and complex in the age when grain has become granular synthesis. Voice moves across and defines spaces and relationships, it resonates and re-sounds. It invokes, provokes, convokes. The panel will address such complexities of voice in the current digital and networked moment of electronic art by bringing to the fore the dynamic relationship between technique and technology and culture, by including theorists and artists in the panel discussion.

#

@juspar [1] and now quoting Galloway [2]: “Code is the only language that is executable”. Does what it says. #code #chun [3] #netpol1010

Paper Abstract by Igor Štromajer

([1] Jussi Parrikka; [2] Alexander R. Galloway; [3] Wendy Chun – http://twitter.com/#!/juspar/status/28433378847) html>head
style
a:link, a:visited, a:active {text-decoration: none
a:hover {text-decoration: none; color: ff0000
/style
link rel=”shortcut icon” href=”../../003.ico”
link rel=”icon” href=”../../ani-003.gif” type=”image/gif” >
meta http-equiv=”Content-Type” content=”text/html; charset=iso-8859-1″>
meta http-equiv=”Content-Language” content=”en”>
meta http-equiv=”Pragma” content=”no-cache” />
meta name=”robots” content=”index,follow”>
script language=”JavaScript”>
if ((navigator.appName.indexOf(‘Microsoft’)+1)) {
document.write(‘‘); }
if ((navigator.appName.indexOf(‘Netscape’)+1)) {
document.write(‘‘); }
else {document.write(”); }
/script>
script>
function clearText(thefield){
if (thefield.defaultValue==thefield.value)
thefield.value = “” }
/script>
/head>
body style=“cursor : crosshair;” bgcolor=“ffffff” tekst=“000000” link=“0000ff” vlink=“0000ff” alink=“0000ff” onload=“window.defaultStatus=‘003’; return true”>
003
/body>

#

Igor Štromajer (Intima Virtual Base – www.intima.org) is an intimate mobile communicator, a multimedia artist. His oeuvre comprises nearly 150 projects presented at more than 100 exhibitions in 50 countries on all the continents. The two most widely known are Ballettikka Internettikka and Oppera Internettikka (1997-2011). He has received several awards for his work (in Moscow, Hamburg, Dresden, Belfort, Madrid and Maribor), and his projects form part of the permanent collections of prestigious art institutions, among them Le Centre National d’Art et de Culture Georges Pompidou – Musee National d’Art Moderne in Paris, France, the Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia in Madrid, Spain, the Moderna Galerija in Ljubljana, Slovenia, the Computerfinearts Gallery – net and media art collection, in New York, USA and the Maribor Art Gallery, Slovenia. His multimedia projects research emotional tactics, and intimate political guerrilla and traumatic low-tech communication strategies. As a guest artist he lectures at universities and contemporary art institutes in Europe, North and Latin America, and Asia.

Radio Študent 89,3 MHz / RKHV #intervju / 25 min
- torek, 14. junija 2011 ob 18:08
www.radiostudent.si/article.php?sid=28150

#

(in Slovenian language)

If one can create art, one can also delete it.
Memory is there to deceive.

www.intima.org/expunction

Number of deleted art works: 37
Number of deleted files: 3.288
Amount of deleted files: 101.72 MB

- Deletion frequency: one (1) net art work per day
- Started: 11 May 2011
- Duration: 37 days (last project deleted on 16 June 2011)
- Subject: net art works by Igor Štromajer, created from 2007 to 1996, were being deleted, erased from the original www.intima.org server, forever

[Flickr] 451 Expunction DEL NET ART Screenshots

Deleted Net Art Works:

37. [Bonus Deletion: Wap Art] wap.sonnet 2000

36. 0.HTML 1996
35. interno/inferno 1996
34. e/motion HELP 1997
33. re:volution 1997
32. re:ligion 1997
31. re:di/vision 1997
30. b.ALT.ica 1998
29. zvrst.3 1999
28. gsm.art 1999
27. Drama.Body.Machine 1999
26. unfortunately, 180.north – gps art 2000
25. what was he thinking about? berlin? praha? ljubljana? skopje? 2000
24. sm.N – Sprinkling Menstrual Navigator 2000
23. “she raped me!” 2000
22. every time i B14 return from moscow – i cry 2000
21. [ i want to share you - what are you doing to me? ] 2001
20. they learned this intimacy, however, meditating on the house 2001
19. SY.SMN – SeeYou.SeeMeNot 2002
18. MomEnt.16 2002
17. iv_ana 2002
16. T_rauma 2003
15. BodySoundNet – BSN.F1 2002
14. S.HTML security 2003
13. art ?* life 2003
12. We Finns, we don’t use chains 2003
11. cgi-bin/search.pl 2003
10. zero/0 tolerance 2003
09. BerlinaGain_TWO 2004
08. Overcoming Political Anxiety 2004
07. wPack 2004
06. ICH BIN IM DEZEMBER IDIOTISCH EROTISCH 2005
05. State of Emergency 2005
04. XTC-03 2005
03. I am SoftWare 2005
02. MAATI 2006
01. InterVent 2007

00. Debates | Archiving

#

[video] www.intima.org/art-life

Igor Štromajer, 2011

Photo: BI Part One, Kapelica Gallery, Ljubljana, 28 March 2001.
Cheers!
www.intima.org/bi

The ultimate Ballettikka Internettikka
by Igor Štromajer & Brane Zorman

November 2011
www.intima.org/bi/a
[10 years: 2001-2011]

Official proposal for the Ballettikka Internettikka Antarcttikka Mission Patch.

Our robot spent the whole night (12 hours) in a small freezing compartment (set on -17°C) of the refrigerator – and survived!

Testing our robot in a refrigerator.

+ Flickr Photo Set
+ Recent/updated info/studies on preparations: Facebook Photo Album

Antarctoforming of a valey, river basin, mountain, or other body is the process of deliberately modifying its surface topography, temperature or ecology to be similar to those of Antarctica.
(the banks of the Elbe river near Hamburg; before and after)

#

Ljubezen brez milosti

Predstavitev dela intimnega mobilnega komunikatorja, intermedijskega umetnika Igorja Štromajerja

Trubarjeva hiša literature, Ljubljana (vhod: Stritarjeva 7)
Torek, 8. marca 2011 ob 18h

www.intima.org
www.trubarjevahisaliterature.si

Igor Štromajer bo v Trubarjevi hiši literature predstavil svoje intermedijske umetniške projekte, s poudarkom na uporabi računalniškega jezika, kode, kot umetniškega izraznega sredstva. Koda je edini jezik, ki je izvršljiv, eksekutabilen, pravi Alexander R. Galloway. Stori natančno tisto, kar reče. S tega stališča gre za unikaten in do popolnosti izdelan umetni jezik, ki je pravzaprav namenjen strojem, oz. sporazumevanju med človekom in strojem, še posebej za izmenjavo informacij med stroji samimi, ne pa za komunikacijo med ljudmi.

“Izkušnja s kodo ni virtualna, temveč telesna, kot je telesno tudi vsako srečanje z informacijo, navodilom, ukazom, strojem. Stroji uživajo in so zelo lepi. Ob dotiku s kodo in strojem, postanejo lepi tudi ljudje. Zato jih neizmerno ljubim. Ko slišim za lepoto, zagrabim za revolver.”
(Igor Štromajer)

Igor Štromajer (www.intima.org, 1967) je diplomiral na Akademiji za gledališče, radio, film in televizijo v Ljubljani. Je medmrežni umetnik in intimni mobilni komunikator z udeležbo na najrazličnejših festivalih in razstavah doma in v tujini. Živi v Ljubljani, kjer je tudi njegova delovna baza, ustvarja pa doma in po vsem svetu. V njegov opus spada več kot šestdeset projektov, ki so bili razstavljeni na več kot stotih razstavah v petdesetih državah po vsem svetu. Med najpomembnejše spadajo Ballettikka in Oppera Internettikka (1998–2009; soavtor Brane Zorman), Problemarket – Borza problemov (2001–2009; soavtor Janez Janša), wPack (2004), Razpršilni menstrualni navigator (2000) in 0.HTML (1996). Njegove projekte v svojih stalnih zbirkah hranijo različne umetnostne institucije, med drugimi Le Centre national d’art et de Culture Georges Pompidou, Musee national d’art moderne v Parizu, Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia v Madridu, Computerfinearts Gallery v New Yorku, Hamburger Kunsthalle v Hamburgu, Moderna galerija v Ljubljani in Umetnostna galerija v Mariboru. Kot gostujoči umetnik predava na univerzah in institutih za sodobno umetnost v Evropi, Severni in Latinski Ameriki ter Aziji. Za svoje delo je prejel številne mednarodne in domače nagrade in priznanja.

L>P – Collection : L>P – 1ère édition – janvier 2011
Questions Théoriques, Paris, France

[comprend: Igor Štromajer]

Le net art − la création artistique par et pour Internet − rejoint depuis quelques années les collections des musées, posant de nouvelles et complexes questions de conservation et d’exposition. D’une part, les matériaux numériques de ces oeuvres sont fragiles ; d’autre part, le déploiement complet de leur dispositif suppose qu’elles soient en ligne et activées par leurs visiteurs.
Il faut donc tenir compte à la fois de la matérialité particulière des oeuvres et de la façon dont la conservation dialogue avec les autres fonctions du musée. Anne Laforet présente et interroge les différentes stratégies de conservation expérimentées par les musées, les archives, les artistes, etc.: documentation, émulation, migration, partition, ré-interprétation, auto-archivage, archivage automatique… et en tire la proposition d’une conservation hybride, celle du «musée archéologique».

Sommaire

Introduction 5

I. L’objet d’étude « net art » dans la perspective de la conservation

1. Net art et définitions 11
2. Matérialité des oeuvres 18
3. Caractéristiques socio-techniques 28
4. Net art et notation 38
5. Délimitation de l’oeuvre de net art 42

II. Conservation et accessibilité

6. La conservation comme consensus historique 47
7. La conservation et les autres fonctions du musée 51
8. Conservation et informatique 82
9. Valeur 90

III. Stratégies de conservation : analyses de cas

10. Médias variables 104
11. La conservation par défaut 120
12. Net artistes et stratégies de conservation 127
13. Les oeuvres de net art et le dépôt légal d’Internet à la BNF 141
14. Musée archéologique 151

Conclusion 163
Glossaire 167
Bibliographie 173
Table des matières 181

+ YouTube version

Štromajer did not produce any art. The only artistic value of his action is the absence of art. Therefore, the artist  performed an artistic action by not performing any artistic action at all. His basic mission is not to do art. He did an art work by not doing it. The most radical artistic action an artist can do today, is the one he/she does not do.

The action Does what it says. was not a part of the transmediale.11 programme, but was an illegal/guerrilla action, announced in advance. To experience the action you needed a valid transmediale.11 pass for the 4th of February (day pass, festival pass, kombi pass, accreditation).

Title: Does what it says.
Location: Haus der Kulturen der Welt (John-Foster-Dulles-Allee 10, Berlin)
Time: 4 February 2011 at 8 pm
Performer: Igor Štromajer (Ljubljana / Hamburg)
Producer: Intima Virtual Base, 2011

Štromajer’s official appearances at the transmediale festival: 1999 (b.ALT.ica, now part of the permanent collection of the Moderna galerija Ljubljana – Museum of Modern Art), 2001 (Sprinkling Menstrual Navigator; now part of the permanent collection of Le Centre national d’art et de Culture Georges Pompidou – Musée national d’art moderne in Paris), 2008 (Silent Cell Network: Looping Hooman Sharifi).

“We shall fight them on the beaches. We shall fight them on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender.”
(W. Churchill)

# all images: Google Earth & Intima

+ update:

This is not an artwork. It is just the only thing which remained after the non-action. It shows a part of the HKW wall (#tm11 HacKaWay exhibition space). The area of the wall (shown on this image) has approx. 6 to 7 square meters. There was a strong light coming from the Main Foyer / Open Zone on the right-hand side. All the rest was normal.
Does what it says.

Stuttgarter Filmwinter Festival /  Wand 5
Saturday, 22 January 2011 at 5:30 PM

Author: Annie Abrahams
Performers: Annie Abrahams, Nicolas Frespech, Igor Štromajer

ON-LINE: Live Internet broadcast at bram.org/huisclos/salon.html
OFF-LINE: Filmhaus, Friedrichstrasse 23a, Stuttgart, Germany

Screenshots: Cyril Thomas

# reference: Huis Clos / No Exit – On Translation by Annie Abrahams (24th Stuttgarter Filmwinter Festival winner; Expanded Media Award “Online/Offline”, January 2011, Stuttgart, Germany)

Interact
Revista online de arte, cultura e tecnologia, Lisboa, Portugal
# 17 (Secção:  Entrevista)

Em Outubro de 2010, o artista esloveno Igor Štromajer esteve em Portugal para colaborar enquanto artista e consultor no projecto “A História é Clandestina”. Aproveitando a sua presença, Jorge Martins Rosa e Margarida Carvalho entrevistaram-no para a Interact.

© Centro de Estudos de Comunicação e Linguagens, Lisboa, Portugal