[notes on
the hypothetical and subversive nature of an ecological media art]
Critical Art. There seem to be different ways of looking at art and
critique. First of all let's say in the following texts the term art
will stand as a 'pars pro toto' for culture. But then again let's see
if that can hold. Anyway, considering art and critique, we can at least
Paul Rabinow: Anthropos Today: Reflections on Modern Equipment (2003)
http://burundi.sk/monoskop/log/?p=300
Paul Rabinow: Marking time. On the Anthropology of the Contemporary (2007)
http://burundi.sk/monoskop/log/?p=298
Felix Guattuari: Three Ecologies.
http://www.iaacblog.com/2008-2009/term03/rs2/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/
A while ago, it seemed obvious that actually the whole lost idea of poetika (descriptive, never prescriptive), could be taken up, just to make temporarily explicit what 'new' means within a contemporary context. (see Rabinow for further comments on the notion contemporary).
In the Gutenberg Project you will only find Locus Solus:
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/19149
There you can read:
"Pour mettre en saisissant relief l'extrême perfection de ses pronostics, Canterel imagina un appareil capable de créer une oeuvre esthétique due aux seuls efforts combinés du soleil et du vent."
In Impressions d'Afrique (in my 2005 Flammarion edition, pp. 116-117) though:
Apart from the original mentioning of l'Horloge à Vent in Raymond Roussel's 'Impressions d'Afrique', a lot of artists and writers, philosophers or just creatively thinking people like you and me, were thinking about time. Here follow some examples...
Mainly we are following the following thread:
theoretically
- ecology as a subversive attitude (now let's define ecology and subversivity better)
- media technology as a subversive attitude (and essentially experimental)
methodologically