sorry, until now this article is only available in german!
An artistic research project in exhibition format, curated by Naveau (FR / AT)
More information here…
What do Google and Wikipedia have in common? Well, if we have a question or are not sure, then we go online and type in the words or even whole sentences in our computer. Algorithms and related computer services are responsible for ensuring that we get results, in our search for knowledge and truth that are based on contributions and regulation of innumerable people. However, we don´t know the algorithms behind it, or let´s say the intentions of Google and why we just read this and get to see what we get. How can I understand these selection systems that are deciding for me what I can see? Who says what should be where? As we know that it´s actually people like you and me sitting behind their computers that are actively shaping knowledge when writing their own websites and blogs, set posts, rate and vote, and we trust them in the same way as we trust the person around us we have confidence in? Who or what tells me what I can believe? Or in other words: the Internet as a source of knowledge, or rather as a community of faith? And if such a person like an Internet Atheist exists, can one survive? Continue reading
After going into the details of the book Bastard Culture! – How User Participation Transforms Cultural Production by Mirko Tobias Schäfer (he published it in 2011), I knew that I had to invite Mirko to take part at the conference MutaMorphosis – Tribute to Uncertainty in Prague last December under the topic of “Limits of Collaboration” as an already accepted panel suggestion. Beside artistic and curatorial approaches I wanted to bring in a critical approach on a broader level when it comes to the topic of the so-called social media structures that we (in Europe and the western world more or less) are all in. How are we intentionally or unintentionally, voluntarily or involuntarily learning and perceiving interaction, communication, participation in a digital culture that is mainly characterized by re-using existing software and interfaces that are already developed and provided and lead us into the paths of guided participation? In addition Mirko was questioning social platforms as emerging public spheres that are pretending to be oriented toward the public’s interest while corporately owned and being geared to economics.
In the beginning of October 2011, I took part in a conference in Sao Paulo, where the „Possible Futures” of archives have been discussed (initiated by Giselle Beiguelman and Ana Magalhães / both University of Sao Paulo in cooperation with Ars Electronica Linz). I experimented in theory on the topic of the internet as a kind of „Über-archive“, confronted Encyclopaedia Britannica with Wikipedia on the topic of Knowledge transfer and was asking about the power of images and illustrations as well as the challenges and borders concerning participation today.
Ars Wild Card
Participatory art often is represented by aesthetics of repetition. Forms and formats, colours, proportions, amount of input that can be contributed,… is usually defined and given by the artists and is constructing a framework in which the audience / the user / a contributing person can interact. The artists leave it up to the audience, that is generating a (huge amount of) input to the artwork mainly by coincidence and mostly with a playful interest.
This is the way i would also like to describe some of the works from Yayoi Kusama, for me the most well known Japanese artist of the post war period. Born in 1929 in Matsumoto, prefecture Nagano, the artist achieved internationally high profile when doing the unauthorized happening „Narcissus Garden“at Venice Biennial. Continue reading
A Communication & Workshop Tool developed by Hideaki Ogawa (JP/AT), Emiko Ogawa (JP/AT), Manuela Naveau (AT) (Ars Electronica Linz, Austria)
Ars Wild Card is an iPhone application developed by Ars Electronica Linz as a participative workshop tool for exhibitions and interventions in public spaces. This application and QR codes assigned to each exhibited project make it possible to generate content about the works on display in a frame with which installation visitors can photograph the works and comment on them right on site. The application also permits personal impressions to be collected via online sharing at the website awc.aec.at. Plus, there’s the option of posting the substantively framed and commented images on all popular social media sites. At the exhibition venue, Ars Wild Cards printed out as postcards constitute a constantly growing collection of snapshots of the exhibition taken by visitors on site or via online participation. Visitors can also take printed-out Ars Wild Card postcards home with them.
I am sitting at Brucknerhaus Linz at Ars Electronica Festival 2011 and following the presentations of Public Square Squared. One of the presentations have been done by Tan Siok Siok and she presented her videowork www.twittamentary.com. She also mentioned:
Crowdsourcing is ike a real time jazz ensenble, that is improvising all the time: actually things end up being included, that have not being planned before. And it´s hard work but rewardable…
So it is. Isn´t it? Does something called “the quality of a collective” exist? if so, what is the additional value apart from that?
I have already doubts about myself. Most evenings i am sitting with my laptop on my couch. I am nearly never online on Facebook, i have never twittered.
born 1933, a pioneer in net art and one of the first artists who worked collaboratively…
The world´s first collaborative sentence
It´s interesting that already in 1994, when Net Art just started, Douglas Davis already recognized that partizipation over the Internet provides new artistic experiences. Douglas, who experimented with video in the early 60ies and 70ies (please see also his telematic work The Last Nine Minutes, that he presented on 1977 already at documenta/Kassel) mentioned:
Immediately I thought of the keyboard, the means of interaction allowed by the Web but not by video or flat art. The big difference between broadcast TV and the Web is the keyboard: that people can say anything with it, they have full expressive capacity. This means a more intense and personal link could occur between me and the audience – and why not get the whole world together to write a sentence? 
 Douglas Davis, interviewed byTilman Baumgaertel