<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Dante-Gabryell Monson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dante.monson@gmail.com">dante.monson@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername"></b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:el@riseup.net" target="_blank">el@riseup.net</a>></span><br>Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 11:36 PM<br>
Subject: <nettime> cyberpunk is dead<br>To: nettime <<a href="mailto:nettime-l@kein.org" target="_blank">nettime-l@kein.org</a>><br><br><br><br>
notes on the development of the so-called social web and the role of<br>
cyberpunks inside this process<br>
<br>
<a href="http://el.blogsport.de/2011/03/28/cyberpunk-is-dead/" target="_blank">http://el.blogsport.de/2011/03/28/cyberpunk-is-dead/</a><br>
<br>
The weakness of cyberpunk was its virtuality, being a complex of<br>
imagery mostly used by writers in fiction, by bloggers in egomany and<br>
by journalists in, well, �journalism�. What was missing, is a<br>
cyberpunk realism, in the sense of an aesthetics that relates to and<br>
occupies something else than the realms of literature. From this<br>
viewpoint, real existing cyberpunk was the adaption of cyberpunk as a<br>
shiny static representation for what was left of the dynamic of<br>
electronic pioneers, the early computer hackers, and their process of<br>
dissolving their avant-guard status in time and into mass. Comparable<br>
to the punks that were the mass reproduction of the avantgarde<br>
activists before them. The name of this historic forerunner of punk<br>
referred to here, was the Situationist International, a 1950s and 60s<br>
avantgarde group (Read their texts and Greil Marcus� history book).<br>
Just like the situationists worked at the fissure between literature<br>
and street, the early real-existing cyberpunks worked at the fissure<br>
of literature and cyberspace. The cyberpunk literature served its<br>
purpose to provide aesthetic naratives some time ago, and in the<br>
ensuing process the real-existing groups that were trying to adapt<br>
these clich�s turned into clich�s for others to adapt to. A virtual<br>
movement.<br>
<br>
What constitutes the weakness of the aesthetic force, results in the<br>
weakness as a material force: Cyberpunk made its way on the market of<br>
despiritualized ideas, as the shopping good for the masses. Ever tried<br>
to squat something in Secondlife, like offline punks would do?<br>
Technically impossible. In the process to solve this dilemma,<br>
cyberpunk had to give up integral parts to be able to work on social<br>
topics without a realism and therefore without a political strategy.<br>
Which led to a certain aligning with the social and economical facts<br>
in the process of trying to gain a social impact through the cyberpunk<br>
models. Wondering why Wikileaks doesn�t have a wiki anymore? Because<br>
cypherpunk (with ph in this case, refering to those fractions of<br>
cyberpunk that focuse on encryption) was either mass movement or<br>
political tactics of an avant-guard. In deciding to focus on political<br>
manouvres, an open publishing model is not fitting anymore. Contrary<br>
to this, CHAN-culture (imageboards, fast communication channels) and<br>
the ANON-meme (crowd orientated cyber actions) try different ways in<br>
waging real mass-based cyberwars, they reach this point by being more<br>
punk again, punk as in: deviant subculture that parents are afraid of.<br>
<br>
Still inside this historic #fail of cyberpunk, there were hacker<br>
groups and cyberpunk collectives not only representing the literary<br>
images of cyberpunk, but trying to do cyberpunk realism. In the sense<br>
of picking up the punk culture and porting it to the cyberspace.<br>
Working with images and text in the new media, taking it back to the<br>
roots of post-war pre-punk movements, creating free tools, cultural<br>
gifts and mixed artworks, like all the minds from Guy Debord (and many<br>
before), to John Lyndon, to Allen Ginsberg, to Wau Holland, had shown<br>
the way. But working with punk attitude in the 90s and the Zeros<br>
proofs to be a delicate business. Now we can see the last phase of<br>
cyberpunk, the virus has spread, it has dissolved into one of its more<br>
justified aims: the dissolution in non-elitist mass approaches. If you<br>
search today for crazy netpunks, doing the mix with images, ideas and<br>
slogans, fighting cyberwars against scientology and other creepy<br>
institutions, you don�t come to the avantgarde collectives, you go the<br>
chans.<br>
<br>
These collectives had been reaching out to you, flooding you with<br>
texts, movies, songs, images, a vast wave of media. Working all the<br>
time under fake identities to give away anticommodities of a little<br>
countercultureindustry. With that fulfilling the idealist idea of the<br>
free and useful citizens. Only through the nature of these efforts<br>
being collective and collaborative, this theater of autonomy could be<br>
kept running, serving as a good example to all little self-managed<br>
projects out there that with a little circle of friends you can reach<br>
everything you can imagine. Nothing else though. So when the<br>
participants got tired of the shooting in the dark acceleration these<br>
collective products had taken, all the releases, all the<br>
administration, all the fuzz, it went down the spiral of<br>
individualization: moving to a aggregation of solo blogs, then moving<br>
on to the short notes of twitter, a medium only to well fitting for<br>
the self-advertisement. After the autonomous text production of the<br>
last two decades, we face a shift to short notes and images. The DIY<br>
music scene remains a bit unaffected by this, since the hope to become<br>
a money earning musician is still a more powerful cultureindustrial<br>
meme than the one of a writer actually getting paid. The recent<br>
shifting from myspace to facebook shows although, that<br>
everyone-is-an-artist wasn�t a powerful enough idea. It had to be<br>
self-representation, mini-blogging, star-cult, focus on images and<br>
other spectacular media instead of text: The hyperindividualist<br>
self-representation platform of facebook suited the masses best.<br>
<br>
For large parts, this big network is filled with representations of<br>
static faces. Faces, that are amongst our most subliminal ways of<br>
communicating, become our fastest and most plain way of making a<br>
statement. Update profile picture, comment, like, like back, update<br>
again. The collectivization of communication (lat. communicare = do<br>
sth. together) failed, in fact this means the failure of mass art.<br>
Todays market of representations means that we exchange images that<br>
are valued by statements without consequence, statements whose only<br>
value is the one of attention, something we have learned from the<br>
advertising process, which has become the key process of culture. This<br>
cultural praxis fails to find a history of the human faces. The faces<br>
tried to break the boundaries of word and image, they were processes<br>
of conscious creation of speaking images for the feelings that words<br>
fail to describe. The times of boredom that everyone wanders now,<br>
through images that don�t form related stories anymore, are a result<br>
of loosing our dream of creating non-static post-representative<br>
playful expressions. To associate the fragile idea of friendship still<br>
with the formalized and online media based networks of �friends� is<br>
the dramatic deception that covers this loss. It was the fragile<br>
nature of friendship itself that was lost, that what made<br>
communication between friends comfortable. The need to be near to<br>
others and to be free on ones own at the same time, was dissolved into<br>
the mode of being present to each other only through distance. The<br>
tools of social media cover up the failure of the social itself.<br>
Giving up the idea of the possibility of social relations in which one<br>
can give each other the comfort of being together and granting all<br>
freedom the same time, is a failure whose results may be not so easy<br>
to cover. This is not a judgment about the idea of mass communication<br>
per se, but about the idea and modes of social media networks.<br>
<br>
Coming back to the crews for once: the game of creating a strong<br>
collective representation that immediately represents itself was<br>
programmed to fail in a society that only uses representations to mark<br>
the value of exchangeability. The punk image of a cybergang that<br>
somehow evades the mainstream norms and holds up the, now<br>
conservative, ideas of elite and underground was the joke that had to<br>
choke itself. It was working with the idea of an everchanging<br>
collective project that would remain the same all the time in order to<br>
avoid to spoil the fans. This planned contradiction of the ultimate<br>
hype was not scandalous anymore when the whole web turned to the<br>
noncontradictive targeted creation of hypes. What these groups had<br>
caricatured since decades was only about to become the online model of<br>
creating static ideas that represent dynamic change. The cybergangs<br>
were constructed never to end, because as a project, a channel, it was<br>
not aiming for something and therefore it couldn�t fail. Other media<br>
collectives of today, opposed to this, want to start because they<br>
realize that pictured dynamics has to be the key feature of a<br>
successful industrial media product.<br>
<br>
So from this learning process we gain the perspective of boringness.<br>
Being a progressive participant of cyberspace today is not about being<br>
elite and surfing the most underground hubs. It�s about surfing on the<br>
top of it all, on the big normal junkyard of human creation and<br>
picking up the inspirations together. It�s also about reading a book<br>
again, following an author�s thought through 400 pages instead of 140<br>
letters. And also in the same sense: doing a website again, a static<br>
thing that waits for hundreds to come by, just like a book in the<br>
library, instead of giving daily updates to attract some other<br>
thousands that need their daily fix of info. Some books still are more<br>
actual than the daily news reports (when these were still existing,<br>
now the news must be updated all the time). And maybe the lost dreams<br>
in these books need an actualisation through a website, instead of<br>
just a quotation in the fast streams of actualities. It�s about<br>
refusing the entertainment, it�s about finding enlightment in thought<br>
processes themselves and not in what forms they have been given for<br>
representation. It�s about picking up something dead and giving it<br>
life instead of living the perpetual death of the bubble of statements.<br>
<br>
The non-conformism of today is a real challenge: To deal with<br>
something beyond the instantaneous satisfaction of a pseudodynamic<br>
static image. The progressive illustrations, thoughts, projects and<br>
processes will need you to stumble over them, to search for them, to<br>
look closely or even stare at them (not like you stared at the TV<br>
since 50 years ago, at youtube since 5 years ago). It needs you to<br>
stop worrying about the central hub, website or plattform that you<br>
feel like home in. It needs you to stop worrying about any rss-feeds<br>
that you only used to feed your identity out of angst in this process<br>
of identification, representation and individualisation. Not to learn<br>
even more exiting ways of being alone � you can easily find those in<br>
the entertainment industry � but to pick up again the idea of<br>
communication. Surf around, take off from time to time and play with<br>
what and whom you might find.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
# �distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission<br>
# �<nettime> �is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,<br>
# �collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets<br>
# �more info: <a href="http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l" target="_blank">http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l</a><br>
# �archive: <a href="http://www.nettime.org" target="_blank">http://www.nettime.org</a> contact: <a href="mailto:nettime@kein.org" target="_blank">nettime@kein.org</a><br>
</div><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>� - <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br>
<br>Connect: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.ning.com" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.ning.com</a>; Discuss: <a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>
<br>Updates: <a href="http://del.icio.us/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://del.icio.us/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br>
<br><br><br><br><br>