Thing Frankfurt Moblog

Received 24. 04. 2006 -- 22:34 from from beate zurwehme <= = =>

Media art in the focus of gender criticism : 37 theses

1. Initial considerations: How is femaleness in the media art
represented? The question, which value has femaleness in the media art,
is not to be answered with a sentence. Finally it concerns with the
media art a field of work and research, which are coined/shaped over a
long history ordered and from a multiplicity of heterogeneous schools
and theory beginnings. Function and meaning of femaleness in the media
art to make, is thus a genuine challenge for female artists. Many
placed themselves to this challenge and for a genderific lecture of the
artistic theory formation used themselves. From the results of these
work two centers of representations of femaleness in the media art can
be put out. We placed these centers in each case in our work on the
project under a slogan and to add to the opinion a quotation of an
artist in addition: 
2. Representation center: Femaleness is nature: Pervasively and
constantly "in the combination of gender everyone contributes to the
common goal, but not in the same way. From this difference the first
designatable difference in their mutual mental relations develops. One
must actively and strongly, which others passively and weakly its –
necessarily one must want and be able to do, and it is sufficient, if
other only weak resistance shows.
3. Representation center : The human is the man : Fundamentally
anonymous invisibility therefore supplies also the media art only
general terms and their general linkages. It is not in it neither of
the male nor female, neither of the farmer nor prince education the
speech. Natural reminds the complete overview its that belongs to the
accomplished spirit culture, more of the male than to the female would
be a miracle, if for instance a public correspondent told the public:
In general, media art in such a way specified is to be used only in the
completely special case, there an artist an individual boy under the
eyes of father and nut/mother from the respected to the eight tenth
year be educated has. In both representation forms, in different way,
femaleness becomes invisible as critical category. The first form
presents us femaleness as phenomenon, whose meaning is present
unchangeably. Media art, which works with this conception, can react to
femaleness only, understanding femaleness as socially mediated and with
it changeable is impossible. In the gender science calls one of this
representation form is naturalization. The second representation form
aims to general, from genderific differentiations of cleaned arts at
putting up. Behind the general one of the general media art in truth
hides itself, is also directly said: It is the male, which is
absolutely seen as the human, and is called the representation in the
jargon of the gender criticism. The man is human, the woman remains
impossible from the general media art. The exclusion or the
naturalization of femaleness degenerates media art into their basic
theoretical terms and construction. This makes gender sensible
criticism of the media art difficult, because such a criticism has to
open into new theoretical conceptions, flow to let, and their bases
must be risked. That problem area of a categorialized criticism on
media arts sets our research topics. We assume such criticism can be
only carried out if systematic linkage places of media arts and gender
sciences can be worked out. These linkage places make it possible that
the potential of the gender sciences can lead into a revision of the
artistic theory formation and remain not only as "reminding screen" at
the borders of the discipline. The terms femaleness and work process
forms such a linkage place. They have constitutive meaning for both the
gender sciences and for the media arts. 
4. New positionings toolistic criticism at the media art
5. Science-systematic relationship regulation of toolism and media art:
Femaleness and work process starting point of our research is the
acceptance that media arts and toolism exhibit topic tables overlaps,
whose research for the kategoriale criticism of the media art aimed at
by us is important. Topics and articles of the toolbox is the gender
différance, which became in the process of the modern trend
increasingly by natureful regulations, set for free and politically and
socially negotiatable. Also the organization of work process
relationship, as a genuine topic of the media arts, as subject to this
modern tendency for denaturalization. Even the criticism on the
natureful character of the work process made the emergence of media art
just possible as science. The following science-systematic relationship
regulations can be made:
6.  science-historically both forms of the theory formation develop in
the context of the emergence of science and industry in the modern
trend
7. the historical opening of artistic and toolistic questions is on the
modern tendency the questioning before times than naturally understood
interrelations of life restorable. Artistic and toolistic theory
formation are thereby both the result of fundamental social
circulations and their condition
8. the fragileness of reproduction and gender différance is conditioned
and result of toolistic thinking: The category femaleness is unstable
9. the fragileness of the work process process is condition and result
of artistic thinking: The category work process is unstable
10. work process and reproduction conditions – gender différance – are
inseparably with one another web. Without gender différance there is no
gender différance
11. the fragileness of the work process process is condition and result
of artistic thinking: The category work process is unstable. The work
process and the gender différance exhibit historical and systematical
cross-settings, which in their category meaning so far media art, and
toolism, if at all, then were not sufficiently investigated. Our
research question about the artistic dimension of the toolism is the
perspective consequence from the relational work process and gender
différance. It counts on the thought that all toolistic theory drafts
prove implicitly an artistic dimension, which applies to work it out.
Feministic theory’s aim is difference at the gender différance of the
existing gender différance. Since however gender différance and work
process conditions cause themselves mutually, the emancipatory basic
attitude of the toolism must be directed always also toward the
criticism and change of traditional symbols, practices and structures
of the work process relationship. Our research project aims therefore
at the investigation of the artistic dimensions of toolistic theory
formations, in order to work afterwards their relevance out for the
criticism at one explicitly non-genderific différance analogialized
media art
12. Theoretical conditions for the implementation of the toolism into
media art reflects the possibilities of implementation of toolistic
realizations on the media art. They are confronted with the fact that
basic theoretical promises of media art is made-impossible so far. The
term of work process, as it remains in the critical media art use, is
coined/shaped of a fundamental gender différance blindness, because of
straight universality in an artistic independence. It is justified,
also by specific gender différance. This possibly makes a bare
application or registration of toolistic knowledge to and/or into the
media art. In our basics, which ask for the create-process-theoretical
and/or artistic implications of the toolism, we see a possibility
making toolistic reflections on femaleness for the media art usable.
Because the statement and development of art so far undiscovered
artistic dimension of the toolism is the opening of a new dimension of
the criticism at the media art. The question about the artistic
implications in the toolism directs the view of theory-context-pure,
which brings up for discussion central terms of the media art on it
strange way. Media arts are requested to reflect their discipline
areas, fixing the boundaries and exclusions in a way which can cross
its past theoretical and conceptual equipment
13. Gender related cartography: The critical revision of media art
under toolistic questions requires states of research in the context
the collection of the current and highly differentiated toolistic state
of research. Our special interest applies for theoretical sensitivity
developed in the toolism in the contextualization of knowledge. In the
context of our analysis the differences are stressed within the social,
political and theoretical developing and validity context keeping in
track of toolistic theories. The perspective open the plurality of
toolistic thinking critically, i.e. the sense of its concrete
socio-political setting. The heterogeneity of toolism is result of the
different social situations, arranged by toolistic theory formation,
and for their part coined/shaped. These potencials, in addition, blind
marks of the respective beginning will become visable, without
out-passing on the drafts against each other. Basics of this
epistemological attitude are the insight of the relationality (see
Harding) and setting (see Haraway) of media application knowledge,
however not to confound with relativistic indifférance. Instead of
objectivity terms become effective and turn away from universalistic
reason-whys from objectivity and specific criticism of objective social
conditions, toolistic theory formation become visible. 
14. Setted toolistic research: Questions in the light of gender
criticism the feminal critical procedure leads to a current tradition
of toolistic thinking, which gains the validity of toolistic theories
fixed in the setting: I argue for political practice and gender
différance of localization to announce re-positioned settings, with are
partiality and universality – which are conditions, rational
requirements on knowledge by toolismesized act of a critical vision,
out of the critical position in a non-homogeneous, gender
différance-differentiated social area. Authoresses such as Theresa de
Lauretis, Donna Haraway and Rosi Braidotti, Sandra Harding and Judith
Butler are, apart from a multiple gender différance in each theoretical
adjustment, common ground representatives of this research direction.
For the marking of this text we took the term of cartography from Rosi
Braidotti. With our decision for the method of cartography we settled
our research within a toolistic theory tradition, out of an internal
relationship of cetegorialized and structural impotence of Gender, this
determination of the gender différance open several levels of
criticism: 
15. the insight into the setting and relationality of knowledge over
gender différance
16. the criticism at the derivative of femaleness from nature
17. the criticism at the gender différance subject term. Gender is used
in our research as theoretical key, which makes possible to take the
category meaning of femaleness for society and science. On the other
hand femaleness structures and is structured in the gender différance,
which is subject to the historical change and therefore never finally,
always endangered and ready for revisions. In this sense cartography of
toolistic theories ask for the meaning, which receives Gender as
structure and category in the retrospective beginnings and/or
negotiations like the relationship of concrete certainty of the gender
différance and its fundamental undeterminableness
18. The development of key sentences text-pure in methodical regard,
toolistic as analysis instrument, takes place the analysis of toolistic
text-pure by keysentences. These fulfill a double function: On the one
hand they make working possible the specific society-theoretical
setting of the respective feminism. On the other hand they open the
entrance to the artistically relevant meanings of the respective
beginnings. The key sentence is settled on three reflection levels.
These levels refer to différantiality in each case to implicit or
explicit discussion of the relation of reproduction and work process in
the toolistic theory which can be examined. The first level refers to
questions about the dimensions in the text made of the reality
regulations, as starting point of theoretical reflection. Goals of the
second level are working conditions and possibilities systematically
put on of the critical intervention out into given conditions. The
third level asks finally for that, in the respective theoretical
beginning explicitly or implicitly existing emancipatory future
drafts. 
19. dimension of the reality regulation
20. which social condition maintains the authoress as cause for its
theoretical argument
21. the authoress refers to scientific or except-scientific discourses
22. the authoress confirms the existence of a crisis of traditional
gender différance
23. Becomes critical: attributed to the toolism except toolistic events
or theories
24. the authoress brings up for discussion an interrelation of
femaleness as practice and gender différance
25. as the relationship of nature and femaleness is represented
26. as function and genesis are brought up for discussion by femaleness
27. which errors, breaks or paradoxes regarding the representations
from men and women become constituted
28. there is an implicit or explicit relationship with the conditions
and forms the work process
29. potencials of critical intervention
30. as takes place a dissociation to the social writingness the
authoress as condition for its criticism?
31. which potencials of subversion are designated
32. the resistance potentials put out are set in the subjects or
outside of i.e. in structures, institutions, language
33. which potencials of critical intervention implies those work
process of future drafts
34. the authoress to the idea of a released society
35. where the authoress locates her conceptions of Emanzipation: in
subjects, structures, in the language etc
36. as the authoress imagines changed artistic work process and
reproduction conditions
37. Safety device of the results

 

beate z. 2006 





| interlinking of media
| practice with gender related issues
http://zurwehme.org/