<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Automatic Update at MoMA: Part One of Two</title>
	<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/</link>
	<description>As relevant as Eric Fischl. New York art news, reviews and gossip.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 22:04:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: _Meh_</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9645</link>
		<author>_Meh_</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:14:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9645</guid>
					<description>Uh, maybe she just wanted a catchy title. The screenshot you offer up is for Windows XP, while the show was about old technology. 

Sure, it was a small show, but that probably has more to do with the space Barbara was given rather than her intentions or aspirations. In the end, people were able to see a few unique things from MoMA's collection -- why does a show even need a "thread"? People make their own meaning by seeing the work. Curators comments are almost always ridiculous and pretentious and should be routinely ignored.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uh, maybe she just wanted a catchy title. The screenshot you offer up is for Windows XP, while the show was about old technology. </p>
<p>Sure, it was a small show, but that probably has more to do with the space Barbara was given rather than her intentions or aspirations. In the end, people were able to see a few unique things from MoMA&#8217;s collection &#8212; why does a show even need a &#8220;thread&#8221;? People make their own meaning by seeing the work. Curators comments are almost always ridiculous and pretentious and should be routinely ignored.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jjkemp</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9646</link>
		<author>jjkemp</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:34:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9646</guid>
					<description>good review.  the most exciting part about the show was looking at the automatic update website before i went and saw anything.
when i made the trip to see the show, i asked four or five museum staff (like the information booth people) where the automatic update show was and not one had even heard of it.
once found, i was a bit disappointed.
look forward to part two.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good review.  the most exciting part about the show was looking at the automatic update website before i went and saw anything.<br />
when i made the trip to see the show, i asked four or five museum staff (like the information booth people) where the automatic update show was and not one had even heard of it.<br />
once found, i was a bit disappointed.<br />
look forward to part two.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Art Fag City</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9659</link>
		<author>Art Fag City</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:37:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9659</guid>
					<description>Meh: The show was actually about "new more mature work" made in the post dot com era.  The show doesn't need a thread if it's just a recent acquisitons/collections show, but that's not what it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Meh: The show was actually about &#8220;new more mature work&#8221; made in the post dot com era.  The show doesn&#8217;t need a thread if it&#8217;s just a recent acquisitons/collections show, but that&#8217;s not what it is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tom moody</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9662</link>
		<author>tom moody</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9662</guid>
					<description>Re: Barbara London's use of the "flat earth" metaphor, here's what Matt Taibbi said in the &lt;a href="http://www.nypress.com/print.cfm?content_id=12841" rel="nofollow"&gt;NY Press&lt;/a&gt; about Thomas Friedman's book The World Is Flat:

&#62;&#62;The book's genesis is a conversation Friedman has with Nandan Nilekani, the CEO of Infosys. Nilekani casually mutters to Friedman: "Tom, the playing field is being leveled." To you and me, an innocent throwaway phrase—the level playing field being, after all, one of the most oft-repeated stock ideas in the history of human interaction. Not to Friedman. Ten minutes after his talk with Nilekani, he is pitching a tent in his company van on the road back from the Infosys campus in Bangalore:

"As I left the Infosys campus that evening along the road back to Bangalore, I kept chewing on that phrase: 'The playing field is being leveled.'

"What Nandan is saying, I thought, is that the playing field is being flattened... Flattened? Flattened? My God, he's telling me the world is flat!"

This is like three pages into the book, and already the premise is totally fucked. Nilekani said level, not flat. The two concepts are completely different. Level is a qualitative idea that implies equality and competitive balance; flat is a physical, geographic concept that Friedman, remember, is openly contrasting-—ironically, as it were-—with Columbus's discovery that the world is round.

Except for one thing. The significance of Columbus's discovery was that on a round earth, humanity is more interconnected than on a flat one. On a round earth, the two most distant points are closer together than they are on a flat earth. But Friedman is going to spend the next 470 pages turning the "flat world" into a metaphor for global interconnectedness. Furthermore, he is specifically going to use the word round to describe the old, geographically isolated, unconnected world.

"Let me... share with you some of the encounters that led me to conclude that the world is no longer round," he says. He will literally travel backward in time, against the current of human knowledge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: Barbara London&#8217;s use of the &#8220;flat earth&#8221; metaphor, here&#8217;s what Matt Taibbi said in the <a href="http://www.nypress.com/print.cfm?content_id=12841" rel="nofollow">NY Press</a> about Thomas Friedman&#8217;s book The World Is Flat:</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;The book&#8217;s genesis is a conversation Friedman has with Nandan Nilekani, the CEO of Infosys. Nilekani casually mutters to Friedman: &#8220;Tom, the playing field is being leveled.&#8221; To you and me, an innocent throwaway phrase—the level playing field being, after all, one of the most oft-repeated stock ideas in the history of human interaction. Not to Friedman. Ten minutes after his talk with Nilekani, he is pitching a tent in his company van on the road back from the Infosys campus in Bangalore:</p>
<p>&#8220;As I left the Infosys campus that evening along the road back to Bangalore, I kept chewing on that phrase: &#8216;The playing field is being leveled.&#8217;</p>
<p>&#8220;What Nandan is saying, I thought, is that the playing field is being flattened&#8230; Flattened? Flattened? My God, he&#8217;s telling me the world is flat!&#8221;</p>
<p>This is like three pages into the book, and already the premise is totally fucked. Nilekani said level, not flat. The two concepts are completely different. Level is a qualitative idea that implies equality and competitive balance; flat is a physical, geographic concept that Friedman, remember, is openly contrasting-—ironically, as it were-—with Columbus&#8217;s discovery that the world is round.</p>
<p>Except for one thing. The significance of Columbus&#8217;s discovery was that on a round earth, humanity is more interconnected than on a flat one. On a round earth, the two most distant points are closer together than they are on a flat earth. But Friedman is going to spend the next 470 pages turning the &#8220;flat world&#8221; into a metaphor for global interconnectedness. Furthermore, he is specifically going to use the word round to describe the old, geographically isolated, unconnected world.</p>
<p>&#8220;Let me&#8230; share with you some of the encounters that led me to conclude that the world is no longer round,&#8221; he says. He will literally travel backward in time, against the current of human knowledge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9667</link>
		<author>Jon</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:44:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9667</guid>
					<description>Did you write about Automatic Update before? I feel like I/You/Someone else commented/read/discussed(?) somewhere (maybe Tom Moody's blog?)  about how much a couldn't stand their web design?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did you write about Automatic Update before? I feel like I/You/Someone else commented/read/discussed(?) somewhere (maybe Tom Moody&#8217;s blog?)  about how much a couldn&#8217;t stand their web design?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tom moody</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9697</link>
		<author>tom moody</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:32:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9697</guid>
					<description>That was &lt;a href="http://nastynets.com/?p=817" rel="nofollow"&gt;this discussion&lt;/a&gt; on Nasty Nets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That was <a href="http://nastynets.com/?p=817" rel="nofollow">this discussion</a> on Nasty Nets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: b.</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9748</link>
		<author>b.</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2007 17:06:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9748</guid>
					<description>...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chibi</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9801</link>
		<author>chibi</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 16:41:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9801</guid>
					<description>_Meh_ - Windows XP is old technology. It has been sadly replace by Windows Vista.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>_Meh_ - Windows XP is old technology. It has been sadly replace by Windows Vista.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: _Meh_</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9858</link>
		<author>_Meh_</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:59:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9858</guid>
					<description>True, the show was a little disappointing because it was so small, and though it might not have been a "recent acquisitons/collections show" many of the shows at MoMA tend to be "picks from the collection" with a fancy title. I would never trust any guard or entrance staff at any institution to know what's actually on display; sadly, few museums have understood that these people should be the most up-to-date on everything about the museum.  

Tom, you couldn't be more right with Friedman. He's an utter jackass who somehow has gained respectability with the dumber elements of the business and media worlds. Dave Rees nailed it long ago: http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/moustache_of_understanding.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>True, the show was a little disappointing because it was so small, and though it might not have been a &#8220;recent acquisitons/collections show&#8221; many of the shows at MoMA tend to be &#8220;picks from the collection&#8221; with a fancy title. I would never trust any guard or entrance staff at any institution to know what&#8217;s actually on display; sadly, few museums have understood that these people should be the most up-to-date on everything about the museum.  </p>
<p>Tom, you couldn&#8217;t be more right with Friedman. He&#8217;s an utter jackass who somehow has gained respectability with the dumber elements of the business and media worlds. Dave Rees nailed it long ago: <a href="http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/moustache_of_understanding.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/moustache_of_understanding.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stephe</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9877</link>
		<author>stephe</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 17:59:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9877</guid>
					<description>I can only say that I'm just kinda pissed because I have been waiting a long long time for the update to this critique (part two of two).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can only say that I&#8217;m just kinda pissed because I have been waiting a long long time for the update to this critique (part two of two).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Art Fag City</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9893</link>
		<author>Art Fag City</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 22:10:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9893</guid>
					<description>Sorry Stephen - I had another obligation today that went later than expected.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Stephen - I had another obligation today that went later than expected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Art Fag City</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9894</link>
		<author>Art Fag City</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 22:11:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9894</guid>
					<description>Jon: You had a conversation about Automatic Update with Tom Moody on Nasty Nets. I can't remember the exact thread now, but you guys talked about website design there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jon: You had a conversation about Automatic Update with Tom Moody on Nasty Nets. I can&#8217;t remember the exact thread now, but you guys talked about website design there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stephe</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9916</link>
		<author>stephe</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 04:48:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9916</guid>
					<description>Oh sorry PJ, was just kidding, tried to make a small pun about waiting for 'updates'...whoops bad pun. Missed the show actually (not live in nyc), so thanks for covering it. Doesn't also Murakami have his own version of a flatness theory?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh sorry PJ, was just kidding, tried to make a small pun about waiting for &#8216;updates&#8217;&#8230;whoops bad pun. Missed the show actually (not live in nyc), so thanks for covering it. Doesn&#8217;t also Murakami have his own version of a flatness theory?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tom moody</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9918</link>
		<author>tom moody</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 04:52:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9918</guid>
					<description>I posted a link to it above!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I posted a link to it above!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Art Fag City</title>
		<link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9921</link>
		<author>Art Fag City</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:53:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.artfagcity.com/2007/09/14/automatic-update-at-moma-part-one-of-two/#comment-9921</guid>
					<description>God, I'm an idiot...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>God, I&#8217;m an idiot&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
