William Hanley on Beige programming ensemble and Paper Rad

by Art Fag City on October 11, 2007 · 27 comments

Tom Moody writes the following on his blog:

A Rhizome.org front page blog write up by William Hanley begins thusly:
“If anyone in London for the Frieze fair is still tempted to write off the manipulated electronics of the Beige programming ensemble or the kinetic graphic work of the group Paper Rad as interesting but merely stylish nostalgia…”
Since no one is quoted voicing this criticism, it’s actually quite likely that
“William Hanley is still tempted to write off the manipulated electronics of the Beige programming ensemble or the kinetic graphic work of the group Paper Rad as interesting but merely stylish nostalgia.”

Just so there’s no confusion here, Hanley’s full quote reads:

“If anyone in London for the Frieze fair is still tempted to write off the manipulated electronics of the Beige programming ensemble or the kinetic graphic work of the group Paper Rad as interesting but merely stylish nostalgia, the exhibition Tha Click, which opens at E:vent Gallery on October 6th and runs through November 4th, should prove that over the last 10 or so years, both ensembles have made a remarkably substantive and genre-shaping contribution to electronic media-inspired art.”(emphasis mine)

I’m not sure why anyone should be upset about these thoughts, particularly because Hanley’s right to observe the skepticism that once frequently accompanied media art. Cory Arcangel himself spoke to me several years ago about the difficulties of being taken seriously for precisely this reason, and the problem (though greatly diminished) still endures.


We Went To Chelsea, Vol. 1	The Art Fag City Rob Pruitt Art Award* Nominees (Mostly) Announced!	Erwin Wurm Ubiquitous, Even at VIP

http://tommoody.us tom moody
The art world didn’t object to media art because it was stylish, it objected to it because it was boring, incomprehensible, or overly technical. By contrast, Beige and Paper Rad were immediately embraced, put in Biennials, shown at Pace, etc. There’s a Paper Rad book out with foreword by ’80s painter Donald Baechler, for cryin’ out loud. What is this writing off Hanley is talking about? When were they ever rejected?
Paper Rad’s first NYC solo was April 2004 and Arcangel’s was January 2005–I’m not sure where Hanley got this “10 years” figure.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
The art world didn’t object to media art because it was stylish, it objected to it because it was boring, incomprehensible, or overly technical. By contrast, Beige and Paper Rad were immediately embraced, put in Biennials, shown at Pace, etc. There’s a Paper Rad book out with foreword by ’80s painter Donald Baechler, for cryin’ out loud. What is this writing off Hanley is talking about? When were they ever rejected?
Paper Rad’s first NYC solo was April 2004 and Arcangel’s was January 2005–I’m not sure where Hanley got this “10 years” figure.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
The art world didn’t object to media art because it was stylish, it objected to it because it was boring, incomprehensible, or overly technical. By contrast, Beige and Paper Rad were immediately embraced, put in Biennials, shown at Pace, etc. There’s a Paper Rad book out with foreword by ’80s painter Donald Baechler, for cryin’ out loud. What is this writing off Hanley is talking about? When were they ever rejected?
Paper Rad’s first NYC solo was April 2004 and Arcangel’s was January 2005–I’m not sure where Hanley got this “10 years” figure.
Art Fag City
I gave a lecture at the Whitney ISP program in 2002 on my work with Cory Arcangel (and two other artists whose names I can’t recall now) and the feedback I received at that time about the discussion was that many attendees found his work too stylish. Obviously, I don’t agree them, but people definitely had that impression. Arcangel closed his discussion with the 8 bit construction set, which I believe was made in 1999. I agree that 10 years is probably an overly robust number given the amount of time they’ve actually been showing, but since they’ve both suffered this criticism basically since they began making work, I don’t think it’s all that far off.
Art Fag City
I gave a lecture at the Whitney ISP program in 2002 on my work with Cory Arcangel (and two other artists whose names I can’t recall now) and the feedback I received at that time about the discussion was that many attendees found his work too stylish. Obviously, I don’t agree them, but people definitely had that impression. Arcangel closed his discussion with the 8 bit construction set, which I believe was made in 1999. I agree that 10 years is probably an overly robust number given the amount of time they’ve actually been showing, but since they’ve both suffered this criticism basically since they began making work, I don’t think it’s all that far off.
Art Fag City
I gave a lecture at the Whitney ISP program in 2002 on my work with Cory Arcangel (and two other artists whose names I can’t recall now) and the feedback I received at that time about the discussion was that many attendees found his work too stylish. Obviously, I don’t agree them, but people definitely had that impression. Arcangel closed his discussion with the 8 bit construction set, which I believe was made in 1999. I agree that 10 years is probably an overly robust number given the amount of time they’ve actually been showing, but since they’ve both suffered this criticism basically since they began making work, I don’t think it’s all that far off.
b.
http://www.intelligentagent.com/archive/Vol4_No2_freecooperation_sholette.htm
The first paragraph of the linked text outlines the problems many critics had to new, paperrad-type outfits appearing in the cultural landscape. The position of one critic aside, I think it was a view shared by more than some, and I think that the market’s unequivocal acceptance does not necessary signal such an enthusiastic response in other arenas of contemporary art discourse. I think the text is from 2004?
b.
http://www.intelligentagent.com/archive/Vol4_No2_freecooperation_sholette.htm
The first paragraph of the linked text outlines the problems many critics had to new, paperrad-type outfits appearing in the cultural landscape. The position of one critic aside, I think it was a view shared by more than some, and I think that the market’s unequivocal acceptance does not necessary signal such an enthusiastic response in other arenas of contemporary art discourse. I think the text is from 2004?
http://tommoody.us tom moody
The lack of acceptance of the art world towards art made with or about the computer is a constant theme on my page but I wouldn’t use Beige and Paper Rad as examples. Sure they had some naysayers, but those tut-tutting voices were drowned out in the chorus of praise. Arcangel’s clip book at Team was already thick by the time of his 2005 solo show. When I was sitting on the floor at the old Foxy space (in Brooklyn) writing about a Paper Rad performance in 2003, Jeffrey Deitch was also in the room, scoping them out for a future show. I’m just saying that Hanley’s implied 10 year epic struggle for acceptance is a false narrative in the case of these two artist collectives. Since the artists weren’t actually rejected for “merely stylish nostalgia” it’s legitimate to ask why Hanley would use a criticism that specific. Not to make too big a deal out of it–probably the defensive lead is just careless writing.
b., I can’t get that intelligentagent link to work. I wasn’t talking about market acceptance so much as every other kind of imaginable art world acceptance (Deitch, MOMA, Whitney Biennial, Artforum Diary, Pace, etc etc)
http://tommoody.us tom moody
The lack of acceptance of the art world towards art made with or about the computer is a constant theme on my page but I wouldn’t use Beige and Paper Rad as examples. Sure they had some naysayers, but those tut-tutting voices were drowned out in the chorus of praise. Arcangel’s clip book at Team was already thick by the time of his 2005 solo show. When I was sitting on the floor at the old Foxy space (in Brooklyn) writing about a Paper Rad performance in 2003, Jeffrey Deitch was also in the room, scoping them out for a future show. I’m just saying that Hanley’s implied 10 year epic struggle for acceptance is a false narrative in the case of these two artist collectives. Since the artists weren’t actually rejected for “merely stylish nostalgia” it’s legitimate to ask why Hanley would use a criticism that specific. Not to make too big a deal out of it–probably the defensive lead is just careless writing.
b., I can’t get that intelligentagent link to work. I wasn’t talking about market acceptance so much as every other kind of imaginable art world acceptance (Deitch, MOMA, Whitney Biennial, Artforum Diary, Pace, etc etc)
http://tommoody.us tom moody
The lack of acceptance of the art world towards art made with or about the computer is a constant theme on my page but I wouldn’t use Beige and Paper Rad as examples. Sure they had some naysayers, but those tut-tutting voices were drowned out in the chorus of praise. Arcangel’s clip book at Team was already thick by the time of his 2005 solo show. When I was sitting on the floor at the old Foxy space (in Brooklyn) writing about a Paper Rad performance in 2003, Jeffrey Deitch was also in the room, scoping them out for a future show. I’m just saying that Hanley’s implied 10 year epic struggle for acceptance is a false narrative in the case of these two artist collectives. Since the artists weren’t actually rejected for “merely stylish nostalgia” it’s legitimate to ask why Hanley would use a criticism that specific. Not to make too big a deal out of it–probably the defensive lead is just careless writing.
b., I can’t get that intelligentagent link to work. I wasn’t talking about market acceptance so much as every other kind of imaginable art world acceptance (Deitch, MOMA, Whitney Biennial, Artforum Diary, Pace, etc etc)
b.
the google cache
b.
the google cache
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Ah, thanks. That’s rather a different issue than what Hanley was talking about, but interesting: the packaging of the collectives as the latest transgressive radicality, rebels, etc. The Sholette article is pretty weak on examples. He relies on one meat-headed quote from Dearraindrop to show that the collectives aren’t as serious as the ones he was involved in. I seriously doubt he read Paul B Davis’ writings about “surplus computing power” or looked at the darker Forcefield videos. The connection of the collectives to “enterprise culture” is a legitimate inquiry but Sholette didn’t do much homework–his essay reads like a rant by an old dude for whom all “the kids” are one big undifferentiated blur.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Ah, thanks. That’s rather a different issue than what Hanley was talking about, but interesting: the packaging of the collectives as the latest transgressive radicality, rebels, etc. The Sholette article is pretty weak on examples. He relies on one meat-headed quote from Dearraindrop to show that the collectives aren’t as serious as the ones he was involved in. I seriously doubt he read Paul B Davis’ writings about “surplus computing power” or looked at the darker Forcefield videos. The connection of the collectives to “enterprise culture” is a legitimate inquiry but Sholette didn’t do much homework–his essay reads like a rant by an old dude for whom all “the kids” are one big undifferentiated blur.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Ah, thanks. That’s rather a different issue than what Hanley was talking about, but interesting: the packaging of the collectives as the latest transgressive radicality, rebels, etc. The Sholette article is pretty weak on examples. He relies on one meat-headed quote from Dearraindrop to show that the collectives aren’t as serious as the ones he was involved in. I seriously doubt he read Paul B Davis’ writings about “surplus computing power” or looked at the darker Forcefield videos. The connection of the collectives to “enterprise culture” is a legitimate inquiry but Sholette didn’t do much homework–his essay reads like a rant by an old dude for whom all “the kids” are one big undifferentiated blur.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Also: The 8-Bit Construction Set LP was released in 2000. The record was well received in the DJ world (“currently receiving play from an impressive array of tastemakers including matthew herbert, mixmaster mike, bodenstandig 2000, dj godfather, and luke vibert”–from the Beige website) but wasn’t officially on the art world’s radar until it appeared in Beige’s Team summer show in Aug 2003. Beige was included in the 2004 Whitney Biennial after that show (largely on the strength of Nintendo Clouds). I know all these details because I was blogging about this subject.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Also: The 8-Bit Construction Set LP was released in 2000. The record was well received in the DJ world (“currently receiving play from an impressive array of tastemakers including matthew herbert, mixmaster mike, bodenstandig 2000, dj godfather, and luke vibert”–from the Beige website) but wasn’t officially on the art world’s radar until it appeared in Beige’s Team summer show in Aug 2003. Beige was included in the 2004 Whitney Biennial after that show (largely on the strength of Nintendo Clouds). I know all these details because I was blogging about this subject.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Also: The 8-Bit Construction Set LP was released in 2000. The record was well received in the DJ world (“currently receiving play from an impressive array of tastemakers including matthew herbert, mixmaster mike, bodenstandig 2000, dj godfather, and luke vibert”–from the Beige website) but wasn’t officially on the art world’s radar until it appeared in Beige’s Team summer show in Aug 2003. Beige was included in the 2004 Whitney Biennial after that show (largely on the strength of Nintendo Clouds). I know all these details because I was blogging about this subject.
http://benjaminqjones.org Ben Jones
Donald Baechler had nothing to do with any Paper Rad book ever. I think this, and many other “lies” or “mistakes” point to a key weakness in the above dialog (and also reveal a gerenal weakness in the new passive-aggressive information model of “posting” or “wiki-ing”).
Donald Baechler’s name was mistakenly inserted into Paper Rad’s “Cartoon Workshop/Pig Tails” one-sheet by the book’s distributer DAP (I think, since I made the book and all the press materials, and oversaw the publishing too, and I am not accusing DAP of anything bad, it was a simple mistake, no biggie).
I think maybe you “guys”(except Tom, cause he really knows what is going on I think in general) should buy the book, if you don’t believe me, or better yet, if you want to have something fun to talk about other than twice removed nostalgia writing about people who think my art is nostalgic.
Or next time you see me, ask me for a free book, cause I have always given my books and cds and dvds to friends and fans and people in the community.
Google’s new blog search sucks.
http://benjaminqjones.org Ben Jones
Donald Baechler had nothing to do with any Paper Rad book ever. I think this, and many other “lies” or “mistakes” point to a key weakness in the above dialog (and also reveal a gerenal weakness in the new passive-aggressive information model of “posting” or “wiki-ing”).
Donald Baechler’s name was mistakenly inserted into Paper Rad’s “Cartoon Workshop/Pig Tails” one-sheet by the book’s distributer DAP (I think, since I made the book and all the press materials, and oversaw the publishing too, and I am not accusing DAP of anything bad, it was a simple mistake, no biggie).
I think maybe you “guys”(except Tom, cause he really knows what is going on I think in general) should buy the book, if you don’t believe me, or better yet, if you want to have something fun to talk about other than twice removed nostalgia writing about people who think my art is nostalgic.
Or next time you see me, ask me for a free book, cause I have always given my books and cds and dvds to friends and fans and people in the community.
Google’s new blog search sucks.
http://benjaminqjones.org Ben Jones
Donald Baechler had nothing to do with any Paper Rad book ever. I think this, and many other “lies” or “mistakes” point to a key weakness in the above dialog (and also reveal a gerenal weakness in the new passive-aggressive information model of “posting” or “wiki-ing”).
Donald Baechler’s name was mistakenly inserted into Paper Rad’s “Cartoon Workshop/Pig Tails” one-sheet by the book’s distributer DAP (I think, since I made the book and all the press materials, and oversaw the publishing too, and I am not accusing DAP of anything bad, it was a simple mistake, no biggie).
I think maybe you “guys”(except Tom, cause he really knows what is going on I think in general) should buy the book, if you don’t believe me, or better yet, if you want to have something fun to talk about other than twice removed nostalgia writing about people who think my art is nostalgic.
Or next time you see me, ask me for a free book, cause I have always given my books and cds and dvds to friends and fans and people in the community.
Google’s new blog search sucks.
http://benjaminqjones.org Ben Jones
Donald Baechler had nothing to do with any Paper Rad book ever. I think this, and many other “lies” or “mistakes” point to a key weakness in the above dialog (and also reveal a gerenal weakness in the new passive-aggressive information model of “posting” or “wiki-ing”).
Donald Baechler’s name was mistakenly inserted into Paper Rad’s “Cartoon Workshop/Pig Tails” one-sheet by the book’s distributer DAP (I think, since I made the book and all the press materials, and oversaw the publishing too, and I am not accusing DAP of anything bad, it was a simple mistake, no biggie).
I think maybe you “guys”(except Tom, cause he really knows what is going on I think in general) should buy the book, if you don’t believe me, or better yet, if you want to have something fun to talk about other than twice removed nostalgia writing about people who think my art is nostalgic.
Or next time you see me, ask me for a free book, cause I have always given my books and cds and dvds to friends and fans and people in the community.
Google’s new blog search sucks.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Unfortunately DAP’s little mistake has Paper Rad’s book listed on amazon as:
Paper Rad: Cartoon Workshop Pig Tales Digest (Paperback)
by Donald Baechler (Foreword), Paper Rad (Author)
Ben, I am enormously relieved to hear your book doesn’t have a Donald Baechler foreword. Looking forward to seeing it regardless.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Unfortunately DAP’s little mistake has Paper Rad’s book listed on amazon as:
Paper Rad: Cartoon Workshop Pig Tales Digest (Paperback)
by Donald Baechler (Foreword), Paper Rad (Author)
Ben, I am enormously relieved to hear your book doesn’t have a Donald Baechler foreword. Looking forward to seeing it regardless.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Unfortunately DAP’s little mistake has Paper Rad’s book listed on amazon as:
Paper Rad: Cartoon Workshop Pig Tales Digest (Paperback)
by Donald Baechler (Foreword), Paper Rad (Author)
Ben, I am enormously relieved to hear your book doesn’t have a Donald Baechler foreword. Looking forward to seeing it regardless.
http://tommoody.us tom moody
Unfortunately DAP’s little mistake has Paper Rad’s book listed on amazon as:
Paper Rad: Cartoon Workshop Pig Tales Digest (Paperback)
by Donald Baechler (Foreword), Paper Rad (Author)
Ben, I am enormously relieved to hear your book doesn’t have a Donald Baechler foreword. Looking forward to seeing it regardless.