Talan Memmott: (e-mail communication, April 2001)

It seems that the closer one works to the bleeding-edge of available and
emergent technology, the more one risks potential obsolescence. There are no
guarantees of widespread adoption of anything 'new' and for most software
and tools developers there is a harsh bottom line that must be met for
development to continue. In this regard it is not surprising when tools and
technologies drop off.

I am somewhat resolved to this, and to the fact that we are in a formative
point in the media/um as well as the supporting technology. We play in a
groundless arena while the apparatus continues along multiple tracks.
Infrastructure and content do not necessarily operate on the same timeline
or with the same agenda. Obsolescence and progress are conflated through
perspective. We see the proprietary DHTML tags of Netscape drop off because
Netscape/AOL operate on a different track than the artists. Where the move
may make some work obsolete, to Netscape/AOL it is progress.

To a certain extent my resolution is based on an adjustment in perspective
from obsolescence to 'obsoletics'. By this I mean, observing the reasons why
some technologies are left to die, and exploring the trajectories of
potential in what comes next for my own work. Sure, it was painful to see
"Lexia to Perplexia" knocked off the technical map so quickly. And, believe
it or not, 5 months since Netscape 6 came out, I am still not complete on
the conversion. But, I am convinced that the learning curve for this stuff
is a never ending incline and this is not the last time we will see
important works killed by the technology.

I do think there is potency to lost work, as it comments on the apparatus as
a whole. Of course, from the point of view of the individual artist looking
to create work with any longevity this is all a big pain in the neck.

Back to most recently-visited page / or

Recto / Permanence / Impermanence / Alteration / Obsolescence / Obliteration / Verso