Mary-anne
Breeze, better known as Mez, lives and works in Australia.
She
first got into a larger net.art picture in 1997, via the net.art
mailinglist
7-11. Her work is highly 'textual', but expands to for
instance
sound as well. Considering the relationship between concrete
poetry
and music or sound, this probably should come as no surprise.
She
likes to change her name (mz post modemism, mezchine,
ms
Tech.no.whore, flesque, e-mauler, and mezflesque.exe) and maybe
because
of this, plus the nature of her work, she has a less clearly
demarcated
position then some other net.artists. This relative
'instability',
compared to some highly compact web artworks is one of
the
attractive sides of her work for me.
*
JB: How would you describe the kind of net art you make?
Mez:
Hard question this one, basically because of the immediate
temptation
to launch into my trademark writing style/language;
that
is to 'mezangelle'. This style of writing/textual construction
[that
has at its base email dialogues and network exchanges]
underpins
all my net.artwork, even the more image intensive versions.
The
format evolved from a series of emailed collaborative pieces
carried
out with m@ [Matt Hoessli from the CADRE Institute] on the
7-11
mailing list from '96 onwards. At the time, I was into switching
avatarian
cloaks [the most regular being 'ms post modemism'] which
is
another defining criteria of my net.artwork. My particular 'angle'
was
to take the information text tracts m@ would post and 'mangle'
them
through free/multi-word associative techniques and repost them
-
hence the term, mezangelle. This technique has developed since,
with
computer code conventions and regular chat/email iconographs
contributing
to its formulation.
If
I were to answer the above question in my 'mezangelle' style:
______________________________________________________________
::N
1 Word: mezangelled
::N
1 Sentence: the con[nned]flagration B-tween m-mage N text[ual]/sound N
fr[ott]ag[e].mentation
ov breath/lec.tron.ics N flesh
::In
Many Wordz: Eye make sever.all versionz of [intra]net[worked].art,
each
1 par.tic[k].ular 2 mi conceptual n-tent m-bedded within you.knitz/
phone.tick-tock
snippettes…labellez/cat.e.gori[cal]es that somehow get
shrinkwordwrapped
ah-round my stuph alwaze zeem som[a]how n-adequate…
______________________________________________________________
Translated, this mezangelled tract would read:
In/using
one word, I'd describe the kind of net.artwork I make
as
'mezangelled'. In/using one sentence, I'd describe it as a
conflagration
between image, text and sound + a fragmentation
[allusion
of frottage as well here] of breath, electronics and flesh.
Extended,
the description would be that I make several versions of
networked
art, each one particular to my conceptual intent, which is
imbedded
within units/phonetic snippets [hence, the audience/'you'
actively
knit the units/ connections together]. The labels and
categories
that are applied [or 'word shrink-wrapped'] to my
artwork/stuff
always seem somehow inadequate.
The
mezangelle phonetic/text-assemblage focus is what creates
my
'style'; this overlaps into my more image-oriented work in the
use
of multiple gif images [and lately, Flash technology]. In several
of
my works I employ units of repeated animated images, in order to
create
a 'cloning' aesthetic - the unit is the important visual key,
and
is repeated infinitely [to create data echoes, resonances].
Also,
my emphasis on collaborative efforts include a breaking down of
dialogical
traditions, of shifting the units of information and
communication
from the usual and expected to the cryptic…it's about
active
layering, and encouraging varied interpretation.
JB: Could I say you have a preoccupation with language and poetry?
Mez:
You could, though I'm not quite sure how accurate this is...
outwardly,
my work has all the habitual signs of a language
preoccupation,
and who knows, language is probably my narcotic.
It's
hard for me to judge, in that if I actively and consciously
recognize
the nature of my net.artwork practice and the mechanisms
I
employ whilst I'm creating, then I'm likely to produce stilted,
predicable
work. I think this may also be the case for [some] other
net.artists.
Regarding poetry, it's a label I'm uncomfortable with.
Some
of my textual work verges on orthodox poetry boundaries in that
I
use succinct emotive phrases/words etc; however, I like to think
that
my work bypasses these regular formats of traditional writing,
through
their network dependency if nothing else.
JB:
Can you maybe explain to us humble ordinary prose writers what
drives
some net artists and net rebels to write in ascii poetry,
near
grafiti style?
Mez:
'Humble ordinary prose writers'? What the hell are they??
[just
joking]. I'm not sure if I can speak for other net.artists but
I
think the drive to create differing modes of textual production
[including
ascii] stems from utilizing the basic building blocks of a
networked
medium. For example, my text tracts are influenced by the
jargon
and developing conventions that pepper various mailing lists,
IRC
chat channels, and multiplayer games. I think the use of these
styles
is a reflection of the informatic culture that exists on/in the
network
itself.
JB:
Do you see a difference between 'new' and 'old' net artists,
or
(a tricky question) between female and male artists?
Mez:
I don't think the distinction between 'new' and 'old'/female and
male
net.artists should be an issue. Having said that, of course I'm
not
naive enough to actually believe that categorization isn't an issue
in
this PPP [Proto-Post-Potential] utopia we call the [inter]net.work.
One
of the things I used to cherish about the net was its ability to
promote
ambiguity through the ideas of extended ownership and indistinct
authorship.
I'm not sure if these ideals still exist, with net.artists
having
to retract into distinctly smaller niches within
corporate/mainstreaming
informatic spaces, almost being compelled to
stake
out an regulation authored space as they go. I think the
distinction
between masculine and feminine oriented net.art maybe more
useful,
in that it describes a perspective that is specific towards
the
work itself, rather than placing the emphasis on the creator.
JB: Do you make special use of mailinglists and email?
Mez:
Can I just answer a resounding 'yes' to this? [joking] This
aspect
of network communication has actually made my net.art possible;
from
volleying mezangelled mails back and forth with collaborators, to
using
the variations in my signature file as a narrative slogan venue
[see
my latest sig file with the 1st instalment/springboard text:
'luv
yr [net]wurk'], to indulging in rampant word play and banter that
later
may enter into a fict/faction piece…it all adds up.
JB:
Is making art your first occupation, or is it an addition to other
work?
Mez:
Constructing/channeling the necessary play/exploration involved in
creating
net.art is what I do. My 'other work' [arts journalism and
critiquing]
is carried out purely in order to feed, house and supply
the
biomezchanics, though I do kinda grudgingly enjoy it.
As
yet, my projects have yet to be funded [aka acceptably rubber
stamped]
via the Australian arts grant circuit so this makes my
'paid
work' a necessary evil. I suppose my preference for blurring my
identity
via avatarian constructs makes this difficult, in that I'm
yet
to establish a persona that has concrete/identifiable markers
required
by most of the relevant funding bodies. As yet, my net.artwork
commissions
have come largely from overseas organizations.
JB: Did you study at any art school? What is your background?
Mez:
I've studied extensively [possibly too much] though not in the
accepted
academic hierarchical sense …I've swapped my learning-curve
emphasis
around, and have degrees in both Applied Social Science
[Psychology],
Creative Writing, and a diploma in Fine Arts. My
professional
arts career was kicked-started as a hybrid writer/painter,
though
I was never satisfied with the medium[s] and my work was
embraced
within the umbrella-label 'installation'…I had the urge to
use
the notion of scientific order to mask/covertly highlight another
type
of 'random' order, the irrational, the 'feminine' undertow
…this
lead to the computer, to play & integration [play is absolutely
crucial
to my work, if I don't allow myself the time to absorb and
digest
and information-trawl, I'm lost].
JB: What should good net art contain in your opinion?
Mez:
I think it's probably easier to give my opinion on what 'bad'
[or
non-engaging] net.art is, and just work backwards. Work that
puts
the latest software/technique first [at the expense of the overall
aesthetic/conceptual
impact] or that panders to the established art
market/bandwagon
whilst making little effort to explore the medium
[graphic
designed made-to-order net.'art'] just doesn't grab me.
Net.art
that utilizes the very grain and grit of the network, that
stretches
preconceived artistic notions, that makes me unsure of the
very
principles that govern the interface/project, that throws a
reliance
on hackneyed dataface terminology out the window and creates
its
own, that blasts open my intellect and sensory faculties is what
it
should be all about.
_____________________________________
+++|++++++++++++++++++|+++++++++|++
+++|++|++||..Luv..||+++++++++++++
||++++++||..Yr..||++++++|+++
+++|||...[[net]]...|||+++
+++||...Wurk...||++
+++|||...|||++|
==+|+==
http://wollongong.starway.net.au/`mezandwalt/
overview of past activities:
http://wollongong.starway.net.au/~mezandwalt/resume2.htm
*