 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Rhizome's move to a subscription format (with membership requiring at least a $5 donation per year) has caused a lot of concern among the net.art community.
The fact that it only took a few days to hack a workaround--a ostensibly free access to Rhizome's artbase (well, at least to linked objects in that database)--strikes a heavy blow for the "information wants to be free" crowd. The site in question, netartconnexion.net, provides some of the accessibility of the Rhizome artbase, and is accompanied by a manifesto and a wink wink, nudge nudge to Rhizome's membership policy.
Now, this puts Rhizome in a tough position, and I see no way for them to come off as anything but "the bad guy". It'll be interesting to see how the process develops. I understand both sides of the Rhizome argument, and am trying to remain as objective as possible. [self disclosure: I'm a Rhizome superuser, but played no hand in--and have given no public support of--the new membership policy] But if netartconnexion.net is a permanent fixture, then Rhizome's community may begin to fall apart: there will be the art objects that are only accessible through the artbase, but I'm not sure that those plus the message boards and Rhizome's various educational and funding endeavours will alone continue Rhizome's community based mission. Artist backlash could tear the community that Rhizome has built down, and it could do it very quickly. I could see Rhizome quickly becoming a emotional and hacking target, a sort of net.art Microsoft. The rhizome could destroy Rhizome.
Somewhere nearby there is a rock. And over there, you can just begin to make out a hard place. And right here, under our feet and noses? It's Rhizome.
Posted by brandon barr at January 30, 2003 05:00 PM | TrackBackIt is a puzzle. I gave Rhizome a donation when it was voluntary. Now that "donation" is involuntary Rhizome doesn't feel like the same institution to which I made my donation. Still, I admire the ways in which Rhizome is trying to not simply be a closed-off subscription site. The fact that direct links to the artbase work without a subscription is part of this, as is the "free Fridays" notion. We need to be actively thinking about and experimenting with alternatives to the straight subscription model.
Posted by: noah on February 3, 2003 05:51 PM===a sensitive and accurate portrayal!====
i came out in favor of the membership fees because i knew the organization was in trouble financially...and i, like noah, made a donation when the site was still free===and i MUST echo noah's statement, that i admire the fact that they're still trying to keep the artBase open to the public, with only this to add:::it still freels the same to me...this may change, and i'm not so sure i support the fact that only members can submit to the artBase (& i also think the artBase should be permanently open, not just on Fridays====why can't they just charge for the lists?)
by the way, brandon, you're doing excellent work! i love reading this blog; it's one of the very few blogs i'll actually go to read....