personal sites

[helenic]

Today, with the help of romauld, who is now kindly hosting me, I bought two new domains: fox-fires.org and wax-and-wane.org. (No links because, as yet, no content.) art-fag.net expired last week (which is why all my links are broken) because I tried to renew it, but couldn't remember my password, and the password email I requested never arrived. That domain has now been Evilled by my old registrar; that is, they've made it unusable for a year unless I pay them £200 to renew it because I didn't renew it before it expired. I hadn't updated the site since last April in any case, and I've had it for over four years, so. Time for something new. Wax-and-wane because the moon is significant for me, for various reasons, because it has overtones of transience and flux and I'm in a state of perpetual moodswing, but at the same time never really feeling like I change. It has various attractive symbolisms, the phrase is pleasing, it's a Cocteau Twins song. I think I'm going to use it for my art, semi-professionally. Fox-fires is a contraction of another Cocteau Twins song (what can I say; they have very pleasing lyrics, and all the other things I came up with were taken), "Frou-frou foxes in midsummer fires". It is also a cunning inversion of PhyrePhoxx, which was my first ever username on Yahoo in about 1996.

It's all got me thinking about websites again. The personal site is a strange genre. Perhaps it's just the ones I've seen, but it seems to be that they are all owned by photography students from Scandinavia, and the layouts are always the same: white page, large rectangular photograph (of the edge of a building, or trees, or someone's legs, usually) with links in a random serif font underneath the picture. Or else they're scrapbook style with scannings-in and handwriting and things cut out of magazines. I'm not trying to be insulting - a lot of them are very well executed and very aesthetically pleasing - but there's no denying the extent to which these things follow trends. I know I've been guilty of it as well, probably more than all the efforts I've (obliquely) described above. But there's something simultaneously depressing and compelling about it, like badly-written escapist fantasy novels. On one level they are pleasing, an enjoyable waste of time, and "inspiring" in the sense of giving you dead-end ideas that can't be developed further, or aesthetic but largely meaningless lyricism, or an idea you'd seen somewhere before but had forgotten. No real change, nothing really new or affecting, but a small kind of nostalgia. Taking comfort in the familiar. Moods you've already had, that sort of thing.

I used to be a bit addicted to these sort of sites, but I haven't browsed the usual suspects in almost a year now, just as I'd left my own domain untouched for so long I'd almost forgotten I had it, and largely used the space for storing livejournal images. I do want to have an online presence again (why? I don't know; suggestions on a postcard plz) but I'm at a bit of a loss about what, precisely, to do with it. I've always wavered between actually putting my abortive and talent-lacking creative endeavours online in the hope of getting vapid compliments, and between being defensively abstract and just putting up a string of paragraphs that chronicle my preoccupations at the time, and try to articulate some of my thinking about things like identity and environment. I want to change tack, but am unsure how, so because this is livejournal I'll ask your opinion rather than, you know, being original and thinking for myself.



[Poll #428405]

Comments

[lsur.livejournal.com]

I can't help feeling that a lot of stuff on the web is ephemeral anyway. There is no quick way to success in anything worthwhile whether painting, writing, science, music, whatever. Easy access to the web seems to lead some people to think they can achieve recognition without any real work. It's largely a kind of fidgeting, fiddling with a keyboard, learning some little trick with html (not exactly a 'real' programming language) and generally a displacement activity. In most cases, the result has no more significance for the world than a teenager's bedroom (unless you are Tracey Emet.)

[libellum.livejournal.com]

the ephemeral nature of online things has always been what I liked about it; which is why the content of my sites in the past has always been inconsequential and self-referentially fleeting. I'm theoretically interested in creating something more substantial but have my doubts about where to start - hence the poll. Certainly if I was putting art online I wouldn't expect to get much business through it from random browsers, but it would be useful to have somewhere to direct people to that had all the information, rather than writing it all into emails every time I get a commission. The art I was putting online wouldn't be intended to have significance for the world, although perhaps in ten years the art that was mentioned on it might do.

I realise the poll sounded a bit snobbish, although I don't think "amateur" is deprecating, just a statement of fact. But yes, when it comes to creative quality I am a snob. I dislike how much shitty "art" and fiction there is out there just as I dislike how many opinion articles are written by self-important people who don't have a clue. It's not so much the inherent quality of the work that bothers me as the author's own attitude towards it. I don't know though, perhaps I'm just a judgemental bitch :) I've had writing online before but I never would now because I know I'm no good at it. As far as I'm concerned it's our responsibility to raise the standards.