DIY has been a crafty movement that has been a response to capitalistic industrial movements. It might be an extension of craft or an expansion to the point assembling or creating your own furniture. The concept of DIY has an idea of being an individual and doing it by “yourself”. This individualism movement is then augmented to DIWO. DIWO is when you are joined by others who have the same goal as you but not too many, to “rebel” against a normative movement. Participants in this movement are individuals brought together to do what DIY was brought to do but with more hands and more brains.
Marc Garrett mentioned E-mail Art, an activity where artists create art in real time through mail platforms, creating a quick and fast system to develop the artwork. By doing so, the work is documented and the final product and the process can be presented seamlessly. This is very similar to the reddit art making process here
Apart from the example, Garrett was also working on to create a flourishing DIWO movement by using digital networks and creating an art platform to help flourish through quick communication and interactions between individuals of cross-disciplines.
On a personal basis, I am intrigued by post internet and internet art. While the world is vast, creative networks all over the world are able to swiftly communicate through networks and social media. Creating work across the globe is much easier and more efficient. This allows work to be made across timezones and using the creative energy from others with different cultural backgrounds to collaborate.
While DIWO is led by an altruistic, artistic process, the concepts are no different to outsourcing and decentralisation (although at no cost). Headquarters in large corporations are also decentralising work across the world to individuals, only requiring meetings via webcam. Although less capitalistic in nature, the idea is not very new, although the efforts and the intentions are.
Conclusively, this movement can be improved and the productivity can be increased in a social, art making setting but also in decentralising corporate work. However artistic altruism is not common. While there are artists that are happy to work with the DIWO movement, not many would be willing to do it for free or for altruistic purposes. At the end, it’s no different from a limited liability partnership and the grey areas of ownership would be brought up again.
Through reading the article I feel that open source codes have allowed many people to build on the software codes that have been passed around through the converging world via the inter web. Unfortunately, the open source practice would result in ideas being shared openly. With the concepts of patents and copyright, which is pretty much the key stronghold of ideation in the creative and making industries, it negates the positive effects of open sources practices, which is essentially sharing information and learning how things work.
The rise of patents and copyright only serves to enable commercial entities to capitalise on their “faster finger” to apply for patents and copyrights, protecting their “creative information” from spreading too far into the open source domain. However, unlike the propriety of stock images and royalties, software is compilation of programming languages and is essentially decodable one way or another. In terms of creative ideation, patents would negate the spread and build up of a community of the open source code.
In more intimate communities however, this idea is of open source is much more welcoming as there is a lack of commercial regard as high level conglomerates are not there to interfere and the supporters of this open source movement have moved to something further away from a community movement, but into a political movement.
All in all, I feel that open source communities would be great for peer learning and peer build up, but it would also mean that there would end up with a lack of commercial benefits in the long run.