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 also to
sound. Considering the relationship between concrete poetry and music or
sound this probably should come as no surprise. She likes to change her
name a lot (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 snippetteslabellez/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 crypticit'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 pieceit 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.