An answer to S. or: How ironic is the Web-Revival?

[ThunderPerfectWitchcraft]

A friend of mine with whom I write more or less regularly expressed his discontent about the state of the world a while ago. Seeing that things are as they are, he especially lamented the lack of an effective counter-culture that has the power to mobilize people, give hope, change things, and so on.

Partly to cheer him up, I tried to name a few counter-culture movements that I regard as somewhat potent in that regard. Among them, the web-revival.

This was his answer:

Could you give me a few examples of that counter movement / web revival ? Websites ? Forums ? I must admit I'm out of my depth in this area. I don't know what exists... and I wouldn't even know where to look for it. Of course I know Neocities for example, since I have websites there, but looking at the super oldschool websites that young people do, and that (sometimes) would have been slightly embarassing websites "back then", I can't shake the feeling that a lot of this is purely ironic, voluntarily kitsch, and I wouldn't want any "web revival" to be ironic, precisely. I actually love kitsch but it demands a certain innocence. And I can be pretty ironic as a person but I think that this omnipresence of irony in contemporary culture is a poison. Just as if some people are ashamed to be sincere or straightforward. Fearing to look "naive" or something.

It is also, I think, a symptom of that "end of History" where we live; nothing new can happen, so just let's have fun growing ironic moustaches and making ugly Geocities-like websites with cat photos and rotating skull GIFs. At the end of the day it's not funny at all, just sad and demotivating.

BUT if there is something new and "serious" that I'm not aware of, I'd be very happy to discover it!

I argued against it from my view, named him artists and pages that I like, and also pages that are - in my view - kitschy in a most earnest way, or just earnest at all. I might have said that I believe that the web-revival is at least formulating questions about how people can interact online in a positive, and equal manner, and sometimes even trying to answer them.

This was a few months ago, but I found myself thinking about his view of the Web-Revival since then. Might be needful to say: I don't see myself as part of a "Web-Revival scene"; I'm a spare-time gamedev who happens to have a homepage, and some love for old tech and (digital) DIY-projects. I'm political, and I like equal participation in (digital) spaces. My own works usually does not follow the aesthetics found in the web-revival (and, as far as I can tell, the question if a common aesthetic or general line exists is, as a question, disputable at best), and I sometimes do feel old, and sometimes like a bit of a bystander here ;).

I believe that the sometimes kitschy, sometimes whimsical, often laid-back "flair" (in the lack of a better word right now) of the Web-Revival (and adjacent "scenes" or "movements") is sincere. I believe that "it" (the people, projects, and communities...), as it is now - partly in cause of reasons my friend addressed in his mail - is often at risk of dropping into shallowness. But I rarely perceive it as ironic, and even where it is, it is never ironic for the means of irony: It tries to formulate a earnest message, to communicate sincere, by using irony as a medium, then. Melooon formulated parts of this in his thread here, where he asked - imho - a very similar questions, but with a more advanced terminology (at least, this is as I interpret it). I might've learned since then.

Do you identify as "belonging to the Web-Revival"? Do you regard it as primarily ironic, as earnest, or - maybe - as both at the same time? Are the pages of others evoking emotions for you when you see them (are they "affective"), or do you see it mainly (or only) as a fun activity to browse them (or, but this would surprise me: As a big joke?)? And what would you have answered to my friend?

[JINSBEK]

I think your friend may be projecting a bit of his own pessimism and cynicism onto that of the average Neocities user. Anyone who is truly as despondent as your friend assumes to be would be far more likely to be engaged more in acts of destruction, not creation. It is very easy to channel and foment one's own discontent on the Internet--just open Twitter or Reddit or the #vent channel of some Discord, and talk about how shitty life is. Or they could just go day-drinking and do drugs. He says, “At the end of the day it’s not funny at all, just sad and demotivating.” He doesn't like cat photos and rotating skull pics. He personally finds them sad and demotivating. He looks at the past and can't seem to fathom that anyone in the present would also like to create "ugly" Geocities pages and share pictures of cats and rotating skull gifs.

There is a broader cultural zeitgeist that he is not looking at. At least in the United States, there is a resurgence of homemaking and interest in skills and crafts such as woodworking, blacksmithing, canning, cooking, vegetable gardening, and so on. Eastman Kodak had to shut down its film production plant because it has to increase its film production capacity to meet demand. These are all hobbies and pastimes that take a significant investment in time, skill, and often money and space, in order to produce something "half-decent". A pastiche is not automatically doom and gloom, it can be a delighted acknowledgement that "Hey, we had something neat that worked well in the past, let's try that again." For us& personally, a cherished example of this is the flowering of "retro"-style horror games. My favourite in recent times is Signalis.

This isn't to say, that there isn't a hint of pessimism or futility lurking behind at least some of these Neocities pages, and that maybe a good portion of the userbase is day-drinking and doing drugs and crying in #vent I don't know. But so many of these website weavers are also disavowing Twitter/X and other hostile social media platforms, asking questions like how to reduce their screentime and compulsive smartphone addictions, and so on. They are not leaning into the negative. They are trying to improve their lives by trying to change how they use technology, and relate to other people. That is very optimistic. As for myself, I don't consider myself part of the "Ugly Web" movement, but I do love it. I am trying to make my own website that shares and expresses my feelings and thoughts, just like others in the Web Revival movement. And I'm having fun.

[dream]

I have a knack for being oblivious but I can't say I understand counter-culture. Is it not contrarian? If counter-X can become X, what is it at all? And if you become it, what do you become?

What does he want to change about the world? In the end, we all just want to be loved. He seems to long for sincerity. He will have to look for it, one person at a time, anywhere.

[ThunderPerfectWitchcraft]

@JINSBEK While S. is certainly a rather pessimistic person, he is very excitable about art and human creativity. He is - if that matters - a very creative, productive amateur artist and musician, and one of the few I know of who are not only making stuff themself but also perceive the work of other amateurs and connects to them. As far as I can tell, most of his online-activity is directed to this cause. I definitely wouldn't call him a cynic, and believe him when he says that he dislikes "rotating skulls" because he feels that it is a sign of hopelessness.

Now, your second point - (let us ignore for a second that the US and the web-revival are two entirely different cup of teas) - it might be that there is an increase in artistically activity. But does this really tell us much? The art produced could still be cynic, ironic, and so on. I also believe it is at least bold to assume that more sold goods also mean that more people who use them. It could be merely the expression of a widespread desire to be creative, or - if we are really pessimistic - industries using these desire to market products to people. And even if people are creative: In what way are they? Does it help if anybody is doing (maybe great) art isolated in their bedchamber, while the world outside burns away? Last I checked, the US weren't seeming in an optimistic state, let alone in an atmosphere of departure in a positive way. What he - at least I'd say so - wants to say: These "neat" things seemingly didn't work out very well in the past, if we regard the situation at hands. Why try them again? He guesses: They are tried again because people are afraid to try something new and see it not working again. Do you regard this as cynical?

For me, the whole genre of retro horror games is a thing that I regard largely as a trend. There are interesting games within, but they are hard to find - most games that use the aesthetics, I see as rather formulaic attempts to fulfill the players assumed expectations. So, I agree that the comparison to the "Web-Revival" fits: If you don't charge this kind of medium with a meaning beside the nostalgia, you are at high risk to create kitsch of the shallow, boring kind.

An the last point: I largely agree about the web-revival being earnest (as expressed above). On the same time, I think I see a tendency of people sometimes just trying to replace Twitter/Facebook/TikTok by "the web-revival" - the logic of these platforms, their meaning, and their fundamental idea isn't challenged, instead some people seemingly are in the search for a substitute. A similar thing goes for many of those who search the internet for a good way to deal with internet addiction in its various forms - the real answer to this problem, is, of course, to not use the internet as much; many of them might be clinging to a dead horse against, against better knowledge, since they can't stop clinging to it.

It's great that you use your page for earnest expression and have fun while doing so ;).


@dream I'd define counter-culture as an collective attempt to change the status quo to the better, that connects various people who act into a similar direction, by often (but not always) similar means. Examples would be the hippies, who tried to create peaceful societies by grass-roots initiatives and alternative structures (and, at least partly, drugs), the surrealists who tried to change the world through the means of the sublime, or (if you ask me) Fridays for Future/Extinction Rebellion who attempt to prevent environmental destruction with their respective means.

Other movements are - in their core - ironic, or desperate. Punk would be an example. It doesn't strife for any form of utopia. The question is - again: Is the web-revival rather hippie, rather punk, or (and if so, in what way) both at the same time?

I'm not sure if we all just want to be loved (I lately read a book by someone who said, that every human wants ultimately to be a beam of light. This is also true). I feel very loved, but I'd also love to see a popular movement that might be able to bring a change. Who wouldn't?

[JINSBEK]

What he - at least I'd say so - wants to say: These "neat" things seemingly didn't work out very well in the past, if we regard the situation at hands. Why try them again? He guesses: They are tried again because people are afraid to try something new and see it not working again. Do you regard this as cynical?

I don't understand at all what you're trying to argue for him. He said, “this omnipresence of irony in contemporary culture is a poison. Just as if some people are ashamed to be sincere or straightforward.” When he's calling a cultural movement of whimsical pastiche poison, I am going to assume he is a greater cynic than the average person who is using Neocities to share pictures of cute cats and cool spinning skull graphics. Yes, some people like those sorts of things, and that in no way automatically makes them despondent in the future. Maybe they don't want to use JavaScript. And what is this implication that optimism exists only if there is some kind of newfangled technological "advance" to herald it? To me, that's like looking down on people who are getting into older crafts like bookbinding and scrapbooking because it's fun to make personal things with your own skill. Humans like to be creative, and Neocities offers an accessible digital online medium to create in. Not everyone has the know-how or desire to work with SASS or pay for a GSAP licence when all they want to do is small-time, hobbyist craft.

And even if people are creative: In what way are they? Does it help if anybody is doing (maybe great) art isolated in their bedchamber, while the world outside burns away? Last I checked, the US weren't seeming in an optimistic state, let alone in an atmosphere of departure in a positive way.

What is the chief complaint? That swathes of people with access to an in-browser code editor are not revolutionary web developers, writers, or multidisciplinary artists who self-organise into futurist art collectives? That people don't have a natural tendency for (or are good at) agitprop, and thus can't possibly be anything but cynical when they share blinkies? I suppose it may be "frustrating" that people are exercising their waking hours the "wrong" way, but if we're going to complain about that, then perhaps it would be even more productive that (in the case of the US, in this example) we examine the material, historical reasons for that (i.e. the rise of the US as the predominant capitalist superpower post-World War II, the breakdown of the Bretton Woods agreement, etc.) and their implications for art and artistic literacy, let alone historical and social consciousness, and talk to people about it and the importance of artistic and political activity (however you define that).

“It is also, I think, a symptom of that "end of History" where we live; nothing new can happen, so just let's have fun growing ironic moustaches and making ugly Geocities-like websites with cat photos and rotating skull GIFs. At the end of the day it's not funny at all, just sad and demotivating.

BUT if there is something new and "serious" that I'm not aware of, I'd be very happy to discover it!”

I sincerely believe he is looking at the wrong place if he has his scope set to encompass only, or largely Neocities. That is a platform that celebrates pastiche in its name. I'm not going to go into the Historical European Martial Arts groups and wring my hands, asking them why they're practicing montante and studying Fiore instead of innovating the light sabre. If he is looking for groups of people actively trying to disrupt the world's current fabric by using the newest in Internet technology (...Haskell and Rust???), he should go into Web3 circles and find the FOSS engineers working for pittances, shares at par value, and/or cryptocurrency. I don't mean that ironically. I mean literally. Go look for these people on X Spaces, Discord, and GitHub. He should be talking to them, reading their whitepapers, and asking them how they think their tech can and should be disruptive for social good. He will have far more optimistic, perhaps stimulating conversations about the future landscape with those full-stack engineers, than perhaps with the average person just wanting to blog about anime in their spare time. A community built on Geocities preservation and homage is probably not going to be new, or even "serious" (how do you define that? Lack of joy? Modern webdev only?), and I believe that is fine.

@dream I'd define counter-culture as an collective attempt to change the status quo to the better, that connects various people who act into a similar direction, by often (but not always) similar means. Examples would be the hippies, who tried to create peaceful societies by grass-roots initiatives and alternative structures (and, at least partly, drugs), the surrealists who tried to change the world through the means of the sublime, or (if you ask me) Fridays for Future/Extinction Rebellion who attempt to prevent environmental destruction with their respective means.

Other movements are - in their core - ironic, or desperate. Punk would be an example. It doesn't strife for any form of utopia. The question is - again: Is the web-revival rather hippie, rather punk, or (and if so, in what way) both at the same time?

I think this is a good definition and I find this line of questioning interesting. I think that is better decided on a case-by-case basis, as there is differentiation between the "Ugly Web" crafters (I suppose they are "punk"), and say, the Desktop Generation Collective . "Web Revival" is very broad and very much an amorphous term.

[ThunderPerfectWitchcraft]

I don't understand at all what you're trying to argue for him. He said, “this omnipresence of irony in contemporary culture is a poison. Just as if some people are ashamed to be sincere or straightforward.” When he's calling a cultural movement of whimsical pastiche poison, I am going to assume he is a greater cynic than the average person who is using Neocities to share pictures of cute cats and cool spinning skull graphics.

He called the irony a poison, not the act or a specific movement. This is an important difference!
What I tried to explain is: He regards the pastiche as ironic. He believes the people who do it are not sincere, but do it as a kind of joke. You clearly disagree.

Yes, some people like those sorts of things, and that in no way automatically makes them despondent in the future.[/color] Maybe they don't want to use JavaScript. And what is this implication that optimism exists only if there is some kind of newfangled technological "advance" to herald it? To me, that's like looking down on people who are getting into older crafts like bookbinding and scrapbooking because it's fun to make personal things with your own skill. Humans like to be creative, and Neocities offers an accessible digital online medium to create in. Not everyone has the know-how or desire to work with SASS or pay for a GSAP licence when all they want to do is small-time, hobbyist craft.[/font]

Oh, nobody said that a technological advance is needed for optimism. I'm very sure that he longs for a social movement, but I'll get back to this later. Lets stay at your bookbinding-analogy:
The question is - if there would be a movement of bookbinders - why do they bind books? Is it a protest against the fordistic labor divison? Do they bind empty books to show that there is nothing what can be written to fill them? Do they do it "just for fun", because they believe that nothing matters anyhow? The "why" matters a lot.
People who bound books as a craft had their reasons to do so: Many of them were monks and religious scholars, who wanted to transform the world after the supposed will of their deity. Later on, the craft was usually done by people who did it for a living. Why do people do it for fun today?

What is the chief complaint? That swathes of people with access to an in-browser code editor are not revolutionary web developers, writers, or multidisciplinary artists who self-organise into futurist art collectives? That people don't have a natural tendency for (or are good at) agitprop, and thus can't possibly be anything but cynical when they share blinkies? I suppose it may be "frustrating" that people are exercising their waking hours the "wrong" way, but if we're going to complain about that, then perhaps it would be even more productive that (in the case of the US, in this example) we examine the material, historical reasons for that (i.e. the rise of the US as the predominant capitalist superpower post-World War II, the breakdown of the Bretton Woods agreement, etc.) and their implications for art and artistic literacy, let alone historical and social consciousness, and talk to people about it and the importance of artistic and political activity (however you define that).

His chief complaint is that we live in a time that he regards as hopeless, and the lack of a counter-culture to challenge the status quo. I cited the web-revival as a potential potent counter-culture. He basically merely expressed his skepticism, and asked where to look. The reasons are surely worth to discuss - I'd rather locate them in the very foundation of the capitalist system/ideology than in singular events, but I'm afraid that this would exceed the framing of this thread.

I sincerely believe he is looking at the wrong place if he has his scope set to encompass only, or largely Neocities. That is a platform that celebrates pastiche in its name. I'm not going to go into the Historical European Martial Arts groups and wring my hands, asking them why they're practicing montante and studying Fiore instead of innovating the light sabre. If he is looking for groups of people actively trying to disrupt the world's current fabric by using the newest in Internet technology (...Haskell and Rust???), he should go into Web3 circles and find the FOSS engineers working for pittances, shares at par value, and/or cryptocurrency. I don't mean that ironically. I mean literally. Go look for these people on X Spaces, Discord, and GitHub. He should be talking to them, reading their whitepapers, and asking them how they think their tech can and should be disruptive for social good. He will have far more optimistic, perhaps stimulating conversations about the future landscape with those full-stack engineers.

I don't believe that technology has the potential to change the world for the better. As far as I'm concerned, one of our greatest problems is that technology outrun social advance - we have the power to destroy our self, but lack systems and mechanisms that ensure a responsible use of this power, and as a result, trying to improve things by improving technique is like trying to extinguish a fire with gas.

The tech-positivity is one of the biggest gripes I've with the FLOSS-movement: I admire their work, I use their projects, and I even use their licenses - but I don't believe that their vision can work out in the way they hope. Nevertheless: They are another optimistic, idealist movement that unfortunately had a wrong premise.

An interesting aspect: The digital technology (the internet, and modern electronics in the extended sense) are a product of the time were capitalism rose to being the primary hegemony, and - in many ways - mirror capitalism's fundamental logics. But the hegemony of capitalism/the free markets are always in conflict of those who try to seize power, and thus need and attempt to limit the freedom of capitalism/the markets (Deleuze wrote a lot about this, if anyone is interested). Many of these "new digital technologies", like cryptocurrencies or LLMs, are clearly directed to ensure the unhindered liberation of the market/capitalism. The thing is: Neither the free market nor those who try to seize power against it have especially good intentions towards the common people. The hopelessness described by S. is, among other things, probably also a result of the fault lines running through fields where only the powerful seem able to get any gains.

I think this is a good definition and I find this line of questioning interesting. I think that is better decided on a case-by-case basis, as there is differentiation between the "Ugly Web" crafters (I suppose they are "punk"), and say, the Desktop Generation Collective . "Web Revival" is very broad and very much an amorphous term.

This is interesting indeed. If we look at punk, the movement was at its beginning very cynical, hedonist, and hopeless at the core ("no future"). If you say that you'd allocate the classic web-revival, you agree in a very fundamental way with S. However, you basically sharply reject conclusions that he makes from it.
And the very interesting thing is: Punk is also not cynical, hedonist, and hopeless anymore. People poured meaning into it - modern punks are usually utopists, often deeply politically engaged and idealists to the core, while holding up the old banner, their old aesthetic, and - in an somewhat ironic way - parts of the old habitus, that is only seemingly cynic and hedonist now. I believe that this duality is the essence of the "Meta-modernity" that Melooon tried to discuss in the thread linked in my OP, and that the web-revival is deeply rooted in this meta-modernity.

I can't really see how the Desktop Generation Collective fits in, though. Seems to me like a commercially oriented design group.

[arcus]

S. may be interested in Merveilles, 100 Rabbits, this webring, and 32-bit Cafe.

I have a lot of mixed feelings about the web revival as a movement. I share some of S.' feelings about a lack of strong counter culture movement in general and involving the internet. There was the Yesterweb, but they did not explain their mission until the end and were hostile to the community they fostered.

Despite all that, the web is gradually improving from my perspective. There are more sites around to explore, many wikis have migrated away from fandom, there's now many alternative front ends for various services, and indie social media sites have bigger communities now. While some of these are far from being solutions, they are an improvement to how things were five to ten years ago.

I can not speak for anyone else about the skull GIFs and how ironic they are or not, but I see them as a net positive either way. Someone's ironic website may be the start of something else.

[wygolvillage]

My enjoyment of web revival aesthetics is totally sincere. Being able to count the pixels and seeing all the jagged edges on an old gif makes it feel more tangible and toylike to me. The people I've met in these spaces are some of the most sweet and sincere creative artists online, I think and there isn't really a concept of "cringe".

I wouldn't have made a whole playable tribute to girly horse games of yesteryear if it was all ironic. I think even the people adopting 90s aesthetics as pastiche are doing it out of love, too, tbh.