Hi all,
I just wanted to respond to this thread even though it is a bit late.
I agree with Simon on this, that it does take time - although I do feel
that the time is very much now. At furtherfield.org we have a massive
backlog of net art to look at and review/support etc...
And the 'http' space in London, has been receiving many net-based
exhibitions as proposals, I think that there are more people/artists
enjoying the making/experiences of net art.
Also, I teach at 3 different colleges/universities a week, and many of
my students are thrilled with net art and related works - so, it is
growing and it will get stronger as a creative force, which I find very
exciting.
marc
>I think Wilfried is too impatient. There are quite a number of artists who,
>over a decade ago, adopted the net as their medium, or as one of their
>media, still producing new and vital work with it. For every retired
>net.artist there is an equivalent old-age pensioner deciding to take late
>retirement. They say it is a trend.
>
>Art is like wine. It needs time (of dear, I sound like a certain Dutch beer
>ad).
>
>Best
>
>Simon
>
>
>Myron Turner wrote:
>
>
>
>>Subject: "Netart", definings
>>
>>A rather despairing post arrived this morning from Wilfried Agricola de
>>Cologne, who most of you will know as the organizer of javamuseum.org. He
>>has clearly committed an enormous amount of energy, time and resources into
>>this project but has decided to call it quits and for reasons which are
>>apropos of our recent discussions. I thought I would excerpt some of what
>>he said; I hope that I am not misinterpreting.
>>
>> After JavaMuseum published. . .really a lot of "netart" features,
>> I personally still doubt, that "netart" represents an art genre of
>> its own. It is still not accepted widely as a specific form of New Media
>> art working, not even the term "netart" is defined in an approximately
>> acceptable way, and it is going round continously in circles, as the
>> active artists and their working remain in a kind of ghetto'
>>
>>He feels that the typical netart generation "does not last longer than
>>two or three years" and that those artists with longer term commitments
>>only "confirm. . .this general impression." If I understand him correctly,
>>he is arguing that because artists don't stick with it, they don't give it
>>enough
>>time for serious exploration:
>>
>> due to the fact that "netart" as it is practiced currently, represents
>> only an intermediate phase in nearly any art working. . .there is no
>> real continuous art working possible which would be able to explore the
>> entire potential of the Internet for artistic purposes and look for the
>> innovative. . . .So, the motivations to explore seriously and
>> continuously what net based art could represent, are existing for most
>> artists only during a kind of intermediate state.
>>
>>He concludes:
>> from my personal point of view the current structures of "netart" have,
>> if any perspectives at all, only short term, but no long term
>> perspectives, and remain therefore in a really desolate state.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Simon Biggs
>[log in to unmask]
>http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>
>Research Professor
>Art and Design Research Centre
>Sheffield Hallam University, UK
>http://www.shu.ac.uk/schools/cs/cri/adrc/research2/
>
>Senior Research Fellow
>Computer Laboratory
>University of Cambridge
>
>
>
>
|