 |
 |
Patrick, list, The question whether we maybe should look at the quality of a work first is a rather obvious one. To me it is even uninteresting. It is like (to use a simple comparison) saying it is more important to look at the quality of a person to do a certain job then it is to make sure more women or black people should be able to get into that specific field or level in a company. I think that you underestimate and maybe even insult the people who discuss (in the case of this list) the topic of interactive art in exhibitions. It is understandable that one is afraid of hype maybe, but the problem is that the fear of hype (fabricated popularity) seems to be one of the reasons that has kept a large part of the artworld away from all kinds of interactive digital and network art. It seems to be the other way around from what you suggest: the quality of certain works is not acknowledged because the environment interactive art is created in (the media) is supicious to some, and it causes them to shut down any kind of discussion about or access to the work in an art context. Let's try to get beyond that. I prefer to discuss this topic on a much more practical level, like for instance Cyper brought up in her/his mail. Does it make sense to have network art (or radio and other more or less public media art) in a museum? I find that an interesting question because I like to question the valuation of art in general. The supremacy of the art object makes it hard to switch to other ways of looking at art then from an outsiders or observers level. It might be good to look at how musea can present interactive art and at how they can help understand it better when they struggle with their object oriented tradition. To answer Cypers question what the added value of an artwork in a museum is (my two eurocents): musea have a role in preserving and presenting culture and art. They cannot simply leave something important out. So the added value to a net art piece in a museum is the acknowledgement of its value to culture in general. The role of a museum is always under discussion but it is beyond doubt that musea are important to how we see our environment and they cannot simply be ignored. At least that is for as far as someone who did not study this topic can tell you :) I hope others on this list can provide some more insightful thoughts on this issue. In the context of the 'too interactive' topic it might also be good to think of the role of security again. I thought that was the most interesting and important topic on this list so far. regards J *