 |
 |
When is a book a work of art? We don't have too much problem, usually, distinguishing an "article" in Parkett, say, from a "project." The SFMOMA site has multiple functions--cataloging, communicating, commissioning--(which, as Sarah C. pointed out, was also true for Let's Entertain/Art Entertainment Network/EAT). It is, of course, possible to critique the success of the sites, but surely it's not that useful to conflate them?? To try and present the gallery-based works as anything more than documentation is useless. SFMOMA should not try to do so, and I don't think it did. How many museums judge the success of their publications based on the number of people who subsequently visit the museum? s > -----Original Message----- > From: Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/ > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Beryl Graham > Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 10:00 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Big Media Art. March Theme of the Month [snip] > As someone who 'saw' the show only on the web site I'm left with a > highly ambivalent relationship to 'the museum space': The web site > was 'big' and complex, as fitting with the public image of a big > museum, but only revealed the web art after much teeth-gritted > determination. Finding out what artworks were in the physical museum > show proved well beyond this gentle reader, although Char Davies' > work and a couple of others were mentioned on the museum site, and > the (rather expensive) catalogue was available for purchase (again > without revealing the actual contents or artists). Taking a positive > view, this may have been an acknowledgment of the essentially > different experiences of physical presence vs. net.art, and a > determination to take new media art seriously in an archivable, > paper-based, ISBN-numbered way. If so, it probably wasn't intended > to "overcome this divide in audiences" but to treat them very > differently. Taking a negative view, it may be an example of new > technology simply failing to provide the kind of basic information > normally provided on a leaflet. I was left with a largely denied > hunger for "sounds, visions, textures, and scents", but perhaps > technology is all about unfulfilled desires. > > Any more responses from those who actually visited the Museum? > > Beryl > > _________________________________________________________ > > Curatorial Resource for Upstart Media Bliss > http://www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/ > > Co-Editors: Telephone: +44 191 515 2896 > Beryl Graham: [log in to unmask] > Sarah Cook: [log in to unmask] >