 |
 |
In reference to Sarah's inquiry... about the usefulness of online information for new media education curators: I am interested particularly in the implications of a "mediated experience" with art - especially the way that new media institutions deal with the intricacies of interpreting new media art. I am an educator at a big insitution that is committed to new media, and have been wishing to include new media art in its education initiatives. There is an intimacy needed to view these works, and the museum as public space has a set of rules (a prescribed distance to a work of art, notions of interactivity in a group setting, all these that Reiner discussed) that are sometimes not conducive to viewing. Handheld PDAs and wireless gadgets that are used to augment an exhibition have been used by the institution to narrate traditional [Duchampian] exhibitions. I am wondering how curators feel about ways an institution strives to create an intimate viewing of new media in Turing-land? Currently, our institution is involved with developing an educational initiative for arts education, and included in its mission is to be heavily technology-driven. We would like to eventually include new media art as part of our programming, especially as it will be a space on-site to engage the visitor in an intimate setting, for the purpose of art education. Is there a strategy that we might utilize to insert itself into the dialogue of new media curation? Have there been ways of engaging the museum visitor that were instigated by the artists/artists' work, the educators, or both? Education is not part of the equation in a raw gallery space, but it is integral to the function of a big institution. There are innovative ways that other institutions have done this last year: namely, net art in the biennial at the Whitney (a success for its very inclusion, a case study for its method of display), and the "Email Project," held in conjunction with the Greater New York show at P.S.1, organized by Anthony Huberman. Are there more examples out there that new media curators felt were exemplary or cutting-edge in their use of technology, that were born in part of their institution's "new media" initiatives (education or otherwise)? By their very nature, big institutions must be conscious of their ability to provide an experience for the visitor, but how can this be a strategy for education, as well? I would be pleased to see a section of Crumb dedicated to new media education curators. Sarah, it has been a pleasure to be included in these discussions, and see some of you at the Museums and the Web Conference in Seattle this week. Cheers, Rosanna Flouty >>> Sarah Cook <[log in to unmask]> 03/12 6:26 AM >>> Dear all, the sunderland server problem seems more or less resolved, and so it's good to catch up on the discussion on the list. I like the brief introductions that people are posting, it's a good way to get to know the bodies of knowledge of the other subscribers, might I encourage more of you to write a few lines as to who you are? In answer to Honor and Reiner's questions, no, I hadn't posted any texts in advance of Lev Manovich's. I have since directed attention to Steve Dietz's "Why have there been no great net artists" (available at www.walkerart.org/gallery9/dietz). Any thoughts there? and yes, the assignment is designed to reference Natalie Bookchin's original homework piece... this was Vuk's suggestion. But as we're engaged in "research" not "teaching" there is no grading or marking involved. it's pass or fail based soley on participation! ;-) In answer to Vicki Mitchell's question about online educational tools, I should direct you to www.artsconnected.org - a site developed by the Walker Art Center and the Minneapolis Institute of Arts in response to government funding for curriculum development in the state of Minnesota. Portions of the site were designed by Trudy Lane, the designer of crumb. If this type of information is useful, and people have other links to suggest, we'll add a new section to crumb for new media education curators. But to turn back to our discussion of the month (and I do hope our invited participants will add their thoughts) - big media art in big media institutions... Reiner wrote, in a final parentheses: (there have to be found/realized ways to present these different aspects by showing 'net-art', i prefer to say i-art, in public places - environments where the visitor is stimulated (or at least gets the chance) to experience the quality of the pieces). and I ask in response, how is the museum different from a public place in the sense meant here? Does the museum prohibit stimulated interaction, and if so, why? does the i in "i-art" stand for intimacy rather than internet or interactive?? thanks, Sarah