 |
 |
Welcome to October and a new discussion theme (designed to co-incide with MediaArtHistories in Riga <http://www.mediaarthistory.org/> ): art history online. Over the past few years I have been researching the histories of digital and new media art forms, the spaces and practices of online art contextualisation - or perhaps rather digital art historiography - and the concept of the art history book. Iıd like to continue to think about these things here and now, but publicly and collaboratively. I am working on a book that is due out in 2014 that looks precisely at post-internet forms of art history/criticism/theory, but from the very beginning, the idea I had in writing the book was to develop a more practice-based approach to the research. To begin with then, I pitched the book and an over-arching book series idea to a new academic publishing house called Gylphi. I argued that not only were there few academic book series that would publish a book on the history of online art history, but that it would be valuable to establish a book series that could explore the issues of creating and disseminating art knowledge in the digital age at more than just a theoretical level. My plan was to set up a book series that would ask what forms art knowledge can and should take today in content AND form. And so Gylphi and I created Arts Future Book: http://www.gylphi.co.uk/series/ArtsFuture/ <http://www.gylphi.co.uk/series/ArtsFuture/> In August we published our first book which is a combination of print and ebook (the ebook will be released shortly) and experimental companion chapter - not to mention artworks/exhibitions. Itıs called Interactive Art and Embodiment and was conceived and written by artist and theorist Nathaniel Stern: http://www.amazon.com/Interactive-Art-Embodiment-Implicit-Performance/dp/178 0240090/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380612757&sr=8-1&keywords=nathaniel+stern <http://www.amazon.com/Interactive-Art-Embodiment-Implicit-Performance/dp/17 80240090/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380612757&sr=8-1&keywords=nathaniel+stern> - more on this later in the month! In setting up the book series, working on Nathanielıs book, and continuing to research art historyıs constituent media (for example my projects asking what art history is made of and if itıs too bookish: http://digitalcritic.org/2013/07/what-is-art-history-made-of/ <http://digitalcritic.org/2013/07/what-is-art-history-made-of/> ) I have been developing a practice-based approach digital art historiography (both thinking about, and modelling in order to think about, the form and concept of the discipline of art history). Over the next month, Iıd therefore like to continue to explore questions like: * What types of art historical, critical and contextual modes does the internet support? * * How far have we come since the early lists in truly democratizing art discussion and creating alternate contextual practices? * * What are some of the valuable new experiments being staged in the critical exploration of the arts? * * What impact does all this have on the future of the art history book? But by doing it here on an arts discussion list (and across other social media like Twitter and Facebook) I want to engage in making and therefore thinking about these kinds of multi-modal art archives. I want to produce something that explores the ideas at the core of my research in form AND content and allow online arts communities and individuals to challenge my work directly through their own knowledge and criticism, and indirectly by helping to build the type of archive a book can never be (mutli-platform, multi-vocal, open-ended, iterative) So how will this work? Each week Iıll introduce a sub-topic and use this list, private email, Twitter, Facebook and the comment sections of blogs to invite contributions and discussion. I will ask some general and some much more direct questions and I hope people will have the time to share as much information as possible on the field of online art discussion they have the most experience of. In this way, this very list discussion will become a valuable archive and extended essay on the history of online art discussion - not to mention yet another experiment in how to produce art history after the internet. In this, Week 1, Iım interested in the early period of online art discussion: How did art-focused online discussion spaces come about? Whatıs the history? Did the art BBS pave the way and which came first Artex or THING? What were the inspirations behind art discussion BBS and list serves? How did BBS and lists evolve? What went wrong? What were the turning points? Who was using them in the mid-late 1990s, how and why? In Week 2 Iıd like to think about some of the new forms of art research and discussion space like blogs, Twitter and Facebook and how theyıve changed the way we doı art history/criticism. What new forms of art research and discussion space have arisen since lists? How much have online discussion forums really changed the way we research and write about art? How has free online art discussion impacted the art critical professions? Have we witnessed the beginning of the end for the salarIed art critic and/or a rise in the independent art critical practitioner? And what about art historical scholars? What digital tools are changing the way art historians work? And how is the discipline adapting? In Week 3 I want to consider how exactly we can describe and theorise online art historical/critical practices How do we explain what we do when we historicise/critique and contexualise arts online? What is different? Are these collaborative, iterative, performative practices and if so, are they all that new? How else might the be described? What do these ways of working mean for the discipline of art history? How can we validate or teach these approaches? What skills are coming to the fore? And what contextual spaces/activities remain so experimental they are almost impossible to frame as art historical or critical acts? And finally, in Week 4 Iıll turn to ideas about the future of the art history/criticism/theory book How can and should we research and communicate on the arts? What do books still have to offer? What should art history and criticism do in the internet age and how might this differ from what we wanted them to do in the print era? Is art historical scholarship bound to the print book? Why is art history so far behind in reconsidering its media? So, first up, what was YOUR first experience of online art discussion? Meanwhile I'm off to ask some early list pioneers to offer their thoughts on the origins of online art discussion