JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING  2001

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING 2001

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Big Media Art. March Theme of the Month

From:

Julie Lazar <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/

Date:

Tue, 27 Mar 2001 11:02:15 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (131 lines)

There is a learning curve for arts writers and critics in mainstream media
outlets.  Most can't/won't even write in meaningful ways about "old" media
(film, video, audio art, etc.) though there are exceptions.  Critics are
always pressed by circulation numbers (just like museums are pressed by
attendance figures).  I don't think this is an excuse, just the reality of
what I've encountered from experience.  Says more to me about what is
lacking in critical studies programs where writers get trained.

While there is a great deal of thoughtful writing about John Cage, for
example, even after nearly ten years since his death, I haven't found a
writer/critic who can consider and evaluate thoughtfully his diverse work in
the various disciplines in which he worked (that bridged the fine arts,
poetry, philosophy, mycology, etc).  Can't claim that I can write about all
of that either.  Still, it is very disappointing (about Cage) that what is
getting press isn't about the actual art works themselves (or the artists)
but that jazziness of the museums.  Guess they have to start somewhere.

This will take time, patience, commitment, inter- and intra- disciplinary
discourse on an on-going basis.  Courage.

Why don't "big media outlets" hire real thinkers to write about art?  (Seems
obvious that editors underrate the intelligence of their readers, or give to
much import to advertisers.)  I'd like to change my mind on all of this. It
must be more complex an issue.

In the arts, as in the sciences--and just about anything else it seems--some
people are up-to-date and comprehend what is really going on in the present,
while others are fifty years behind and everything in-between.  Speaking of
which, V. Klebnikov's "Zangezi: A Supersaga in Twenty Planes" (in The King
of Time, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1985) is worth reading re:
foreseeing the net as is McLuhan's "Agenbite of Outwit" (published in
Rolywholyover   A Circus, Rizzoli, New York, 1993 or Tyuoni 1, 1985).





-----Original Message-----
From: Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Steve Dietz
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 10:33 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Big Media Art. March Theme of the Month


Beryl+,
Size is relative. I won't go into my powers of 10 rant, but just as
one person's metadata is another person's data, for some the Walker is
a huge, "mainstream" institution, and for others it's an interesting,
small, regional anomaly. It depends on perspective, and I agree with
Barbara that people do/can make a difference--but that's just my
perspective.

That said, I think there is a level of press coverage of the efforts
by a SFMOMA or Whitney that may be out of proportion to what they are
actually mounting in relation to the history of what has been already
done. And this is not unique to new media by any means. When the
Whitney(?) did a "mid-career" retrospective of Cindy Sherman, it was
covered by the press differently than her hundreds of shows up till
then.

What astonishes me--and depresses me a bit--is the level of the
discourse around the shows by the press. It's like Bill Walsh
scripting the first 20 plays of an (American) football game--What
about $? What about copyright?  Does MegaMuseum doing this mean that
net art is real? What's the future? etc. If one of the things "large"
institutions bring to the table is additional audience/press, what is
the responsibility to the level of discourse? Why do 9 out of 10
articles about Bitstreams talk about Jeffrey Blake and his "moving"
paintings?

s

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Beryl Graham
> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 4:46 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Big Media Art. March Theme of the Month
>
>
> Steve Dietz said:
>
> >Beryl,
> >Why does it matter to _you_ what "big" institutions do? I've never
> >quite understood the emphasis on the size thing.
>
> Interesting question! Of course, I wouldn't admit to being a
> size-queen myself (living in a place which is NOT London), but I
> thought it interesting and shocking that I've talked to several
> people who had never heard of new media/digital art before
> the 010101
> show at SFMOMA (admittedly, these people were Californians, and not
> art folk).
>
> I think big organisations reach some different parts of the
> audience,
> and different parts of the press, and I think that SOME big museums
> feel  rather obliged to think about 'canons'. I also think that
> expectations are different, I thought that the reactions
> that Matthew
> Gansallo mentioned were particularly responding to the fact 'hey,
> it's the Tate doing this' whereas they may have expected
> that kind of
> work from a smaller organisation.
>
> I've worked for big, medium, and small organisations in new media,
> and, well, they're different in curatorial terms (I didn't say which
> was better, did I?) To crudely stereotype: big ones have a more
> middle-of-the-road audience, more powerful/annoying marketing
> departments, worry about Internet porn, but have the money for big
> physical installations; small ones let you be more
> experimental, have
> no equipment, but have staff who have used the Internet for fun.
>
> Something which concerns me is whether physical installations are
> becoming the 'preserve' of big museums, and net.art the preserve of
> artist-run spaces (mostly because of resources), which relates to
> some of Simon Biggs' comments, and what Barbara London mentioned
> about artists leading the debate. Interestingly, it seems to be the
> physical installations which are less debated these days.
>
> Of course, you Steve have done the opposite to my stereotypes, which
> might be why you've proved rather successful! Does size
> matter to you?
>
> yours,
>
> Beryl
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager