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  2002

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING 2002

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: February's topic: artist/critic/curator

From:

Josephine Bosma <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Tue, 5 Feb 2002 10:45:57 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (120 lines)

hello Crumbs,


First of all, thanks to Sarah Cook for offering a way to extend the
discussions we had on January 25th in another context. On that friday
afternoon and evening we concentrated almost entirely on art criticism:
wouldn't it be appropriate to create an art criticism that is aware of,
which encompasses media theory and media criticism in a culture whose
language and feel is infested by electronic media. In other words: look
at all art through the latest of its siblings. Now, on Crumb, I feel
challenged to take this idea further into the practice of presenting
(net) art. Not an easy task.

One reason why this is not an easy task: there are many interpretations
of the term net art, and it makes any discussion confusing if that is
not cleared. As Max Bruinsma, dutch art critic, said during our non
public discussion "we are building the new criticism as we speak" and
that means also the new definitions. I am now going to take the risk of
boring you to death with me thinking out loud. Just to show you the
broadness of the term net art. The following comes from some questions
someone sent me to answer. It is not perfect, but it gives some kind of
idea of what I am talking about when I say 'net art'.

    > question 4: do you distinguish the terms web art from netart?

      Web art and net art are two different things. Web art is an art
that is made to be presented and viewed within a web browser. Net art is
art that is made for and within a network (the combination of the social
and
technical (mostly computer) networks). Web art is therefore only a part
of net art. It is impossible to understand net art when all you know is
web art. It is however possible to know web art when you look at net art
as a whole. Because of the significance of networking and networks for
our politics, our society and our culture (so also for art) looking at
net art through web art alone is very unwise. It is like looking through
a peephole when you could open the door instead. Another more
interesting subdivision (if one can call it that) of net art has been in
focus lately though. The Transmediale festival in Berlin has been
important in its acceptance. This is code art. Inke Arns (german critic
and curator) has written a very interesting text about this recently.
Code is, as you know, the foundation of all computer communications, all
interfaces and all digital representations. Code is like the genetic
make up of the digital world and it is created by humans. I myself see
code art as a specialized area in net art most of all. In it artists
examine and experiment with the language people use to make computers do
things. The term 'code' can however be perceived in a very broad sense,
just like the term 'network'. There are dress codes, codes of behavior,
social and
political codes, just to name a few.
The term net art has always been problematic. One can ask oneself
whether an art that is so diverse in its appearances and in its
practices needs to be called by a term that seems to lock it within a
certain technical context. Because of the specific changes to art within
a networked society it seems necessary however to have some kind of
reference to technology in the terminology used in order to not discard
or neglect certain crucial issues at hand (for as long as it is
necessary to create awareness of these issues). This is why I have
persisted in using the term net art. Code art so far is the only term
that has the same kind of double meaning and broadness that net art has
(and let's not forget the same snappy short name). It is the only term
that could compete with it. I think that the difference between the two,
and a choice for one over the other, would lay solely in from which
perspective one chooses to look at this new situation for art. Looking
at the code, the 'genetic' make up, would mean looking at the material
and the context of this art through a magnifying glass. Focussing on the
network means taking communication, sharing and exchange as central to a
debate around art today. Both are equally important to me even though
code is at the basis of, amongst other things, this communication,
sharing and exchange. Code art and net art are highly related if not the
same for me.
Coming from a tactical media background I am very interested in (amongst
other things) how perception and understanding are created. Because of
this I still choose to use net art over code art. The reason for this is
that to focus on code would mean a diversion from free speech and media
access for me, even if code has everything to do with these issues. The
diversion I am referring to is entirely in people's minds. I simply
think people know what networking means, but code is something much more
obscure (still). So I choose for the term net art for pr reasons. <

In the end of course (and I repeat this over and over, maybe
superfluously) it is all simply about art.

After this long description of how broadly I see net art maybe you can
imagine a bit how an approach to curating and exhibiting this art should
be broad or varied as well, depending on individual works. Of course the
issues we have seen here on crumb (concerning technology and security)
are important as well. They are not all there is to exhibiting this art
though (I believe people have sometimes commented on this here before).
I think we can distinguish between curators who look at the technology
as the interesting factor in media art and curators who look at the
cultural impact of art works. Even if technology cannot be but important
in art today, it is not the center of it imo. I forgot who it was, but
someone recently made a remark about the big media art exhibitions in
for instance the US (bitstreams etc.). It was something like this: when
will we see more curators who know how to present media art without
gettho-izing it inside the art world (or without emphasizing the art
gettho it is already in maybe)?

I think we should not forget that with net art we see an art that for
the first time has its own media, its own environment, its own ways of
representing itself. This can be used and incorporated in
representations of this work. It would be easy to say this own
environment is a reason to keep this art separate from 'the art world'
at large. Some net artists tend to think they need to be seperate from
the art world too. But why create two dinosaurs if we can have one
living art culture?

I will try to write something about responsibility and material use
(when working in a media environment, and that counts for curators too)
here too. Writing this down now makes it impossible for me to escape or
forget that one!  ;) Remind me if I do.


highest regards,



J
*

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
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