>I don't want to hijack Crumb for my own topic since I actually like the idea
>of structured moderation for a list like this.
me too but what i don't understand is that i never see discussion on
the themes coming through the list, just the messages from beryll at
the start of the month announcing the theme and i'm thinking this is
due to that 'reply' quirk that this list is using (ie not responding
to the list but someone in the list) that was picked up on last week.
at first glance that seems to be fixed now so hopefully....
i was a bit nervious about posting through the list initially as
well, but nobody has said anything, if required and there is interest
we could always start a temporary list on something like yahoo to
take this further, let me know what you think because it might be
seen that we're trying to ciphen off members to a different list!
>But I see there isn't a theme
>this month so perhaps we can take some of these questions and give
>them some form for a future monthly theme.
it would be welcome, its a HUGH topic with so many possible threads
of discussion it will be difficult to do, but someone's got to!
>So, you see, from my POV, it doesn't make sense to view net art as an art
>form but, at most, a tool (like theory more than a brush).
i see your point, but at present due to my age i don't have the
experience of passing through a few art 'forms' or tools as you
prefer, to be able to take the stance that the end defines the means,
ie i want to create art and will use whatever necessary to do it
regardless of how that will classify the work once its finished, if
i've used video it must be video art, if i've used html it must be
net.art etc.
genuinely this is'nt trying to be sarcastic, but i guess with a few
more years behind me i will take the same point of view. i certainly
was'nt around at the start of net.art and am the first to admit that
but feel i have plenty to bring it. for the moment i guess i have
been pigeon-holed as a net.artist and in a way thats bad but feel the
sacrifice is necessary if i want to excel at any one tool, a trade up
if you will for the present.
> It makes even less sense to squeeze net art into an institutional,
>curatorial category. But then we get back to questions asked by
>conceptual art...
its the curating that needs to change more than the arts, thats very
obvious here, so i don't think it will ever be squeezing net.art into
an institution as such. whats needed though for curators to
understand how to start to form structures that can cope with art in
all its new 'forms' (art does'nt have a form as such so this takes in
everything from my 'net.art form' to your 'tool' without any
problems) is that artists, and increasingly technical people, are
working with them.
a+
gar
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
[log in to unmask]
http://www.asquare.org/
http://www.bannerart.org/
http://www.zendco.com/
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
|