hi,
just a few notes on the comments to the "10 questions":
————
@judsoN
> would it be more or less effective of a piece if you did it in a language of your choice?
this is a bit difficult to answer for me. a piece of net.art itself isn`t more or less effective in different languages, unless it deals with the additional layer of "language" itself. but language is a point in making net - related art. to me its very important to discuss some pieces because a kind of "audience" is always a part of it. either the people i discuss with on different topics or the ones who look at my stuff and react upon it. in this sense the language makes a piece more effective,because if i do something in english more people react to it. i tried many times to start discussions or presenting pieces on german (which is my native language) mailinglists. the only answers came from a troll…
and, in fact, real >discussions< on these lists are generally very rare.
———–
painting vs. coding
- is programming just a skill or an artistic process?
i think both is possible. i once got to know a sculptor who made exactly the sculptures he had (eidetic) in mind/ planned. so sculpting was just a tool to visualize his thoughts/ cocepts. on the other hand there are many who use sculpting as a process. i think it's the same with programming, so in my opinion the question if someone has to have programming skills or not to be a "new media" - artist isn't the point. important is just the quality of what he/ she does (and i don't think here in "good" or "bad" - terms).
————
"art"
to me it's very interesting that most of the people here use the term "art" for their work. i'm far from judging if something is actually art or not, but why "art"? in my opinion the term itself focusses (strictly seen) on something that began with the renaissance and ended in the 19th century - l'art pour l'art. before this it was just an attribute of religion, afterwards it's more a kind of discourse.
regards,
carlos
———————————————
c a r l o s k a t a s t r o f s k y
http://aqua.subnet.at/carlos
http://tinyurl.com/bm43p
10 questions / painting vs. coding / art
-
Type: discussion
Comments
I think "art" is just a name for a certain class of products. I do
realize that the word has been weighted by the romantic history of
"art" – and to use this word still has a certain haughtiness about
it. I hope – for myself – to get rid of this weight, and just use
the word as another might use a word like "bookkeeping" or
"construction work".
Furthermore, I think getting rid of the weight or content of the word
"art" could be an artistic project. Thoughout history we've seen this
"emptying out" happening time and time again. Examples? Perhaps not
Barnett Newman (see http://nznl.com for a long list of my pre-
suppositions and preconceptions on this subject…). so much as a
figure like Blinky Palermo, assembling what may be called "dummy"
abstract paintings.
http://images.google.com/images?q=blinky%20palermo
http://nznl.com/geert/pop.php?dag 051003
Geert
http://nznl.com
> to me it's very interesting that most of the people here use the
> term "art" for their work. i'm far from judging if something is
> actually art or not, but why "art"? in my opinion the term itself
> focusses (strictly seen) on something that began with the
> renaissance and ended in the 19th century - l'art pour l'art.
> before this it was just an attribute of religion, afterwards it's
> more a kind of discourse.
>
> regards,
> carlos
>
> ———————————————
> c a r l o s k a t a s t r o f s k y
> http://aqua.subnet.at/carlos
> http://tinyurl.com/bm43p
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
> subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/
> 29.php