Discussions (29) Opportunities (0) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

What?


Did someone say beer? I'll definetely be there.

DISCUSSION

What?


Here's why that embeddded youtube video makes sense: It's from the 90s (not 80s!) and as you can see it has the same euphoria about technology as the net art of that time. The reason why it looks "bad" today is the same reason why 90s net.art looks "bad" today (even though you're right that "bad" turned into awesome)

DISCUSSION

What?


seriously dude, they post quicker than i can look!


DISCUSSION

What?


Erika: Certainly. (See "It's very rhizomatic but it's also a mess to read"...)
There's a very interesting discussion about wether media art even exists, but it's in German :(
http://www.mail-archive.com/rohrpost@mikrolisten.de/msg02075.html

Tom can you give an example for such "element[s] of conscious opposition to old-guard net art practice"? I agree that a lot of the good new shit is "looking back to '60s (text-centric, gallery-centric) conceptual art for models", I often wonder why. Artist websites seem to imitate aesthetics of a gallery, white, clean and neat. This is something I will never understand, since in my eyes the web is about everything BUT that form of presentation. It even clashes with a post-post modern attitude where everything is equally meaningful. Looks like everyone's trying to hide behind the eminent authenticity of conceptual and minimal art, since clearly nobody knows where net.art should go.

I have to admit however, that I love all the new stuff (such as my own hehe) and it's level of communication. But it's easy to like it: it's like riddles and the key to the answer is your own cultural competence. Everytime you "get" such a piece of art, it's a feeling of success. And that's always positive (only if the difficulty level is not too low and "everybody" could get it). And if it even appears waterproof concerning authenticity (due to a conceptual aspect) whattaya know; it's art!

DISCUSSION

What?


Damon's list came after my comment. But yeah, my pleasure. I don't know if it has anything to do with fragile and complicated things vs. mainstream internet culture things (pardon my limited english skills).
It seems that we (3rd generation net artists how Olia calls us) were trashed with all that cultural content by the media and finally grew up to communicate in a way which is all about quoting or remixing that garbage (even if it concerns new phenomena); where as 1990s net.art was more trying to come up with a intentional concept and seemed to have an answer prepared for even the un-asked questions. To me it really seems like the newer net art is more about processing cultural input than it is about the dimensions and the possibilities of the web. Frames and hypertext, code and generative art, Mille Plateau and Rhizomes; that's all very interesting things concerning the concepts of mediated perception. But to me the stuff which is going on today is more about presets and terms of mainstream perception. I might not be sober at this moment, but I hope this still makes sense tomorrow. Call it reactionary, but I feel like anything you do (appropriate, remix, or just getting inspired) is some sort of reaction since we have been so exposed to media (old and new). Wether it's cheesy marquee tags or fancy iChat effects or (whatevs) it's all about the cultural competence and less about a new frontier.

Da da da ich lieb dich nicht du liebst mich nicht...