Re: [-empyre-] questions - time for good blogging



Perhaps the most important criteria for "good" art in the modernist era,
tho' arguably pre- and post-modernism too, has been innovation. Works that
are different and whose differences come to be seen as reflective of changes
throughout a culture are valued more highly.

As troubling as this privileging of the avant garde has been, the point came
home to me recently in a group exhibition where only one of several works
was really innovative in that way; the rest could be seen to be derivative
(though not without interest in either their derivative or non-derivative
aspects).

In blogging, or in new media work generally, this criteria is no less alive
(or at least still moving). One looks for differences in relation to what is
typical of a genre (arguably blogging is a genre and was so almost
instantly).

On the second point, the average time gallery visitors spend looking at a
work of art is 8 seconds. This is a malais that museums are challenged to
address. Anyone who has been to art school has spent more than 8 seconds
looking at pictures of, reading about, hearing and talking about Duchamp's
urinal. It is this repeated exposure and reflection upon the work that
constitutes "appreciation" and not the time spent off or online one time. If
the work is any good, those who care about such things will find it and
spend the time. In this respect, blogging is no different than or less
accessible than other types of work.

Robert Labossiere
Toronto

"I grow old... I grow old...
I shall wear the bottom of my trousers rolled."


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <severn@acay.com.au>
To: <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 4:00 AM
Subject: [-empyre-] questions


> apologies for my temporal instability, I'm on digest
>
> -------------
> this months topic has generated much offlist discussion here regarding the
> current trends on the internet and has been stimulating despite the list's
> 'interesting times'. some questions/observations arising
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> 'after "duchamp's dunny" (according to artpup) I could do a (dogpoo) in
> the corner and call it art. But would it be good art?'
>
> What criteria are applicable in determining what constitutes good or bad
> blogart? Are their any special criteria significant to this artform?
>
> --------------------------------------
>
> audience time investment
>
> how much time is the audience willing to spend to access a net artwork,
> including time taken to educate about the work?
>
> how accessable is blogging?
>
> --------------------------------------
>
> j
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>





This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.