[-empyre-] Galleries, publics, net.art



Hi Helen -

I agree that some of the attraction in viewing net.art is participation, to be sure. Also, the chance to have oneself "reflected" (for example Mouchette's site etc.) is a very seductive one. On the techy side - the attraction is more focused on technique and discovering new applications.

However, in what concerns home viewing vs. gallery viewing - my feelings are divided. Yes, I love being a viewer from my home - if only for the simple reason that I don't have to go to NY (from Montreal) to see work. Being able to participate in, interact with and follow the works of artists from all over the world is very enriching. In fact, I would say that it is a major contributor to my still being in Montreal. I don't need to move to "the big city" to participate.

However, I'm still an advocate for institutions and their participation in the representation of, archiving, documentation, contextualizing etc. of net.art. And I think that in some ways they (institutions) are untapped resources. With MobileGaze, we find ourselves already asking ourselves the question - what do we do when our server is full? Can we give some of this "stuff" that we've made away to an institution that will participate in its conservation? I also feel that is is only a matter or time until museums do incorporate net.art into regular programming (like video etc.) However, the problem of presentation is still a pertinent one. Can (should) net.art make its way into full-on multimedia installation presentations? How? And what is the justification for this. (Other than the spectacular.)

I also agree with Patrick Lichty's comment:

"I think the best translation has been the Walker Art Center's portal for the
Let's Entertain show in 1999.  It consisted of a revolving door with a
monitor within it that rotated through the net pieces as you revolved the
door.  Excellent metaphor, and the most engaging interface I had seen yet."

I would wish for a greater integration of net.art into a wider exhibition context.

As for festivals - I have to say that I have often been disappointed in the presentations strategies (tables w/ computers?) as I would, of course, prefer to view works from my house. In fact, festivals such as the FCMM in Montreal have stopped showing net.art completely. Which to me is indicative of a crisis. And a great loss for the community. Because, if work is not being shown, people will stop making it! Video and sound art are presented much more in Montreal - and hence there are MANY more video and sound artists.

So I do see a need for some kind of support - that can be complimented with all the great things that are happening online (Turbulence, Rhizome, etc.)

Valerie



hello Valerie, Sylvie. Melinda et.al. Having read the empyre list on a more
or less regular basis, I'd like to suggest that it -- and particularly the
blogs/vogs stuff --  suggests a possible way of looking at one of Valerie's
concerns: As the director of the turbulence website  (we commission and
present artistic work for the Internet) and an early if somewhat reluctant
participant in the presentation of net art in physical spaces, I too have
been aware that the public is not particularly drawn to viewing net art.
What it is drawn to and what many of the empyre group have  demonstrated
they are drawn to is participation. They want to do something: blog or vog,
not necessarily view the work of someone calling herself an artist. EXCEPT
-- and this has been true for as long as I can remember on the net -- to
learn from her (or him) how to do something -- to grab a piece of
programming, an idea..

I don't honestly know that museum or gallery presentation is going to
increase viewership. What they do is put an old-timey seal of approval on
the field, and a pressure on artists to create more object-like work.
Festivals strike me as something else, perhaps because they're more fun,
usually show more work, and one can participate in them: check out a few
things, talk to people you know etc.

So my question in return to Valerie is: isn't expecting viewership from the
public a concern related to all forms of art? And wouldn't this kind of
"art" be better promoted by encouraging online viewing? I frankly prefer to
view from my home. The idea of schlepping across NYC  to see one or two
works I could easily see at home is pretty appalling .. I do think there's a
big difference between home viewing and the impersonal gallery or museum
viewing. And that the general public may in fact be intimidated by the
gallery/museum setting .. I may be wrong, but send me some URLs for
home-viewing and you have a viewer. Expect me to travel across town to the
gallery or museum and you may not.

-- Helen Thorington
http://turbulence.org
http://new-radio.org/helen/



Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 16:25:36 -0400
To: empyre@imap.cofa.unsw.edu.au
From: valerie <valerie@mobilegaze.com>
Subject: [-empyre-] Intro
Reply-To: empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au

Dear Melinda / [empyre] -

Thank you for the introduction. As you mentioned - I am a
multi-tasker par excellence - involved in performance, technology,
curating Web art and running an online magazine/ dissemination
project (MobileGaze). I hope to be able to cover a number of
questions / subjects around these various disciplines and interest in
the coming weeks with the [empyre] community which I have avidly been
listening in on over the course of the last few months.

So here goes...

I want to take this opportunity to start by discussing issues around
Web dissemination and visibility. I've been involved in Web art for a
little over 4 years - and I have come to 2 recent conclusions /
questions which have sparked animated debates in my local artistic
circles.

The first conclusion is that the public at large using the Internet
on a daily basis is not exceptionally involved in viewership of Web
art. This is something which I seek to resolve in actively promoting
Web art works - especially locally. However - I realize that it is
obviously a question that goes beyond "access" and rather touches on
expectations of "form" and "content". So, any thoughts on that would
be welcome.

My second question (which has been postulated in recent museum
exhibitions at Whitney & SFMoma - and locally in Montreal with events
such as the Web section of the Biennale de Montr=E9al) is how to make a
transition of presentation to a wider public through museum contexts
etc. without sabotaging the wonderful fluidity of production and
presentation on the Web? I know that some people have reacted
strongly against "museum" exhibitions - however, I also feel that Web
artists wish to be a part of the establishment. The reason I ask this
question in part is because I am curating an upcoming Web art
exhibition at the Mus=E9e du Qu=E9bec (Canada) and these concerns have
been raised both outside and inside the institution.

However, MobileGaze (http://www.mobilegaze.com) - and art collective
site that I run with net.artist Brad Todd
(http://www.mobilegaze.com/zero) - is probably the other end of the
spectrum of presentation. We do not have a space (other than
cyberspace) or employees or even a strict schedule. Here we've opted
for thematic "issues" (like a magazine) which feature video as well
as written interviews with artists and digital producers. However,
I'm curious of other formats (examples) of Web dissemination that Web
artists feel are successful?

What is the future of Web dissemination?

Best - Valerie



--
MobileGaze: on-line culture.
http://www.mobilegaze.com

Matter + Memory net.art exhibition
http://www.mobilegaze.com/m+m





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