RE: [-empyre-] Re: empyre digest, Vol 1 #172 -

[Christiane_Paul@WHITNEY.ORG]

-----Original Message-----
From: newradio
To: empyre@imap.cofa.unsw.edu.au
Sent: 7/5/02 10:30 AM
Subject: [-empyre-] Re: empyre digest, Vol 1 #172 -


>I have no question that we're seeing, with museum and gallery
>involvement,the development of a lot of interesting "new" work >connecting
the Internet with physical space. ($$$)   But there's a lot >of stuff that
should be floating free, and whether you call it (or the >museum curator
calls it) art is of less consequence than that its >development be
encouraged.

I absolutely agree and that's the great advantage net art has over other
media. Museums can play a role in supporting and encouraging it but no
matter what they do, the art doesn't depend on them, it is already out there
(and there was an on-line art world with galleries, critics etc. long before
the traditional art world paid attention). Museums are a good platform for
expanding into a larger audience and for avoiding that net art remains a
ghetto inhabited only by a specific community (which still pretty much is
the case and of course, people are divided on whether that's good or bad).
The downside is that they imprint a stamp of approval that can influence the
balance of what is or isn't accepted as "(good) art."