RE: [-empyre-] Size matters?

["Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>]

> Does net art need validation? Does it need this? Certainly there are all
> sorts of venues/types of net art, from BMW films thru shockwave
> ads, Jodi,
> ascii art, etc. Finally, you mention 'a language of net art and
> new media'
> - but there isn't one, not even a Wittgensteinian language game of one.
> Instead there are confluences and dispersions of discourses of all sorts.

People speak of 'the language of film' with some justification, or 'the
language(s) of painting', for that matter. there are aspects that are common
to at least many varieties of net art and new media, such as interactivity
or programming or coding or, in a different vein, the digital image or the
art of digital sound or elements of film etc. Interactivity involves
interface of some sort, and this must 'speak to' the player/wreader/etc in
various ways; it needn't be written language, but it is language, and can be
quite nuanced in implication. when i experience an interactive work, i am
always curious about how and what the interactivity
conveys/assumes/implies/hides/reveals; there can be a dialog implicit in
this with the author or the work; it can have a subtle 'voice'.

it's important to have lists where the notion of language particular to new
media/net.art can be discussed.

As for language games in new media or net art, there are plenty of them. Not
sure what you mean by a Wittgenseinian one.

I don't think new media or net art language is simply a matter of confluence
or dispersion of other discourses, though certainly that's an important
aspect to art that is synthetic of various arts and media. not just
confluence and dispersion because in the synthesis, the language of any
given one is modified. the web.art that engages intensely with language, for
instance, comes to approach language differently from print poetry via the
influence of the other arts and media that can also be part of the gestalt.
to the point where it is commonly not recognized as poetry at all, though
its engagement with language may be intense. similarly, written language is
all but out the window in contemporary film; but not so in some net.art/new
media art that is nonetheless intensely visual/filmic; and the presence of
the written language can change filmic language.

nice to be able to talk about the language(s) of new media/net.art in
relation to lists. that's an important part of writing about digital art on
some lists; not so much for 'validation' as for exploration and
understanding/recognition, as artists and critics and experiencers of the
work of others.

in fact, as charlotte suggests, lists on digital art/net.art/web.art/new
media art tend to be where the issues get hashed out, rather than in books,
say, which are not typically so dialogical in their nature.

ja
http://vispo.com