Discussion for tuesday

A.
So I thought it would be cool to do something like .Beksinski.








B. But because That would take about 6 years I figured I'd go a slightly different route.


Initially I wanted to create a metaphor for the internet and it's infinite nature. I wanted a space where anything could exist. I decided to add some humorous elements, like the jet pack kid , The mario warp pipes and clouds and such. I used one point perspective to create the two buildings which are symbols for how the internet is used. The building closest to the viewer has many complex pipes and wires connecting to it. It also says "porn" on the door. The Building in the foreground with only one solitary tube running to it is everything else.

As far as technique goes I started with the city horizon line. I hand drew that and scanned it in. Found the Mario sky on the internet. I drew the buildings and on the computer and collaged the jetpack kid old school style and scanned him in.

I really am not to thrilled with my composition. I wish I had more time. I've been tinkering and re- tinkering for quite some time and am still not completely happy. I'll submit as is and hopefully get some feedback that will lead me in the right direction.

C.
So I'm reading this stuff about the history of net.art while cooking some spaghetti. I nearly burnt my meat balls because I was so enthralled with this article. Actually I did find the article more interesting than some of the net art itself.
I liked how the name and media came to be by accident. Cosic was trying to read a corrupted email and the only intelligible couple of words was net.art. I think it's weird to imagine the genesis of any other medium. A dude slips in some bird shit realizes that it made a cool mark and then BOOM painting was born.

I think the hot topic for debate is the power or lack there of in net.art. Does net.art have a future? Or a present for that matter considering this article was written back in 2000?
I think the huge problem with net art is that it started out as Avant garde. And it's kind of hard to profess exactly what I mean by saying that. It's just that all other art forms have a way to appeal to the masses. An uneducated person can look at a painting and may not understand the subject material or concept but can at least appreciate the aesthetics (the ooo that's pretty effect). Where as anyone approaching net.art unknowingly would probably think "Shit fuck the internet's broke!"

I don't know lot of it is pretty hard to stomach and I just cant see unpalatable art going anywhere.




gustav is a fucking bitch.

Homework for 8/28

A:
So I guess i'll start with an icebreaker discussion question, you know to get the juices flowing...
Anybody get that second site to work?
Or is that just an example of net art? A webpage that seems to be down? Post Modern websites. It's like Jackson Pollock with code. Fucking Genius.

In any case. Im not too sure If I feel that web art should be considered a valid form of art. Mainly because it's not something that's tangible. The final question in the interview asks how net.art can be purchased and owned if anyone can view it. Cosic's answer was that it was just merely a way of acknowledging a relationship between the museum and the artist. That seems pretty pointless in my opinion and also maybe explains why net.art has reduced in popularity at the Venice Biennale from 2001 to 2008.

B:

I reviewed various pieces from Expressioncity: Amophoscapes series 1. (2002) This series was found on the SoundToy's website. Created by a dude named Stanza?

Most of the pieces on this site were living paintings that constantly grew and changed. Some of the pieces were interactive where you could click and the painting would react in a different way- Causing the colors to move in a different way or even stop all together. What I thought was interesting about these works was that they evolved. each time I checked out a piece it was never the same as the previous time I viewed it.
Another thing that interested me was the use of sound. These pieces were soundtracked by ambient noises.
I'm kind of torn between how I feel about this. I love the Idea of putting sound to visual art. I feel when done correctly the two work well together: creating a powerful piece. However this series of net.artwork just used ambient noises. And If i listen to ambient-repeating noises for too long I want to bash my brains out with a rusty shovel.

All in all the Expressioncity series was interesting but still felt like novelty art.

C:
1; I don't think the introduction of digital media to the art world has changed the perception of art, but just merely expanded it to new grounds. New grounds where the same principles that have governed art before in the past still apply. Principles such as aesthetics and composition, Concept, and so forth. Digital media is just another medium just as photography or printmaking.

2: I think the work of old school digi-artists can be compared with the work of present day digi-artists. The real main difference is the technology allowed and the possibilities that more sophisticated technology brings to the art board. In order to compare the two successfully, one would have to have a good knowledge of history and what was available at the time as far as software and so forth. I think in the future holograms will probably be employed into the digital art scene.

3: I think I like the definition internet based art. However, I would like to discredit net art as being a real form of art. As widely available as net art is it is also just as restricted. If the power goes out, a server fails, or if even a viewer doesn't have the necessary soft ware (like me and shock wave) to view the art it is worthless. On the flip side it also has the potential to be viewed world wide overnight, without having to go through the entire gallery scene.

4: I think it would be interesting to find a way to merge the old school ways of presenting art with the new school. For example I would set up a fancy classic gallery scene with wine, drunk floozies, and canvas's on the wall, but then bring in the Digital by using projectors to project onto these canvas's. That way they had the physicality of a painting, but the futuristicness of a digital creation.

5: I would just rather not accept them honestly. I just cant see them as being anything other than novelty. (I know Im going to get my ass kicked for this one)

worthless

Finding out if this works.

The obligatory first post!

After a few cheap shots to the nose, some hair pulling, and a textbook full nelson I finally submitted and created this damn blog. This as the title reads is my first post. I hope to have at least three to five more in the future.