|
Subject: Re: [shock] suspended questions Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 03:35:26 -0800 From: alex@rhizome.org (alex galloway) To: shock@rhizome.walkerart.org >Firstly I am a little confused as to how >new media art (or digital art, or >whatever you want to call it) is to be >defined in this discussion. >Currently it seems that what has come >to be called net.art by some will be the >dominant thread...however, I >personally would have a problem with >this. Not that I have any problem with >net based art...just that I see this as >only one aspect of a media art practice >that is notable for its breadth and >diversity. So, I hope the discussion >will be equally broad and engage with >all the manifestations of new and >digital media. hello everyone, and a big thanks to the organizers for getting this project off the ground. here is a little bit of feedback on terminology from the RHIZOME archives that might be useful for our discussion... new media art--in 1996 mark tribe defined new media art as "contemporary art that uses new media technology." so this covers internet art, CD-ROM, certain kinds of installations and art object production, digital video, net radio, etc. if you query at RHIZOME on "DIGITAL OBJECTS" you'll get a whole series of people answering the question "what is new media art?" ...some interesting replies. internet art--internet art is the broad category to refer to art on the web, email, telnet, etc. net.art--this definition is a little more subjective... net.art isn't generally the same as internet art. net.art describes the lo-tech aesthetic popularized by the 7-11 list and artists like Jodi.org. the first recorded usage of "net.art" on RHIZOME was by Vuk Cosic in May, 1996 with his announcement for "Net.art per se." This roughly coincides with the beginning of RHIZOME so earlier usages are possible. The term "net.art" was common by the winter of 96/97. of course, these definitions are up for debate. best, -ag
Alex Galloway
|