[NetBehaviour] Re: RHIZOME_RAW: "new media meltdown"

aabrahams aabrahams at bram.org
Fri Jan 12 11:34:02 CET 2007

dear Eric

Could you name these significant  paintings, photos and installations made
in the last 12 years?

Opening the doors to self publishing and networked visual expression might
not have produced great images and text (but that's in for discussion also),
but it has produced new communication spaces and very significant volatile
interactions. It is contributing every day to giving people air in a totally
by economics determined world, that only interacts with them on a customized
base and accustoms them to being treated as databases.

Eric, if you want me to take you serious, you should start to give precise
critics on works you don't think meeting the standards you would like to

yours Annie

On 1/12/07, dymond at idirect.ca <dymond at idirect.ca> wrote:
> Why is New Media Art so insignificant?
> I have been going over the last 12 years of New Media
> works trying to find a significant work of art and I
> have come up empty. Not lost however, and that is a positive thing. This
> failure isn't true of Painting, Photography,
> Installation Art. Those media have all produced
> memorable works.
> Film and Video have flourished as well ( I think that
> helps explain the flood of videos by new media
> artists), but the use of new media for visual
> expression is sadly on the last bench of the stadium.
> Even the so-called success of electronic literature
> pales when compared with the interesting work created
> in the printed media.
> Why?
> It doesn't make sense at first.
> Opening the doors to self publishing and networked
> visual expression should have produced great images and
> text by now, but it hasn't.
> Whats wrong?
> I think there is a strange attractor act work here.
> Works that go through the pain and prejudice of the
> existing mandated mechanisms actually come out the better for it.
> There is rigor and self-criticism that is sorely
> lacking in networked publishing and visual expression in *communities*.
> For me to acknowledge this is blasphemy in many ways.
> I was an early proponent of the creative commons (see
> Leonardo, Vol. 31, No. 4 (1998), pp. 297-298).
> Is a culture important when it concerns
> itself with determining what works contain quality and depth and operate
> as a necessary filter to keep out those works that deserve to fail? Well,
> no more lazy art. No More easy graphics.
> If New Media wants to grow up, then it has to set some
> rigorous standards and demand that the work ACTUALLY be
> culturally significant on a broad scale. Self indulgence is fun, but it's
> lazy and middling, and stupid.
> My avatar died last month, send condolences to Dymes Mulberry on Second
> Life. Eric
> +
> -> post: list at rhizome.org
> -> questions: info at rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

.mp3 Archives and photos of  Oppera Internettikka - Protection et Sécurité
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20070112/5bc12193/attachment.htm>

More information about the NetBehaviour mailing list