{ brad brace } wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Lisa wrote:
>
> > { brad brace } wrote:
> >
> > > Art can only manifest in media that have been at least little
> > > 'played-out;' new-media can rarely be art.
> >
> > interesting point but I'm not sure...Melies films were certainly
> > artful, in the sense of aiming to decieve, to trick us with
> > tricks...or am I stretching the meaing of art too far?
>
> I'm not sure either, but the current rash of recent
> art-as-showcased/awarded-media buffoonery is perhaps a similar "stretch."
...however what else do we have to go on other than art played out in a
contest (that's a typo, I meant to write "context" but perhaps the typo was
serendipitous!), and where this is an 'arena' that includes "awarded media
buffoonery", well c'est la vie, that's part of the equation... the alternative
is some kind of self-contained, away from any context, hoary old modernist
ideal, solipsistically placing 'art' on a 'higher plane' unconcerned with the
messy reality of social, political, etc, relationships and contexts... in
other words, like it or not, the buffoonery is all part of the context of the
'art world' that locates and defines its existence. Denial of that so easily
equates to some kind of "...I'm right, the world is wrong" perspective, which
is clearly pathological!
anyway I'll try to do some clearer thinking on this and the whole issue
(wholly problematic, wholly pertinent) of "what the fuck is (New-) Media Arts
anyway?"!!!
SB
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
hothouse: media arts discussion and action at the threshold of
technology and the 21st Century
MANIFESTO 2nd - 12th November 1999 Experimenta Media Arts
www.experimenta.org
