Hello, I imagine Bob’s question came from Aymeric’s somewhat technical last response? I think its important to remember that, as I mentioned in my first answer, pure:dyne is a tool and not an artwork. Bob’s question was about the discussion of artwork and I don’t think it exactly applies because of this. Naturally a discussion about a tool might turn technical, especially if it’s a relatively new one that people are (luckily) interested in trying for themselves.
But to answer the question more broadly – it can of course help when audiences understand some formal aspects of a medium an artwork is made in. It’s not just media arts. Luckily for media artists, the uptake of technology is happening not only in our field but in society as a whole. :) I’m reminded of something Olia Lialina said recently, paraphrasing her paraphrasing herself, that net art never used to make sense in a gallery years ago, but now we can surely imagine that gallery audiences have just got up from their computers – so they understand the references and the context. Audiences are becoming more comfortable with technological references so discussion around media artworks may not seem so obscure for much longer. To bring this back to pure:dyne you could turn it into an accessibility question. Not whether *discussion* around media art must always be at the level of Formula 1 engineers, but whether the artists must be Formula 1 engineers themselves. Do all media artists need to have the deep technical understanding that someone like Aymeric does, to the point where they can build their own tools like pure:dyne? Depending on your definition of media arts, but mine doesn’t even require that artwork uses a single piece of technology. The technical discussion around pure:dyne might be off-putting for some, but part of the reason for moving to the Debian system, as Aymeric laid out, was so that it could be more accessible to more people. The aim of pure:dyne is not that everyone needs to be an expert to use the tool – for example see Aymeric’s discussion about the window manager (i.e. the desktop interface) we chose. But our accessibility choices will hopefully lead you closer to, not further from, a true understanding of how the tool you are using works. In short, you don’t have to understand what repositories and packages are in order to open up applications in pure:dyne and start using them. We're happy to have a great group of partners across the UK who use pure:dyne with their local, varied, communities - young people, older people, all different backgrounds. But of course this leads into the concept the Beige collective call intentional computing – the idea that artists should learn about the tools they’re using down to the very core (code) elements in order to truly have control over what they’re creating. No Photoshop filters but hand-coded effects; even the operating system pushes you to make certain aesthetic choices. So maybe you do want to learn a bit more about how we’ve built pure:dyne if you want to have full control over what you’re making and how it runs. Otherwise, at least be consoled that the ones making those choices are artists like you :) Cheers, Heather marc garrett wrote: > Hi Bob, Heather, Aymeric & all, > > I think that Bob has raised one of the most important questions that > many artists ask themselves in respect of using technology as part of > their art, and those who are interested in exploring it further > themselves as a contemporary practice. This question can also be > extended to those who wish to curate it and critique it as well, not > forgetting audiences. > > So my next question is, Rob's question ;-) > > "Art forms have their technical aspects. Artists are forever learning, > playing, working and experimenting with the technology at their > disposal. Tools for the job. Means and ends. Artists are largely > focused on the latter; the ability to use the tools is presumed." > > "However when it comes to digital/new media/net art, discussion of the > technical aspects still seems to predominate. Do you think that's in > the nature of the technology? Or will there come a time when 'new > media' artists won't have to talk like Formula 1 engineers?" > > marc > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > -- Heather Corcoran Curator FACT 88 Wood Street Liverpool, L1 4DQ t: + 44 (0)151 707 4425 f: + 44 (0)151 707 4445 http://www.fact.co.uk Bookings: +44 (0)8707 583217 Information: +44 (0)151 707 4450 FACT is proud to be in LIVERPOOL, EUROPEAN CAPITAL OF CULTURE 2008 _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
