Hello Nettime!
This conversation is simply *too* *interesting*!
I'm a bit busy right now, but just want to register that I have loads of
responses.
What is "digital art"? Where is the boundary between digital art and art
that engages with the digital?
The artworks that I and my friends made in the mid 90s, under the banner
"Redudant Technology Initiative" were always embodied in physical
computers - they were installations and objects. If you make objects (as
I do), you know that they change over time.
Sometimes I think that the "prank", the "intervention" or the
"interactive" that characterises much of how Lev describes digital art
doesn't quite do this - it's more performative and of the moment. It
isn't meant to have a presence over time.
I think that the theme of RTI artworks was redemption, the reclamation
of objects from the universal process of decay. Philip K Dick called
this "kipplization". The tendency of all things to degenerate into
trash. We used then ancient computers to make installations, in the
knowledge that we were already working with the semi-functional, the
antiquated, the obsolete. We weren't just advocating recycling, and
exploring our software skills, we were also raging against entropy - the
"accelerated decrepitude" of the digital age.
That feeling of sadness, or tragedy that Lev identifies was ALWAYS AN
INTENDED PART OF THE WORK.
Before making those artworks, one of my earliest "digital" installations
was a complete list of identified computer viruses, painted in clear
varnish onto 1m x 2m sheets of raw steel. (Eight of them, I think -
maybe 10!). Visitors to the gallery were invited to spray the steel with
corrosive liquid (water, salt and vinegar) which made the piece decay,
and the image appear. (The varnish protected the virus names.) I knew
that this process of decay was unstoppable. The piece would slowly rust
into oblivion.
Similarly, each time we exhibited the "Lowtech Videowall", we resisted
careful packing and cleaning, so the installation (comprising 36
25-33mHz computers, and a powerful 66mHz server!) accumulated dents,
scratches and grime. We conceded that it was legitimate to clean the
screens.
Now here's a thing. I have stored those artworks for the last 20 years.
They have become even more antiquated. The 486s that were, at the time,
obsolete, have now become antique. The '80s styling of the cases has
become fascinating in a way that it wasn't at the time. At the time, the
Lowtech Video Wall was something of a demonstration of technical
prowess. Should I show it again, it will be so again. The effort and
skill required to revive 30-year-old machines will be, if anything,
greater than it was to repair and reuse them in the first place. Perhaps
it's impossible, and entropy has already won.
The rusting artwork I mentioned of is still in storage. Whether the list
of virus names that was first applied to it is still legible, I don't
know. All was predicted, and all has come to pass.
If anyone ever wants to help me break open the digital pyramid, to
exhume and reanimate the works for exhibition, I'd love to talk.
Best regards,
James
=====
On 17/09/2020 08:37, Geert Lovink wrote:
URL or not but this is too good, and too important for nettimers, not
to read and discuss. These very personal and relevant observations
come from a public Facebook page and have been written by Lev Manovich
(who is “feeling thoughtful” as the page indicates).
—
https://m.facebook.com/668367315/posts/10159683846717316/?extid=fWYl63KjbcA3uqqm&d=n
My anti-digital art manifesto / What do we feel when we look at the
previous generations of electronic and computer technologies? 1940s TV
sets, 1960s mainframes, 1980s PCs, 1990s versions of Windows, or 2000s
mobile phones? I feel "embarrassed. "Awkward." Almost "shameful."
"Sad." And this is exactly the same feelings I have looking at 99% of
digital art/computer art / new media art/media art created in previous
decades. And I will feel the same when looking at the most
cutting-edge art done today ("AI art," etc.) 5 years from now.
If consumer products have "planned obsolescence," digital art created
with the "latest" technology has its own "built-in obsolescence." //
These feelings of sadness, disappointment,remorse, and embarrassment
have been provoked especially this week as I am watching Ars
Electronica programs every day. I start wondering - did I waste my
whole life in the wrong field? It is very exciting to be at the
"cutting edge", but the price you pay is heavy. After 30 years in this
field, there are very few artworks I can show to my students without
feeling embarrassed. While I remember why there were so important to
us at the moment they were made, their low-resolution visuals and
broken links can't inspire students. //
The same is often true for the "content" of digital art. It's about
"issues," "impact of X on Y", "critique of A", "a parody of B",
"community of C" and so on. //
It's almost never about our real everyday life and our humanity.
Feelings. Passions. Looking at the world. Looking inside yourself.
Falling in love. Breaking up. Questioning yourself. Searching for
love, meaning, less alienated life.//
After I watch Ars Electronica streams, I go to Netflix or switch on
the TV, and it feels like fresh air. I see very well made films and TV
series. Perfectly lighted, color graded, art directed.
I see real people, not "ideas" and meaningless sounds of yet another
"electronic music" performance, or yet another meaningless outputs of
a neural network invented by brilliant scientists and badly misused by
"artists."
New media art never deals with human life, and this is why it does not
enter museums. It's our fault. Don't blame curators or the "art
world." Digital art is "anti-human art," and this is why it does not
stay in history. //
P.S. As always, I exaggerated a bit my point to provoke discussion -
but not that much. This post does reflect my real feelings. Of course,
some of these issues are complex - but after 30 years in the field, I
really do wonder what it was all about)
P.P.S.
The mystery of why some technology (and art made with them) has
obsolescence and others do not - thinking about this for 25 years. We
are fascinated by 19th-century photographs or 1960s ones. They look
beautiful, rich, full of emotions, and meanings. But video art from
the 1980s-1990s looks simply terrible, you want to run away and forget
that you ever saw this. Why first Apple computers look cool, cute,
engaged? But art created on them does not? And so on. I still have not
solved this question.
Perhaps part of this has to be with the message that goes along with
lots of tech art from the 1960s to today - and especially today. 19th
or 20th-century photographs done by professional photographs or good
amateurs do not come with utopian, pretentious, exaggerated,
unrealistic, and hypocritical statements, the way lots of "progressive
art" does today. Nor do their titles announce all latest tech
processes used to create these photographs.
--------------------
Ars Electronica 2020:
https://ars.electronica.art/keplersgardens/en/
<https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fars.electronica.art%2Fkeplersgardens%2Fen%2F&h=AT2w4OEuuoeVihKs5LjapuFkzEqtX9kuEBqihrvRbLxcuGHrMqRyRMepEAj7BPSSlqJg9BXKo7LkCG_hIaW69JvA5Kxej9OYXAGjkGNmEm3brgToON6XJYp7Et8r5tsIzkFwbrHkPa3zDVfvnsoo2zo5TMf5GxGjT83hCGKqrSbm>
--------------------
Video illustration: Japanese robot at Ars Electronica 2010 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmabKC1P51A
<https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DmmabKC1P51A&h=AT0ZZLvc7X9Tf8ucLLR-DUPF7ioMwdtdLBafjgz2Y_Fq9EBhcL-jiyga7ljPRHx0Quc6zpegRFbBFcgLw7VFffy0xT4s9Y_QZ1lFGsTgU2dNuph12NAxFyRRUwNZ0uai5yQJ3nDDib4h4xcmlL6vHlPXM27bHgOHtAZB67GwKbei>
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: