Archive for the ‘art as criticism’ Category
The first three "likes" are art writer/curator types of the "net art" persuasion -- can't tell from the screenshot (hat tip wigs) who else finds this funny or profound, only that there are 56 of them (is there an expectation of privacy here? Sorry!). Anyway, this is what cult of personality looks like, Facebook style. You can say something meaningless (except that it lets everyone know you think you're an artist) and have it instantly validated.
I am a male artist as much as I am a mail artist.
[Smedley Q. Moma, Earl Whitney, The Late Peggy Guggenheim and 56 others like this.]
Possibly someone has already similarly cracked wise but in case not, Michael Manning and I have got this covered (below and above, respectively).
In the spirit of falling Brancusi sculptures, etc.
(monster logo upper right by publiking)
Artists explain and preserve the human experience through myth, translating internal visions into external interpretations, in order to make sense of physical and psychological worlds. Through a collective agency supported by pervasive connectivity, the creation, purpose, and evolution of myth transfers back into the hands of the global village, reclaimed from centuries of appropriation. Eventually, a sentience emerged, and myths took on a new form—-rather than being explicative, they have become alternative. Advances in technology have rendered natural phenomena mere novelty, seemingly explaining all but the existential meaning and complexity of the human mind. Jung suggests that the collective unconscious is a conditioned state, that archetypes are finite and the same mythologies will reiterate ceaselessly. However, storytellers are no longer interested in interpretation, and instead aim to materialize and explore meta-realities. The communal space of the Internet has developed into a proverbial campfire where we sit, glassy-eyed, transfixed by the glow, waiting for revelations.
What's the state of the modern myth? How do myths proliferate, what do we use to represent them, and what's the cultural value of storytelling? #FUTUREMYTH presents digital artists engaged in contemporary myth-making who are using the gallery as a way to navigate, define, and discuss the current landscape of mythology and its relevance in our technologically dependent lives.
text appropriated from 319 Scholes press release.
artwork by pummp (left) found on dump.fm
Bennett Williamson (top) and Ryder Ripps (bottom).
The "DIY Pirate TED Talk" photobooth photos are from the EYEBEAM F.A.T. Lab show. The fatties are not this blog's cup of tea but these pics are funny. We all hate TED talks!
screenshot (not photoshopped by me): chris "leave britney alone" crocker image found in "fat foods not to consume" ad
Also, Facebook, and its system of likes, friends, and pokes.
There’s not much artists can do to extricate themselves from this data-driven system as long as they hope to make and display work online. Not that you would want to extricate yourself from the Party, which gives you life and happiness and binds you close to government.
[2087 notes] [537 likes]
share on [yelp] [foursquare] [digg]
i found this post [fascinating] [amazing] [robust] [for the greater good]
If it's any consolation to Hissbitch's current five worst net artists, eventually you will join that blogger's 10 worst net artists as a deleted post that survives only on someone one else's tumblr with the style sheet missing.
"Hello, Karen Archey? Mr. Hyrax here. Listen, I'm a busy man, but I read your institutional blog post about Joel Holmberg and had some bones to pick with what you said about Nasty Nets. I loved that blog and it wasn't Art, it was trash, it was nuts.
"The way you write it up it sounds like a vehicle for getting into galleries and you even gave a recap on who from the group was exhibiting and who was a miserable lapsed artist. Ms. Archey, who gives a shit about any of that. You need to stop reading so much Brad Troemel. The beauty of Nasty Nets was it had people working on all levels simultaneously (lapsed artist, non-artist, fanatic climber) with the idea of creating something that had nothing to do with the existing art world. It was the internet, man. That was the subject. Also, you could use a fact checker, or at least an implication checker: several Nasty Netters were exhibiting artists before the group, including Michael Bell-Smith. Whether any of the self-identified artists in the group had "considerable success in the art market" before or after only matters to capitalist tools such as yourself. Also, as Tom Moody noted in his comment, you ignored the most prolific contributors to the group and concentrated on a handful of less productive users--why was that? I'd say because it fit your bogus rags to riches narrative. Also, it's like you're picking your favorite members of the Beatles. It was the Beatles, right? OK, gotta go, I'm a busy man, but I'll be keeping an eye out for your corrections."
collage posted to dump.fm by Island had nothing to do with this post