In response to my invitation, Nick DeMarco emailed the following comment:
Chill and Chill Alike
Thanks for the invitation to join in your conversation, I'm happy to!
For starters, I'm very curious as to why you seem to be focusing heavily on the tangential aspects of the show (who we are, where we're from, what we call the group, the format of the exhibitions etc) and have avoided talking about almost any of the actual pieces in the show? Then, to go even further, and to claim that the content of the show was disingenuous, while still not providing any examples (sort of a fox news "some people say" kind of tactic).
There was a lot of real thought and care that went into each piece in the show, and I would very much like to hear some thoughtful responses from the critical netart community.
Nick, the last time we talked online you were focused on who I am, how I present myself, etc.
I didn't say the show was disingenuous.
I gave an example of disingenuousness of the website--Daniel Leyva's page is made to seem like chillin' (lazy, relaxed, kickin back) when it is anything but. You have to sign in and click stuff--that's work!--and then the software assembles a pixel art room for you with elements that took much time and talent to draw. It's good but your typical heavily-determined piece of net art. Is it chillin? I'd say not. Why call it that? False modesty?
Much care and thought went into my discussion of Tolga Taluy's painting in the show. Sorry if that seemed Fox News-like to you.