general

Joshua Decter made a lengthy and considered reply on Rhizome to my post, joshua decter: gallery art critic as new media artist. It'll take some time to separate his objections to my facts from his objections to my opinions. Will post something once I've mulled over what needs a response or clarification. In the meantime, please give his reply a read.

Joshua Decter replied to an earlier post, joshua decter: gallery art critic as new media artist:

This was just one of several annoyed tweets, including "This is wrong-headed; e.g., I have never considered my curatorial activity as art. Get your facts right Mr. Moody." No doubt he doesn't consider his art to be art but I didn't say he did. After a couple of other tweets about getting my facts wrong Pedro Vélez asked him:

Decter took the opportunity to plug his new book:

This somewhat illuminates the observation at the end of that earlier writing: "The Rhizome post ultimately provides a fascinating glimpse at how fields with differing expectations and critical standards can exist side by side, each without ever critiquing the other."

Update, May 14, 2104: Decter made a lengthy and considered reply to my post on Rhizome. It'll take some time to separate his objections to my facts from his objections to my opinions. Will post something once I've mulled over what needs a response or clarification.

Be careful what you ask for because (you know the rest). A few months ago, in (ineptly) making fun of Kenneth Goldsmith's interest in a Shia LeBeouf performance stunt, I said I'd "like to see the convo diverted to more new-media-relevant topics, such as the role of LA collectors in market-making for YIBA (or YIBI) art."
In the Rhizome comments to Goldsmith's post, Michael Connor posted a link to an interview with chief market-maker Stefan Simchowitz. My response, after reading it:

Michael, thanks for the link to the Simchowitz interview. He is quite the self-regarding loudmouth, or "amplification nodule," to use his term. Interesting that he gives no credit to Rhizome or the pre-Facebook blogosphere for first introducing his stable of "Post-Internet" superstars -- it's as if they had no careers or critical recognition before he started pushing them. His presence on the scene should make Rhizome uneasy about continuing to carry critical water for the brand (it certainly does me). Perhaps enough has been done for that particular group of artists -- they have him now.

After finally seeing "The New Romantics" show at Eyebeam (a closing reception was last night) I read Paddy Johnson's Artnet interview with Nicholas O'Brien, one of the three curators. Her questions drip with understandable skepticism and the answers are not satisfactory. Johnson asked if technology was making us lose our sense of awe, and O'Brien replied with an observation about his college-level digital art students:

They not only feel overwhelmed by access to our history, but I think they are overwhelmed by the amount of things that need to be considered and the amount of things that should be considered when being a responsible artist in the 21st century.

"Responsible artist in the 21st century" -- there's the problem right there. Can you be a romantic and be that? It suggests a better title and concept for the show than "The New Romantics." This is a show of up-and-coming new media artists who aren't overwhelmed by choice, aren't opposed to using the tools and algorithms of consumer society they're told they must use to exist responsibly in the modern world (Apple computers, Samsung screens, 3D printers), and are all looking for validation within an academic system that expects them to work and teach responsibly. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you The New Conformists.

Some of the work was good and would have been better if viewed through a non-Romantic lens. I particularly enjoyed Jonathan Monaghan's baroque decoration flying apart and slowly drifting through a virtual cubicle environment, Krist Wood's collection of physics-modeling demos by one- or two-time users culled from YouTube and elsewhere, Katie Torn's Tanguy-esque collages, and other non-romantic works.

Completely missing from the show was the lo-fi or DIY trend in new media that's as close as the field gets to a Romantic impulse, in the sense of the Arts & Crafts Movement's response to industrialization or William Blake's contention that Isaac Newton killed the cosmos. This rebel, self-help tendency has been manifested in the past with the Bent Festival (circuit bending), Blipfest (chiptunes made with "obsolete" gear) or anyone trying to make their own computers or an alternate, non-corporate/government Internet. At Eyebeam it was Apple gear as far as the eye could see. Sorry, Steve Jobs was not romantic.

More

We're a competitive species, we're told, so there's something hard-wired about wanting to know how we're scoring. It's this innate whatever that makes the current internet thrive. Grow your followers. Attract more friends. Your every utterance needs a popularity count. Five people liked your tweet! You are encouraged to check constantly by having "notification" numbers appearing at the top of your page -- it's not neurotic and fucked-up at all to investigate those numbers further, to obsess about your stats -- it's OK, it's the libertarian, neoliberal model. It's like a game, right? Game-ification results in more customer involvement with a brand. Social media allows advertisers to rate people as they are rating themselves. Give people numbers, it's fun!

The prophets and holy people of religion (particularly Buddhism) might say this was a false premise, that the internet is not a place for a healthy, mindful existence. When you're out in the world you don't have a number pinned to your back listing your total followers. It's generally considered rude, outside of Dallas, Texas, to ask when first meeting someone, "how much money do you make?" It would be creepy to ask a stranger how many internet friends he has. Your stats aren't a fit subject for discussion yet there they are, at the top of your page, like a scarlet letter. You can't turn them off. The success of the business model and the American way of life depends on these counts, we're told by our Gods, the new Gods, the job-creators and monopolizers of Silicon Valley.