[Nettime-bold] Re: Re: net art history

[Josephine Bosma <jesis@xs4all.nl>]

robert adrian wrote:

> All of the artists
> you mention treat the Internet as public space
> and, no matter what their other agendas may be,
> an important political element of their work is
> to claim that space as a place for art.

Exactly. And this is the part where politics -do- come into view: with
the tools or space for art or culture in general to develop with or in.
The fact that politics are undeniably a part of art in media does not
mean that a potential of an art practice to make a difference in the
politics of either the artworld itself or in that of a broader world of
industrial and political power struggles mean that such a potential
should be judged seperately from the other aspects of such artworks. To
do that gives a crooked image of an enterprise that fails at reaching
some goal. As Josephine Berry did say, and she uses the example of
00100etc.org for this, is that the -potential- for political change in
some net art obviously has -not- 'failed' or died yet. I think it is
exactly that which was and is its strength and also its burden. Art in
media are and will be always controversial. The controversy around it is
not easy to give words to always though. Sometimes it is just something
simple like 'it is useless'.


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold