Comments on: Artists and Geeks

By: Peter Semmelhack

Peter Semmelhack — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 00:09:15 +0000

leMel,
Thanks for your comment. I couldn’t agree more. Most people don’t thing of books (mass produced by printing press) as a technology advance but it certainly was when it was introduced. It opened up an enormous new universe to anyone willing to become “literate”. I often use the same analogy you refer to here to describe our goal – demystify technology, move it from the domain of the high tech priesthood and let anyone interested use it to their benefit, easily and productively.

By: leMel

leMel — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:08:43 +0000

…the democratization of *literacies*…

dumb auto-spell check.

By: leMel

leMel — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:06:54 +0000

I believe that the democratization of illiteracies has always eventually resulted in a flood of good.

When books exploded on the scene, the ability to read became more valuable to the average person. No chicken and egg about it!

I think something similar is in effect here: As the traditional facets of engineering become more modular and more abstracted, the ability to build complex, smart things will become at once both more accessible and more desirable.

By: Peter Semmelhack

Peter Semmelhack — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:16:17 +0000

These comments are great. I hadn’t really thought about how the current environment might preclude a mass-market art hero like Warhol from ever arising again. I guess it’s possible. But I’m not willing to give up on my belief that humans like heros. We want and need heros. We still have “hits” and “rock stars”. I’d like to think they can still exist in the art world. Maybe I’m wrong. Or maybe both can coexist – the Long Tail of aesthetics!

By: Gregory Borenstein

Gregory Borenstein — Sun, 12 Aug 2007 04:37:18 +0000

Have you ever seen the work of Jennifer and Kevin McCoy (http://www.mccoyspace.com/)?

They’re an amazing NY-based husband and wife duo whose work fits your combination of technical achievement and artistic merit (take a stroll through their flickr account for a glimpse at what I mean: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mccoyspace/sets).

But, on your larger point, about not having seen somewhat acheive that combination _on the web_, I think you’re right on. All the amazing net.art-ists, — Jodi, et al — made great work that was truly native to the web, but, coming before the web really became the main home for global popular culture, it was just too early-adopter-y/avant-garde to have any kind of Wharhol-ish mass impact.

It’s my guess that with the way the really lets us live in our little individual niches, the kind of middlebrow success — even fame — of a Warhol is going to get less and less common. Indeed, a greater and greate space will open between the viral pop hits (Chocolate Rain) and the high brow/conceptual/obscure (Jodi, _why the lucky stiff). Both of these push the boundaries of the web as a creative medium in their own ways, but neither is very likely to really break out in the way you’re describing.

By: Peter Semmelhack

Peter Semmelhack — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:20:41 +0000

Thanks for the comments. I agree that Internet art forms will need to incorporate elements that are native to it – specifically time and data – but perhaps also phenomena (meta-data) we’re starting to see now around social and community networks. Frankly, I think a new breed of tools are needed. Ones that take advantage of all these new possibilities. It’s early days and I’m no where near smart enough to figure out where it’s all headed

By: Daniel

Daniel — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:36:27 +0000

I think projects such as http://www.wefeelfine.org/ are a move in the right direction. A good visualization can be as audio/visually pleasing as any other piece of art. But where it differs than everything that came before is its organic nature — not only is the piece itself constantly flowing, constantly challenging and engaging the viewer, but it’s also dynamically updated. It’s pulling data off of the massive database we call the internet.

I’d say that these types of projects are potentially a new art form for this small distinction: classical art forms boil down to an artist mediating all of the inputs and influences of the world through his/her brain and talents; this piece is the artist using his brain to create a powerful tool, which itself mediates direct inputs from the world.

By: retech

retech — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 22:22:17 +0000

You still need to be a savvy coder to make a site work. And you still need to be a creative artist to create art. The two art opposite parts of the brain. It’s a very rare individual that shares both. It most likely will never happen that you get both in one person and then find that same person determined enough to perfect both sides and make something viable and aesthetically enriching.