| Cultural Exchange via Internet - Opportunities and Strategies Forum of the House of World Cultures, Berlin |
< back |
Insights into the Debate: September - December, 1999
(Print- / Download-version)
Contents:
Discussed Themes:
List of Links: presented Projects, Information
At the end of September, activity in the Forum picked up suddenly. From September until December 1999 there were 396 postings from 66 participants. This large number has made it necessary to use a tighter form in the summaries than was found in the past views into the debate. Unfortunately, it is not possible to follow all of the discussion's branchings off or to adequately document the development of certain trains of thought in participants' exchange of views. For reason of clarity it was necessary to separately portray thematic structures that actually merged into each other in the Forum. Only a few core statements could be quoted to the various aspects listed. As a result, other equally interesting views must go unmentioned. The Forum's course during this period of time was, however, much more diverse than is possible to depict in this short summary.
I would like to thank Pat Binder for her support in the summary's elaboration.
Gerhard Haupt, Project director
Important note:
All of the contributions to the discussion for the period of time between September and December 1999 are available in text format (txt) on the website (see List of Postings) as well as compressed into a ZIP-file (564 kb). By clicking on the author's name you come to the txt-file of the contribution which contains the quote and/or statements on the particular topic. To return to the main text, use the »back« button on your browser's menu.
Please take into consideration that the copyright for the individual postings rests with the respective authors. The author is solely responsible for the information and opinions expressed in his/her contribution.
In an article from the Los Angeles Times often quoted in 1999, the web was said to be on a course of continual and tremendous growth, however, the users have increasingly been concentrating on a few top sites instead of exploring new ones. Gerhard Haupt ) asked if this were really the case, or if there are simply proportional shifts due to the growing number of users. What chances do cultural websites still have at all, now and in the future, to catch the attention of a broader audience that doesn't put any effort into looking for them.
Ami Isseroff gave reasons why the L.A. Times' ascertainment is accurate which included, among others: huge sums spent on advertisement and the use of the most modern technology with which smaller operators cannot compete; technical limitations and profit-oriented politics of search engines; changes in user types and interests. He gave concrete suggestions how to increase the number of visitors. Chris Drew felt that the only effective way for a smaller website to make a place for itself in an expanding Internet is to create a community and keep its interests alive.
By way of emphasizing the importance of effective web marketing, for cultural websites as well, Gerhard Haupt mentioned a few points from the study by Steve Lawrence and C. Lee Giles (NEC Research Institute) »Accessibility and Distribution of Information on the Web«, published on July 8th 1999 in the magazine »Nature«, the basis of the L.A. Times article. It verified, among other things, that the 11 largest search engines only included around 42% of the 800 million webpages on the web at that particular time.
Collective Webpage / Link List of the Forum
There had already been several proposals for collective projects with Forum participants (see: Evaluation, 1998, suggestions for new projects). This time Heidi J. Figueroa Sarriera prompted a collective webpage on »the possibilities, practical strategies, problems and theoretical aspects of the use of the Internet in the cultural field«. During the ensuing communication (also concerning the difficulties of such an undertaking) it was agreed upon to create a collective link list. However, in view of the fact that only a few participants sent in links proposals, Gerhard Haupt wrote: »But maybe the exchange emerging from this point is in itself more important than the actual result.« [see also Isseroff and Hewison]
Presented Projects, Exchange of Information
What had been referred to in the past was finally confirmed: the actual collective project is the Forum itself. This includes the numerous references to other projects as well as links and book tips that were sent in during the continual information exchange. For the most part, they deal with concrete examples for the Internet's use in art and cultural contexts. Their presentation is often brought together with comments on the thematic context of the discussion in which they are mentioned.
Such postings from the time from September to December are summarized on a special list
Connectivity / Improving Access
Once again, the problem of limited net access in many parts of the world was brought up for discussion. This time, however, more examples were given for fostering Internet usage.
Partha Pratim Sarker sent the article »When a modem costs more than a cow« by Shahidul Alam from Bangladesh. Based on a short look back at the use of technology and language as instruments of power in his country, Alam describes how the Drik initiative, instigated in 1994, has successfully built up networks and new information structures. Other participants mentioned possibilities to use the Internet even in countries with underdeveloped telephone infrastructures. [see, among others Isseroff, Schmidt, Sheffield]
Two months later, Tom Vincent reported on an initiative that sends used hospital equipment to poorer countries, and asked about similar ones for computer and Internet access. Additionally he mentioned links to free providers in Europe and to an initiative in Great Britain that passes along the industry's scrapped computers to schools.
Josette Balsa recommended not applying for corporate sponsorship as an individual but rather in the name of a group, preferably of an institution or association. In answer to Cristina Jadick Cristina Jadick, who asked if computers couldn't be placed in public spaces like telephones, Susan Marquez and Anjali Arora gave examples from California and India.
Kim Machan wanted to know if others shared her expectation that the Internet in Asia would become as ubiquitous as the television. Susan Marquez answered »let's hope that the internet can replace television«. Especially her statement, »Television has proven disastrous in so many ways. Internet television can only help the next generation to avoid the one-sidedness of viewing television«, brought about vehement protest.
Ami Isseroff warned against: »estimat[ing] that people's nature, interests and esthetics are better than are indicated by television, and the hope that this would be evident if only they turned to an interactive environment like Internet.« And furthermore: »It is a 20th century superstition par excellence that technical improvements will change the content of our lives for the better. ... Salvation will not come through better gadgets.«
Olu Oguibe did not agree with television's condemnation and by way of objection named diverse negative aspects of the Internet. Other participants were concerned with how much television reflects life's reality or if it only serves commercial interests, and how this is increasingly to be expected from Internet offerings as well. [see, among others, Isseroff and d'Alpoim].
Within the context of this topic, the danger of the homogenization of global culture and the WWW was once again referred to [see Isseroff]. Tim Bigelow reminded us that the Internet was and still is connected with pluralistic, multicultural expectations. Just as biological diversity is protected, there are individuals and organizations who defend cultural diversity. »Their efforts should be encouraged.«
Susan Marquez took the view that via the connection between television and Internet one could at least scrutinize the credibility of the information sent, Isseroff contradicted her energetically once more. Marquez suggested considering if one couldn't apply the merchandising principle for products connected with certain TV series to the art field, as in »infotainment« programs connected with arts and culture.
Reluctance of Artists Facing New Technologies
Even in places where good Internet access exists, the medium is only used by relatively few artists. Chris Drew guesses that in the USA around 90% of artists, or more, are not yet online. He outlined what his initiative ART-ACT is doing to change this situation. Anjali Arora added that in India, too, there are many artists with apprehensions toward the Internet and went into detail on that. However, Drew qualified his statement sometime later by citing the disadvantages of the computer compared with »handmade« art and termed it an elitist instrument for art. The Internet's usefulness for artists lies mainly in the ability to make their art known to others.
Raul Ferrera-Balanquet sent a long posting on problems that artists in Mexico and Latin America who want to use the Internet see themselves confronted with. Christy Sheffield Sanford found parallels to the situations of many artists mainly in southern USA.
Peter Toy questioned the metaphor of the Internet as an »artificial mind of which we are 'all' a part of«. Many would not belong because the means, knowledge and technological requirements were missing and would increasingly see this as a disadvantage. Before that, Toy had held the view that art on the net is »an institution of self gratification« and net artists were not concerned enough with human rights and »global ethics«. Tom Vincent offered him several examples of politically active net.art. He wrote, basically the same content is found in art on the net as is found elsewhere.
Responsibility to the Unconnected
The subject was brought up time and again: whether and to what extent on the Internet active cultural practitioners address the reality outside the net and with it the significance of the unconnected, and whether and to what extent they deal with it responsibly. Within this context, Pat Binder brought to our attention the essay by Olu Oguibe (member of our mailing list) »Connectivity, and the Fate of the Unconnected«, published on 6 December, 1999 in the German online magazine Telepolis. In it, Oguibe discusses, among other things, the problem that the unconnected are left out of the net discussions which have to do with their living conditions. »As a result the network often breeds representation within itself, on behalf of such polities. By default it readily locates or fabricates voices within who assume the authority to speak for the Other since, quite often, parties and individuals are not in short supply who would ride on the event to appoint and delegate themselves as representatives of the absent.«
Ami Isseroff referred to this when he wrote that "we" would have to learn to question publically our own opinion and to support reflection and communication, »rather than promote ourselves and 'causes'.«
Two months beforehand, Gerhard Haupt had already raised the question: to what extent does the cultural diaspora - living in places with better Internet access - have the right to act as representative and speaker on the net for a whole cultural group?
As an example of repression towards active cultural work, Hans Braumüller drew attention to the case of Humberto Nilo. He attached a letter (in Spanish) in which Nilo documents his case [English translation, see: Pat Binder] and informed us about an international protest campaign. Following a Mail Art action for the freedom of artistic education, Humberto Nilo was dismissed as director and academic of the Arts School at the University of Chile.
[see also Katz and Braumüller]
Further participants saw parallels to this case in other parts of the world, whereas the contradictions between the democratic claim and the reality in the USA were cited as well, and it came to a debate on democracy and freedom in general. [see among others Ferrera-Balanquet, Zetina, Schiavone, Isseroff, Ferrera-Balanquet]
In the context of the exchange on Humberto Nilo's case, Juan José Díaz Infante, mentioned that the mayor of New York wanted to shut off the subventions to the Brooklyn Museum. With that, the exhibition »Sensation«, which was behind it all, became the point of departure for a lengthy and long-lasting discussion in the Forum. At the beginning, the participants touched upon the question of public funding for the arts [see Marquez, Isseroff, Díaz Infante, Drew, Drew, Marquez, Sheffield Sanford, Ellis] and discussed the exhibition and the Saatchi collection as a marketing phenomenon.
At one point in the debate, their strong concentration on New York was criticized, although the exchange with and between Africa, Asia/Pacific and Latin America should have been the focal point of the Forum. [see Machan, Drew]. Other participants countered, more members of the list would just have to be heard from [Oguibe] and called for a greater diversity of statements [Drew]. As it soon turned out, the exchange of views increasingly branched off in the most diverse directions and took on specific phenomena in other cultures (e.g. China) as well as questions of general interest, while various topics and aspects merged into each other.
It is impossible to sum up the flow of this discussion in the short space offered here. Therefore central points will be brought up in the following sections, points which were to some extent discussed separately from »Sensation« and at other places in the Forum.
Finding Attention / Marketing Strategies
After Christy Sheffield Sanford had protested about the fact that the »bad guys« of art were receiving more attention than artists who had really earned it, this phenomenon was discussed within the context of media mechanisms and marketing strategies in the art field. Charity Ellis recalled the basically similar scandal almost 10 years ago surrounding Andrew Serrano's »Piss Christ« and opined, the »bad guys« weren't just finding the attention of the media but also that of the politicians which, in turn, can have an effect on access to financial resources.
Juan José Díaz Infante sent a posting with the provocative subject »Lady D was a prostitute« which dealt with, among other things, the »art to get attention« in order to get public funding for the arts (with Mexico, among others, as an example) as well as marketing strategies for art. In answer to this, Gerhard Haupt referred to the texts of Michael H. Goldhabers about the conditions of production and distribution of art under the circumstances of a new »Attention Economy« [published since 1996 in the German online magazine Telepolis - see links in the posting]. They deal with, among other things, the efforts that must be made today to get a piece of the increasingly scarce attention pie, and with the economical advantages of those who have made it and become »Stars«.
Pat Binder contributed a few passages she translated from the essay by Luis Camnitzer »Corruption in the Arts/The Art of Corruption« (published in Universes in Universe in German and Spanish). In his complex reflection on the artist's complicated conditions of existence, Camnitzer was concerned with, among other things, the question of how »one can use corruption without letting oneself be corrupted«. Binder quoted one of the answers he gave himself: »The dilemma has no solution, therefore I have armed myself with a moral structure, which I ended up calling 'ethical cynicism'. The essence of this position is based on the idea that, to prostitute oneself consciously is better than to do it unaware. In the first case it is a strategy, in the second, it is corruption. As a strategy it serves me to identify the line, I am about to trespass, and therefore, it allows me - to a certain point - to reverse the action. Restricted to corruption as a product of unawareness, the act is forced to lead to a rhetoric of justification, without the possibility of assuming the responsibility for the decision.«
Francisco Córdoba endorsed this as he explained his »selling strategies« and his view of »culture, ethics and aesthetics«. Often it is not easy to bring both aspects in accord with each other. Donna Hand Lee had already told of her work as a fine art marketing consultant. A part of that is to »advise visual artists in business development so they will have more time to create«.
Tom Vincent held the view that »part of an artist's job is marketing. ... The struggle between the artist's standards and society's standards is a vital part of the artist's job.« This is true for basically everyone, he wrote. Ami Isseroff did not agree. One need only think of the artists who had to work under a repressive regime, or of the scientists whose ideas have been lost or were oppressed. Acknowledgement in one's lifetime is not always a question of talent, rather sometimes just one of luck or fate or energy in terms of »marketing«.
Kim Machan emphasized once again that when artists use the Internet, they can open new canals to the public and new networks for an exertion of influence. And, in the end, marketing has to do with access to the public.
New York mayor Giuliani's anger regarding the exhibition »Sensation« was especially set off by the image »The Holy Virgin Mary« (1996) by Chris Ofili, in which the artist placed elephant dung on the sacred motif. In one posting Olu Oguibe meticulously analyzed Ofili's artistic point of departure. He demystified a self-mystification that referred to Africa of an artist born in England, and revealed with what kind of skill for self-promotion Ofili persistently searched for success.
In a further contribution, Oguibe questioned the view of femininity and especially the black woman in Ofili's painting, a work attacked by one and defended by the other. He could only wonder that of all images such a portrayal could »come to represent the cultural community's icon of battle against statutory and religious 'intolerance'«.
Olu Oguibe's third e-mail on this subject deserves particular consideration. This longer text should be read in its entirety so that none of the conclusive argumentation is lost. Oguibe went into depth in his analysis of Ofili's strategy of provocation and showed the scandal's instrumentalization in New York. Based on this, he dealt in a most critical way with the »self-centeredness« of cultural work and the view that an artist has »greater freedom to express than the rest«, which he called the »I-am-sacred-because-I-am-an-artist syndrome«. One of the core thoughts in his reflection on the »artists' relationship to the public and the state in general« goes as follows: »... while censorship is unacceptable, it is nevertheless part of the artist's civic duty as a member of society rather than a god, to be sensitive to their environs, and to take the varying sensibilities of their public into consideration especially when it is their intention to take their work to that public.«
Later on in the Forum, the responsibility of artists was brought up as well when Britta Erickson described the influence of »Sensation« on young Chinese artists. Although they had never seen the exhibition, they knew the catalogue and took the shock effects even further. »Where British artists made installations with dead animals, Chinese artists have been able to use dead humans and live animals.« Erickson referred to photos of the relevant works on the net.
After Christy Sheffield Sanford had rigorously rejected such cruelty, Tom Vincent replied: »'Cruelty' is one of the many building-blocks that make up what we humans are, and so it is a very relevant resource for artists to use.« ... »The value put on individual life - human, animal and vegetable - varies from culture to culture.« Personally, he shared Sheffield Sanford's sentiments regarding such artistic practices »but I am also very skeptical about the humanitarians, not because of what they do so much as what they often _don't do, or _don't consider. We must be very sure, before we judge, that our own position really is the right one..«
José Tlatelpas found that it is often so that »artists without enough mastery, message or aesthetic, spiritual, cultural contribution try to make noise using the resource of scandal. It is a way of to get attention ...«
First there was a discussion on whether the New York mayor's intention of cutting off public funds to the Brooklyn Museum due to the »Sensation« exhibition was an act of censorship [see Díaz Infante and Drew], or rather just politics meddling in art - not to be termed as censorship [Isseroff]. Later on, Chris Drew inquired about cases of censorship in other areas of the world and added questions on, among other things, the power of curators, state control and the influence of the artscene on »local thought patterns«.
Raul Ferrera-Balanquet gave an example from Mexico, but felt that much worse was the self-censorship practiced by artists there. There was a short dispute between Kim Machan and Dianne d'Alpoim Guedes on the situation of the Internet in Australia and the effects of new laws on art websites. Machan also reported that the planned presentation of »Sensation« in the Australian National Gallery was cancelled due to the scandal in New York. Although it was not censorship, Fran Ilich wanted to bring the aspect of »exclusivity & exclusion« into the discussion. He described what he meant with that by way of the example of the 1st Cyberculture Festival in Latin America in Tijuana, organized by Laboratorios Cinemátik. Francisco Córdoba saw the worst form of censorship in repression and gave examples of that as well.
Art System, Mainstream - Minorities
Chris Drew described the exhibition practice of the Uptown Multi-Cultural Art Center in Chicago, where he works, and set against that an - in his opinion - unsuccessful attempt by the Chicago Cultural Center to show the diversity of art in Chicago in 1990. In it, the jurors had chosen almost exclusively works that were in accordance with their own »European background«. Raul Ferrera-Balanquet, too, held the view that as a result of the USA's education system, curators and art historians would be fixated on »eurocentric notions« and not understand, for example, the »complexities of Latino and Latin American art«.
In a comprehensive answer to this, Pablo Helguera brought up some fundamental problems and contexts. Here are several quotes from his contribution:
»To my view the question lies in whether we, the cultural administrators, curators, critics, artists and educators, have adequately fought to structure a system in which minority artists can integrate into the dialogue of the mainstream without necessarily loosing their individual identities or cultural discourse.«
»We created terms as 'community art', which, with very few exceptions, have never been taken totally seriously by the international museum and art world. At the beginning of multiculturalism, artists found that ethnicity gave them grants, opportunities and shows. However, with the passage of time, it backfired - rightly so- by showing that these goods were given because of their being minorities, and not necessarily on the basis of their being good artists.«
Further down Helguera wrote: »... we have thought too long about modernism and post-modernism as a white Anglo-Saxon concepts this entire time, and this is not true at all - as conceptualism, for instance, has existed all throughout Latin America for decades. And, even if they where Anglo-Saxon concepts, nowadays all belongs to everyone, and an exciting lingua franca ... allows us to communicate visually throughout the world...«
»A final word, which hopefully ties with the whole 'Sensation' discussion: the mainstream is here to stay; it is the nature of every single specialty, not only art. Art will always be structured in such a way in which there will always be a more informed minority and an excluded majority which will always resent its exclusion. All we can do is understand this process and articulate our language and our actions in a way in which we can communicate properly to the various constituencies. And of course we can do it: it's our job.«
Chris Drew defended the »community artists« who had worked within their communities long before the boom of the term »multiculturalism«. At the conclusion of his polemic discourse is: »The 'Art World' is not the world. The 'Art World' is an elite group that performs for itself. They value art so it can be traded between themselves. There is no unified aesthetic that explains and measures quality across cultures and all time.«
In his reply, Pablo Helguera »... I don't think you can generalize by saying that there is only one 'elite' and one 'hierarchy'. The richness of the art today is that there are a lot of different groups and a lot of different individuals and institutions that support different kinds of things. There are thousands and thousands of artists showing at innumerable museums and galleries throughout the world.« ... »I have a problem with the conspiracy theory that all art supported today is determined by Western critics ... Although it is absolutely true that a lot of really valid art hasn't been given its deserved value, this argument has been used too long by too many artists who can't find who else to blame for their lack of success in their careers.«
His conclusion is also worth considering: »Individually, at this moment, we will not be able to transform the world in a drastic way. As communities will continue, elites and other structures will continue too. It is possible to adopt an anarchist attitude and question everything. But I think it is more practical to understand the realities that we live and try to challenge them with our means. And try to instigate dialogue, not a self-glorified isolationism.«
José Roca took a similar direction. He began with the ascertainment: »Art is about communication. You have to reach people in order to get your private obsessions known, so they might trigger something significant in somebody else...« Even Land Art, which attempts to escape the museums and the market, would remain widely unknown if there weren't books on and photographs or prints of it. »Why is it that the most virulent attack on the museum system comes from Hans Haacke, someone that regularly exposes worldwide? They [these artists] are all aware that the virus strategy is better: to attack and overturn from within. But also to establish a connection between art that happens at the museum, and art that happens elsewhere. The exhibition system and the market are there, to be used, not as a goal but as a mean.«
In other contributions, the role of museums in cultural politics and the museum system itself were more explicitly addressed. Juan José Díaz Infante named two possible models that could bring about a change. Pablo Helguera agreed with him that, among other things, the established hierarchies do not necessarily guarantee the quality of art presented in museums. As a matter of fact, more open structures are necessary. The term »contemporary art« museum seems to be an oxymoron, as »the new art of today will be old tomorrow«. He sees one important point to a museum in the art world in communicating context. Helguera also gave a short report on the symposium »Fiction Inside and Outside the Museum« that he had just organized in Mexico City. At the symposium the following questions, among others, were discussed: »1) the museum as a place which we need to have in order to rebel against it; 2) artists who appropriate the 'context' of the museum into their own work; 3) the museum as a cultural Disneyland (or Disneyland as the accultured museum); 4) the museum as having lost the sense of wonder which originated its very roots.«
Curators, Interpretation of Other Cultures
The work of curators as a part of the art world was brought up time and again in the Forum. For the most part, artists were the ones who criticized the curator's power and asked if the »non-attention« to art was not an exclusion mechanism that had to do with censorship. Christy Sheffield Sanford contradicted this before the discussion of this topic even began when, in another context, she wrote: »I think many curators depend too heavily on their existing networks. Exclusionary tactics are often not tactics at all. People don't have enough time or impetus to search for new voices.«
Juan José Díaz Infante asked later: »Is a curator by definition an examiner, a guardian of art, a supervisor of communication?« Pablo Helguera often found the role of curators to be viewed too negatively. »Curators, as museums ... are needed to bridge those gaps of communication which often exist between the artist and the audience.«
Britta Erickson returned to this subject one month later and basically held the same view: »Curators can provide a service to both artist and audience, if they can act as effective advocates for the artists and interpreters for the audience. They should be able to do this in a non-intrusive way, too, so as not to come between the audience and the direct experience of the work of art. And the curator or critic should be able to point out to the audience the process that gave birth to the work of art - if process is important to a particular piece.«
»How do audiences connect with works of art? This is a question of great interest to me, since I write English-speaking audience about Chinese art. This puts me in the questionable position of interpreting a culture into which I was not born.« Erickson thinks that she is able to and thereby contradicted the point of view of a Chinese critic who wrote in an article, »Westerners cannot understand Chinese art«. She quoted several passages from a reply which she had sent him.
Raul Ferrera-Balanquet added, among other things: »What fascinates me about 'good curators' is their ability to see the subtextual connections among works from different cultures and artists.« What he meant by this he explained with the example of the British film and video curator Mark Finch. The questions he posed to Erickson concerning her work are at the same time of general relevance: »Are you aware that in the process of translation a new interpretation takes place? How do you negotiate with your translations when you know that socio-linguistic and cultural referents could be misunderstood and lost in that process? ... When you make the translations do you speak about the object, or the context in which the object was created, or the history circumscribing the object, or the sico-emotional experiences of the producer of the object?«
Within the context of Olu Oguibe's description of Ofili's strategy, Beral Madra, herself a curator, had already polemicized on the phenomenon she has become aware of in the work of curators as well as in that of artists: »And as to Ofili's work, we have seen the 'Utilizing Artists of Non-West To Attract Attention' story many a times. Since the beginning of the 90's the 'clever emigrant' artists have understood that the time has come for them, deciphered the requirements of the contemporary art industry, and started to produce works which metaphorically reflected the desires and opinions of the Western viewer on the Non-west! Vice versa, since quite a time the Western curators are discovering the remote art scenes in order to utilize them for the fulfillment of their EGO's. When investigated and discussed properly, these 'Western Curator's Non-Western Shows' syndrome is as scandalous as the Sensation event!« As an example of this she mentioned the Israel Biennial in Jerusalem, curated by Kasper König, and Paolo Colombo's Istanbul Biennial. At the Biennials' symposiums, delicate questions would never have been posed, but thanks to the Internet it has become possible to discuss these issues within a larger framework.
Curating / Exhibiting in the WWW
Following Christy Sheffield Sanford introduction of her web project »My Millennium«, Pat Binder asked if there is »a web-specific curating-exhibiting modality. Online-time is money, that's why the audience usually doesn't take the time to really get through the proposed web works. However, for the very reason that the audience is spread around the world, it becomes especially important to publish contextual information on the artists and their works.« Sheffield Sanford added: »Another option is to ask those involved to discuss the technical/artistic aspects of their work in introductory paragraphs.«
After that, Janet Swartz told us about a lecture given by Benjamin Weil, Director of New Media, ICA London and co-founder/curator of Äda'web, at the Museo de Monterrey in Mexico and mentioned a few core thoughts from it. Weil curated the second edition of the »Virtual Tours: Thematic proposals in Internet about art«, a project of the museum's Mediateca. He published an essay with images and links to art projects on the web with the title »Readme.txt - Browsing online art: An exploration of various directions in networked art projects«. It is available on the Museo de Monterrey's website in English and Spanish.
Raul Ferrera Balanquet, who lives in Mexico, criticized the Museo de Monterrey's project for »the absence of Mexicans, Latinos and Latin American web art, even though the curator stated that he was fascinated by the amount of technology that he found in rural Mexico«.
Juan José Díaz-Infante stressed, Raul's commentary »is pointing out a complex of having to be imported in order to be good. Complex of the 'industrial' relationship between first and third world«. In conclusion, Díaz Infante wrote: »... A curator, from any center of arts in London, will never be able even to grasp a culture that by the very common reality surpasses by far his levels of understanding. Just by the simple fact that he lacks the frames of reference to decode our art.«
In this summary's appendix, you will find a list of art projects on the net which were touched upon in the Forum. In most of these postings, the curators and artists reported on their concrete experiences in the creation of the projects.
In December 1999, an interesting exchange on Chinese art took place between Josette Balsa und Britta Erickson in which other participants joined in. Whoever is interested in this area can find important information and reflections in the relevant postings. Among other things, it dealt with the work of Gu Wenda and Xu Bing. [see among others Balsa /16.12., Knote, Erickson / 20.12., Balsa / 22.12., Erickson / 22.12.]
During the months summarized here, a continuous and often controversial process of understanding took place on the nature of art, which was picked up as a central theme in December once more. This could basically make up a Forum in itself. It would go beyond the scope of this summary if one attempted to take a more detailed look at the various facets and directions of the debate. For this reason, only a few basic points are mentioned here:
Among other things, it dealt with art as a game, as a lie, as myth and as action. Contexts between art and communication as well as art and politics (i.e. how political is art) were also discussed. A further question was, to what extent can art be understood at all and who is in a position to do this.
A comment by Tom Vincent made apparent how difficult it is to grasp such a vast topic, for this reason it is being quoted last: »I'm not really sure there _is_ any true understanding anywhere - especially regarding this slippery thing we call 'art'. Perhaps we can only 'do', and then 'do' some more - all the while attempting to keep our eyes open to what we are not expecting to find, and struggling in the direction that appears to be leading towards satori.«
[Satori - Enlightenment, Buddhist and Zen: the absolute understanding of the composition and the truths of the universe and human beings]
See, among others, the following postings: Díaz Infante / 8.10., Díaz Infante / 8.12., d'Alpoim Guedes / 10.12., Davin / 12.12., Díaz Infante / 12.12., d'Alpoim Guedes / 13.12., Vincent / 13.12., Ferrera-Balanquet / 13.12., Díaz Infante / 14.12., Braumüller / 14.12., d'Alpoim Guedes / 15.12., Vincent / 15.12.
See also list of presented projects and information.
Summary: Gerhard Haupt
Translation: Rebeccah Blum
© House of World Cultures, January, 2000
< back