Tag Archives: web 2.0

Art & Criticism

Like a fellow classmate, I did enjoy reading Round Table: The Present Conditions of Art Criticism published by The MIT Press Journals. I fantasized about people sitting together and discussing without interruption and wondered if I would ever have the pleasure. (oops was I being sarcastic?) I did also note that this article is just the beginning of what could be so many discussions about art, artists, critics and writing (and magazines and their audiences). There is a goldmine of topic starters.

As I read I made notations and these are some of the main ones and based on my understanding of the discussion and context.

The role of critic has been diminished. The reasons, as far as I can tell, are complicated. Art has become more about investment rather than commentary or visual discussion among other reasons. Storr mentions (203) that the language in criticism is difficult and I agree. I would not go so far as to say it should be dumbed down, but sometimes that is exactly how it makes me feel, like a dummy. What I conclude when I approach difficult articles is that someone like me makes the art and someone else writes the criticism, but I may not be the person it is written for. At least not at my level. Ha, no one is writing about my work anyway! lol.

I appreciated parts of the discussion where teaching (at least for me) was occurring. The delineation between the economic and intellectual markets, for instance. Or the way in which writing legitimizes certain art practices. And the discussion around judgment and interpretation was useful. Also helpful was Buchloh’s explanation of academic criticism versus the artist critic. I agreed with Molesworth’s comment (207) that “there is always a benefit to a discursive.”

I wondered where some comments leave me. Baker says “a younger generation that has not had as much public discourse to develop that their criteria are (210),” and Miller repeats it with “the invocation of the youth culture…either older artists are affirmed as quasi-masters, or the artist is young and their work has to have some kind of relation to D.J. Culture or something similar. (218)”

I was interested in the discussion surrounding collaboration as I am also just finishing the Web2.0 class which discusses peer to peer networks and mass collaboration as culture creators. Buchloh (215) points out that thinking we are actually collaborating is a false assumption based on the way power is, in reality, distributed. Something that I realized in the other class too is that mass collaboration is only democratic when everyone has a computer, has an Internet connection, and has the tools to create. Hello, there may be 1 billion people like that, but that leaves over 5 billion of them without. Poor and illiterate (and mostly female too?) people would be my guess.

An affirmation for me was the discussion surrounding site-specificity and context. For round-table participants, as writers, it is important, but also for artists. As Fraser says (223) “I do believe that artists have a responsibility to think critically about their contexts…” Storr also comments (224) that for writers it is important “not to get stuck in one register.” Ditto that for artists!

Purely fun was the comment by Storr on 215 where he says, “No I don’t. And that is insider or coterie talk, because you’re saying, ‘Yes, you know who they are,’ and I don’t know who they are. So tell me.” I laughed so hard.

I suppose that critics could be helped if I subscribe to October magazine?

My Pipe & No I Don’t Smoke

I have been trying to set up Yahoo Pipes to filter blogs for a class (in school).

Frustrating. It takes me back to the day when I was learning to write Java. Write some Java. Hope that each punctuation mark was in place because at 3am after having looked at it for the billionth time you wouldn’t have a chance of finding a mistake anyway. Compile. Frack! It doesn’t work. Drink yet more coffee. Read it backwards. Find an error. Compile…

At any rate, I have been digging around on the Internet looking for a solution. Using the same solution for filtering as my instructor does not work. It returns every article on my blog when only one should be listed. Other Pipes offered hope, but used parameters from the drop down menus on the modules like “item.gd:etag.” Yahoo Pipes should offer a list of each of these parameters and what their function is. “Item.” Is that each blog entry? Is it the entire blog? “gd.” What? “etag.” I’m guessing it calls the tags one adds to their blog entries.

I have ended up using the solution that was used by another student. Each blog is filtered four times. Once each for “description,” “title,” “category,” and “gd:etag.” It works, but…

My Yahoo Pipe.

Frauenfelder 13-36

I have a recommended reading for the class, which states, “Frauenfelder 13-36.” What? I already ordered my books! Frauenfelder wasn’t on the list. Putting my resources to work, naturally I google 13-36. What is truly funny about that, is the sponsored link that appears on the right (see below).

[image missing]

Next, I google “Frauenfelder”. Wikipedia has an entry.

Anyway, he is the co-editor of the collaborative weblog Boing Boing, which was also on our list. Boing boing seems at first glance like a typical (I don’t mean boring) blog. Snippets of information gathered from here and there and posted to one location. It is collaborative, which means that more than one author is able to post. This would certainly contribute to more balance, especially if each person had different politics, culture etc.

I especially enjoyed the entry on girls becoming infertile if they play the digeridoo. Sounds ridiculous to me, but I’ll bet it doesn’t to girls who are entrenched in that culture. Are you daring me to touch thaaat?

Guess I’ll have to post in the forum to find out where to find pages 13-36.

Web 2.0

I am excited about the class. It should be interesting.

I am already spending hours looking over all the options for blogs…oh, oh I’m hooked. I may need to file for a divorce from that other networking thing that starts with an ‘f.’