Re: <eyebeam><blast> Art and Digital Practices

[Tim Jordan <tjordan@myriad.its.unimelb.EDU.AU>]

>>From his description, I think he's right. I would classify these
>programs as tools rather than artworks.


As a working definition of an
>artist, I'd say most artists have a world view that they are attempting

>to share with a viewer. The originality and/or relevance of that world
>view, coupled with the clarity of its expression is what makes them
good
>or not such good artists. I don't see much of a world view in much
>digital art, but I think the web has great potential for those artists
>who are interested in communication and social relations. I don't think

>much good art will come from those who are interested in technology per

>se, or those who are using technology to make fundamentally old things.

The Web Stalker, seems to be 'net art' partly because it embodies the
net's
distribution to many people new abilities. Rather than being something
to
contemplate (though the Stalker produces pictures to contemplate), the
Stalker is a tool to be used. I feel that is part of the artistic vision

here; art offering tools for others to analyse the powers they are
caught in.

Hey, I'm game.

Tim Jordan


-

-------------------------------------------------------------
a critical forum for artistic practice in the network
texts are the property of individual authors
to unsubscribe, send email to eyebeam@list.thing.net
with the following single line in the message body:
unsubscribe eyebeam-list
information and archive at http://www.eyebeam.org
Eyebeam Atelier/X Art Foundation http://www.blast.org
-------------------------------------------------------------