I'm so glad you posted this! I still have the draft you angsted over on my HD because I liked it so much; I was wondering if you had decided not to post it at all. I was going to post it sooner, but the timing was usually wrong. I didn't want to post it after VVC because it would have looked like shit stirring.
Vidding is just as much art as anything else, and just as flexible in terms of stated goals. Word. I could drop an egg from a 4th floor window and it's art.
In other words, it's big and messy, just like the rest of the art world because it's all about defining something that is...undefinable. There will be something to disprove it as soon as something is defined.
But, while I haven't seen as many anti-art arguments as you have, the few I have seen have tended more towards, "vidding isn't art because it's commentary" end of the spectrum, separating "meta" from "art". For a few months it seemed liked every 15th thing I looked at online was something about how vidding can't be art.
But I think your essay has a really insightful point that there are entire schools of art that are based on providing "meta commentary" on real things, like the various appropriators you mentioned. Yes, I see a lot of artistic works as commenting on others in a meta way. Fountain (after Marcel Duchamp: A.P.) and LHOOQ are two shown here that can work on the same level as a vid in terms of meta commentary.
no subject
I was going to post it sooner, but the timing was usually wrong. I didn't want to post it after VVC because it would have looked like shit stirring.
Vidding is just as much art as anything else, and just as flexible in terms of stated goals.
Word. I could drop an egg from a 4th floor window and it's art.
In other words, it's big and messy, just like the rest of the art world because it's all about defining something that is...undefinable.
There will be something to disprove it as soon as something is defined.
But, while I haven't seen as many anti-art arguments as you have, the few I have seen have tended more towards, "vidding isn't art because it's commentary" end of the spectrum, separating "meta" from "art".
For a few months it seemed liked every 15th thing I looked at online was something about how vidding can't be art.
But I think your essay has a really insightful point that there are entire schools of art that are based on providing "meta commentary" on real things, like the various appropriators you mentioned.
Yes, I see a lot of artistic works as commenting on others in a meta way. Fountain (after Marcel Duchamp: A.P.) and LHOOQ are two shown here that can work on the same level as a vid in terms of meta commentary.