Topic: Introduce one example of net art that you consider to be a
work of art. Explain why you consider this piece artwork to be a work of art,
showing how it fits the particular definition of art that support. To support
your argument refer to the work of scholars of net art as well as the work of
scholars who have defined art.
Introduction
The twentieth-century is an age of technology explosion. Unlike
traditional forms of art such as painting, sculpture and printing, many artists
start to explore new forms of art like software art and game art. Net art, also
known as Internet art, which is one of the new art forms, becomes prevalent since
the past decade. According to Tilman Baumgartel, a scholar and a professor of
University of Philippines, defines digital art as ‘Net art plays with the protocols of the Internet,
with its technical peculiarities. It puts known or undiscovered errors within
the system to its own use. It deals creatively with software and with the rules
software follows in order to work. It only has any meaning at all within its
medium, the Internet.’
However, although the appearance
of net art has changed the way we experience and create art, many people
question that whether a piece of net art is a work of art. In order to have an
answer to this controversial topic, I am going to discuss wwwwwwwww.jodi.org
(Jodi.org), which is an example of digital art. In the essay, firstly, I will give
a brief introduction of this work and describe it in detailed. At the end, I
will make an evaluation on it by using key quotes from several scholars.
What is Jodi.org?
wwwwwwwww.jodi.org (also known as Jodi.org) is a Net art project,
which first appeared online in 1993.
It is a collective artwork of two internet artists, Joan Heemskerk from the
Netherlands and Dirk Paesmans from Belgium. ‘Jodi’ is a collective signature
combining the first two letters of their first names. Jodi gave a new function
to the Internet that it was not only a platform for us to publish or receive
information, also acted as an art medium like oil painting and photography. Through
applying computer programming, the language of web and HTML scripts, Jodi.org
changed the way we think about the internet and turn over a new leaf to art
history.
Jodi.org
is the large and the most iconic website of Jodi’s works. It is a
Web-site-as-art-work, which contains garbled texts, a massive structure of
designed patterns and stranger images laid out in the basic HTML.
Also, Jodi.org is combined by a full of collection of
strange pages and many invisible hyperlinks. Each page is separated but
designed to link with interfaces. We may have no idea of where the interfaces
to other pages are until exactly the right link is clicked or the right
passageway is found. The arrangement may cause confusion to its viewers and
make them want to know about what the purpose behind is.
Figure 1. Jodi.org’s homepage
Personally, I think Jodi.org is an interesting and aesthetic
artwork. Take its homepage
[Figure 1] as an example. When I
first access to the homepage of Jodi.org, there are scrambled green texts. I
think the code is beautiful when it elegantly implemented. Black
and bright green are used in the homepage which creates a strong contrast to
each other and make the green text stand out. The repetition of the code also creates
rhythm and movement to the entire homepage. As a result, the page looks
consistent and unified.
However, the website seems to be a glitch that is difficult for us to perceive
the meaning. I have no idea why Jodi displayed the symbols, notation and
numbers in this way, but I still think it is regularly displayed with purpose.
Just like what the artist Sol LeWitt described conceptual art, ‘All planning and decisions are made beforehand
and the execution is perfunctory affair. The idea becomes the machine that
makes the art’. Jodi.org operates on a conceptual level. Viewers can experience and
explore in those unknown code but may not get its hidden message.
What is the meaning behind the work?
When I browse Jodi.org, I feel confused and lost. Even I keep
clicking on more hyperlinks on the website, but it does not help me to find out
the hidden information. Therefore, I have a speculation: there is no concrete
message behind the work. ‘Interactivity’ is the potential purpose Jodi wanted
to emphases - the experience of interacting with the Internet. We act like a
key of the artwork to some extent. We cannot remain static with the interactive
Web screen,
we need to ‘keep moving’ in order to see the next images or pages, thus a lot
of interfaces are left. A sense of humor also concealed in the artwork. Since we
need to find out the hidden message of the work, the action of ‘clicking
hyperlink’ may represent that Jodi wants to play joke on its viewers and makes
them feeling confused. Thus, there is no need for us to understand what the
images shown in Jodi.org want to talk about exactly, but the concept which Jodi
emphases.
Is Jodi.org a work of art?
Compare with other new forms of art, net art is relatively
inexpensively to produce and therefore many artists started to use computer and
Internet as a tool for producing art since 1950s. However, there are some traditional
artists criticizing net art not work of art. To my point of views, I think Jodi.org
as a net at project is a work of art under the following definition:
“An artwork is something produced with intention of
giving it the capacity to satisfy the aesthetic interest.” - Monroe C.
Beardsley
Firstly, Jodi.org
is created with intention. Dirk Paesmans has said that ‘We explore the computer …
inside, and mirror this on the net. When a viewer looks at our work, we are
inside his computer…and we are honored to be in somebody’s computer.’ That means by using
computer, Jodi wants to interact with its viewers. Via their interaction, Jodi
can get into someone’s mind and understand how the viewer acts. This is Jodi’s
intention to create its artworks and therefore, Jodi.org fulfils Beardsley’s
definition of art. Thus, it is a work of art.
Secondly,
it
is a work of art that contains contents and concept. Jodi.org is combined by
many independent pieces of conceptual art. The images we seen in each page operate
in a conceptual level which are shown based on what link is clicked. We cannot
understand every patterns, glitches and texts which appeared in Jodi.org. However,
the process of experiencing the work is what Jodi.org highlight.
Thirdly, Jodi
is aesthetically created. According to Ernest W. Adams, he said that art had an
aesthetic. Jodi
has manipulated imported data and internal computer data to often dizzying
effect by applying different elements of art. For example, there is the use of
repetition. The wavy lines, curved shapes, repeated forms and color are kept
repeating in Jodi.org. We can see the repetition of art elements is used in an
organized and regular way. This gives us a sense of movement, rhythm, wholeness
and unity. Hence, aesthetic is created.
Lastly,
Jodi.org is a work of art by using Internet as a tool. In the book Digital Art
(2003), Christiane Paul, as a curator and media historian, made an
identification between art that uses digital technology ‘as a tool for the creation of traditional
art objects – photography, print, sculpture, or music – and art that employs
these technologies as its very own medium’.
So the Internet seems to be the intermediary between the artist and the
realization of the artist’s idea, rather than a medium in itself. So
we should not criticize the net art’s artworks are not work of art based on the
medium. As the net art artists just consider the Internet as a tool to produce
and display their works. Thus, we should judge whether it is a work of art with
other factors like artist’s intention, but not only depending on the medium.
Conclusion
After
a detailed description of Jodi.org, we can understand that Jodi.org is a work
of art. It is because Jodi.org contains intention, content, concept and aesthetic.
Although it is a piece of work of net art, the Internet is considered as a tool
to produce art. So people should not criticize all net art’s artworks are not
work of art based on their medium.
Bibliography
1.
Tribe, Mark, and Reena Jana. New Media Art. Köln: Taschen,
2006.
2.
Corby, Tom. Network Art: Practices and Positions.
London: Routledge, 2006.
3.
Rush, Michael. New Media in Art. London: Thames
& Hudson, 2005.
4.
Paul, Christiane. Digital Art. New York: Thames &
Hudson, 2003.
5. Adams, Randy. Transdisciplinary Digital Art Sound, Vision and
the New Screen ; Selected Papers. Berlin: Springer, 2008.
6.
Beardsley, Monroe C.
"An Aesthetic Definition of Art." (1983)
7. Adams, Ernest W. “Will
Computer Games Ever Be a Legitimate Art Form”. In Clarke
and Mitchell (eds), Videogames and Art
Website
Jodi.org:
Tom Corby, Network Art:
Practices and Position, (London: Routledge, 2006), 38.
Ernest W. Adams, “Will Computer Games Ever Be a Legitimate Art Form”. In Clarke and Mitchell (eds), Videogames and Art, 255-264.
I agree governments have the right to place age restrictions on violent video games. I think these restrictions are essential to provide guidance for players. For example, for those games contains violent and bloody elements, sex, controversial language and substance abuse, players who aged under 18 are restricted to play themselves. This may protect them being affected by the games.
