Hz

[An interesting site and a fine example of a journal making the transition from printed page to virtual page. Begun by Fylkingen in the 60's - it is now one of the few internet journals originating from Sweden. Fylkingen is a non-profit art organization in Stockholm that was established in 1933. I very much like what is being said here about new media - both in definition and how it is being used/not used by artists and the various discourses that stem from those using it...]


When using technology to create a piece of art, you often get trapped between those who are mostly (if not only) interested in the newest technology and those whose references are strictly from visual arts. It is no secret that new media art is a loosely defined discipline consisting of people coming from different backgrounds with various preferential degrees toward technology fetishism. Here more often than not you meet people whose favourite topics of discussions are the newest technological gadgets rather than those of aesthetical or philosophical, who know more about the latest releases from Nintendo than the latest exhibitions at Tate or MOMA, and to whom such names as Matthew Barneys, Sophie Calle, Damien Hirst or even Bill Viola only ring hollow bells. As though neither the constant economical set-backs since the '70s nor piling-up of social and environmental problems leading to our mistrust in human nature has ever left any visible trace to change our mental picture of "the future," they seem to continue to march on with their almost religious-like faith in techno paradise.

On the other hand, though artists want to consider themselves radical and forward-thinking, still assuming their rightful position to be the cutting-edge crowds within the hierarchy of aesthetic society, history tells us otherwise when it comes to utilizing new technology to their art. The most notable example of this is probably the use of photography as an art medium. Except for a few open-minded artists, it took more than a century for photography to be accepted as a valid means to produce art, and those who proceeded in using camera before its acceptance were simply called "photographers" and not "artists." Film also went down the same path. Though some handful french artists such as Legé and (American-born) Man Ray experimented with the medium at the dawn of cinema, film-makers gradually developed their own language with its particular concerns. As a result film as a genre acquired a specific sphere quite different from that occupied by visual arts. Though many visual artists today use these technologies for their creation, we cannot erase our history of specialisation in which these genres have created their own discourses. As a result what we witness today is different categories of artists using the same technology (i.e., photographers and artists using photography, film-makers and artists using film, etc.), contributing in parallel to their related areas of discourses. The difference, therefore, is not so much as what kind of technological media or medium one uses, but rather what kind of discourses one's work stems from and refers to. Likewise it is safe to say what one appreciates as a member of the public depends very much on what kind of discourses and languages one is familiar with and accustomed to.