What is art without experimentation? Many have challenged
the concept and idea of what it art, what does it take to be art, and what
deserves to be art. The birth of video art and performing art is no exception. The
boom of portable film opened door to many people, Nam June Paik being one of
them. The common influence of daily objects opened doors… and critics. For many,
video became a whole new branch, an extension for their artwork, or just an interesting
toy. Many people started to take video art seriously, but then again, some did
not. Some people tried to make a bold difference between video and performance
art, and experimental theater and film. For some artists, the gallery space became
like a playground, teasing among the artist itself who was going to make it
challenge it.
I think that challenge has made what we are today: a modern
mess. We have that kind of technology more than available: photo cameras, video
cameras, editing programs, user-friendly stuff, and beyond. As young artists,
we are not only challenging art itself, but society, pushing the limits of
technology and what is “normal”. I think it is interesting this idea of “serious
playfulness”, as a serious and thoughtful art piece which at the same time it
is fun it is usually done by distorting the notions of perception. But does art
end when the viewer becomes part of the piece? Or when it comes too personal or
biased? Art describing events, such as WW2, tend to be strong, unwanted, and
challenged by many other point of view. The line between disturbing, borrowed,
or new, becomes harder and strongly challenge each year.
No comments:
Post a Comment