UNT Video Art Spring 2014: Who's Concept of What Body?

What I found most useful about the content of this reading was the re-affirmation of the use of new media to engage the public. When work is presented in a gallery, it is, in a sense, for the people. That video installation (intermedia experimentation) adjusts the role of the viewer to "co-conspirator" and challenges the notion of "viewer as passive consumer of sensations" holds very strong resonance for me in my interest for viewer/user participation.

Furthermore, I believe the greatest value within this reading was the multiple forms of presentation with respect to video. A consideration of space and experimentation has been prevalent within the history of this art form and that is certainly inspiring ( particularly the works of Peter Sarkasian ).

To discuss the "why" involved with video and the conceptual body, would be somewhat redundant considering our past readings on preserving and presenting the self and notions of the future.

What I wish to address is not necessarily the content of this reading, but how this content is presented.

Being that it is essentially an art historical text, I find it interesting that there seems to be a lack of consideration for it's content. Presenting a book on video art is akin to printing out a picture of food when you're hungry (see here). I would prefer a re-imagining of image/video presentation that had a more fluid relationship between source material and discussion. If only there was a book with video capabilities..

Whoop, There it is

To briefly voice my other main qualm, the bias presented racially and sexually in this material is not as forward thinking as some of the material that it addresses. While I do appreciate the thoroughness of inclusion of women video/performance artists, It seems that generally when I study art history the categorization of "woman" or "black" collects a group of artists together in opposition towards the supposed norm. The structure of the text loosely reads: mostly white male artists > mostly white female artists > experimentation > black male artists. While inclusion appreciated, there is a sense of exclusion by their representation as "other". I believe there is a certain amount of awareness and creativity that should be demanded in the presentation of texts, so as not to perpetuate the biases that art history has fallen accustom to.

"In the aftermath of World War II, two countries deeply involved with the destruction that occurred during the war became the breeding ground for radical new forms of Performance and media: Japan, which had attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and Nazi-occupied Austria."

WHOA WHOA WHOA, HISTORICAL CONTEXT NECESSARY

I have much that I could say about the blatant nationalism in that statement, and the glazing over of the suffering of individuals with histories deeply connected to trauma and instability. But I'm exhausted and might comment on that later.

Instead, I'll be more positive and insert links that I responded to: