Why Have There Been No Great Net Artists? Rather than trying to assimilate net art into our existing understanding of art history, there may be a way that it can be understood to problematize many of the very assumptions we take to be normal, if not natural.Įven a simple question like “Why have there been no great women artists?” can, if answered adequately, create a sort of chain reaction, expanding not merely to encompass the accepted assumptions of the single field, but outward to embrace history and the social sciences, or even psychology and literature, and thereby, from the outset, to challenge the assumptions that the traditional divisions of intellectual inquiry are still adequate to deal with the meaningful questions of our time, rather than the merely convenient or self-generated ones.įollowing is a series of modified questions culled from Nochlin’s article, which I hope to relate to the current status of net art. In a similar vein, I would like to explore the similarly silly question, “Why have there been no great net artists?
1971: 22-39 In it, she uses a “silly” question to give a long answer that is not about women artists but about the very notion of art and the patriarchal hegemony of the art system. ‘Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?’ ArtNews Jan. To my mind, one of the premiere investigations of art world “power” in relation to a disenfranchised class is Linda Nochlin’s seminal essay, “Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?” 2 Nochlin, Linda. Why Have There Been No Great Net Artists? 1 In this edited version of what was originally a talk, curator Steve Dietz suggests a way of thinking about new media art.
0 kommentar(er)
