<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Lev Manovich on the embarressment of digital
art</title></head><body>
<div>URL or not but this is too good, and too important for nettimers,
not to read and discuss. These very personal and relevant observations
come from a public Facebook page and have been written by Lev Manovich
(who is "feeling thoughtful" as the page indicates).</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>-</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><a
href=
"https://m.facebook.com/668367315/posts/10159683846717316/?extid=fWYl63KjbcA3uqqm&d=n"><span
></span
>https://m.facebook.com/668367315/posts/10159683846717316/?extid=fWYl<span
></span>63KjbcA3uqqm&d=n</a></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>My anti-digital art manifesto / What do we feel when we look at
the previous generations of electronic and computer technologies?
1940s TV sets, 1960s mainframes, 1980s PCs, 1990s versions of Windows,
or 2000s mobile phones? I feel "embarrassed. "Awkward."
Almost "shameful." "Sad." And this is exactly the
same feelings I have looking at 99% of digital art/computer art / new
media art/media art created in previous decades. And I will feel the
same when looking at the most cutting-edge art done today ("AI
art," etc.) 5 years from now.<br>
</div>
<div>If consumer products have "planned obsolescence,"
digital art created with the "latest" technology has its own
"built-in obsolescence." //<br>
</div>
<div>These feelings of sadness, disappointment, remorse, and
embarrassment have been provoked especially this week as I am watching
Ars Electronica programs every day. I start wondering - did I waste my
whole life in the wrong field? It is very exciting to be at the
"cutting edge", but the price you pay is heavy. After 30
years in this field, there are very few artworks I can show to my
students without feeling embarrassed. While I remember why there were
so important to us at the moment they were made, their low-resolution
visuals and broken links can't inspire students. //<br>
</div>
<div>The same is often true for the "content" of digital
art. It's about "issues," "impact of X on Y",
"critique of A", "a parody of B", "community
of C" and so on. //<br>
</div>
<div>It's almost never about our real everyday life and our humanity.
Feelings. Passions. Looking at the world. Looking inside yourself.
Falling in love. Breaking up. Questioning yourself. Searching for
love, meaning, less alienated life.//<br>
</div>
<div>After I watch Ars Electronica streams, I go to Netflix or switch
on the TV, and it feels like fresh air. I see very well made films and
TV series. Perfectly lighted, color graded, art directed.<br>
</div>
<div>I see real people, not "ideas" and meaningless sounds
of yet another "electronic music" performance, or yet
another meaningless outputs of a neural network invented by brilliant
scientists and badly misused by "artists."<br>
</div>
<div>New media art never deals with human life, and this is why it
does not enter museums. It's our fault. Don't blame curators or the
"art world." Digital art is "anti-human art," and
this is why it does not stay in history. //<br>
</div>
<div>P.S. As always, I exaggerated a bit my point to provoke
discussion - but not that much. This post does reflect my real
feelings. Of course, some of these issues are complex - but after 30
years in the field, I really do wonder what it was all about)<br>
</div>
<div>P.P.S.<br>
</div>
<div>The mystery of why some technology (and art made with them) has
obsolescence and others do not - thinking about this for 25 years. We
are fascinated by 19th-century photographs or 1960s ones. They look
beautiful, rich, full of emotions, and meanings. But video art from
the 1980s-1990s looks simply terrible, you want to run away and forget
that you ever saw this. Why first Apple computers look cool, cute,
engaged? But art created on them does not? And so on. I still have not
solved this question.<br>
</div>
<div>Perhaps part of this has to be with the message that goes along
with lots of tech art from the 1960s to today - and especially today.
19th or 20th-century photographs done by professional photographs or
good amateurs do not come with utopian, pretentious, exaggerated,
unrealistic, and hypocritical statements, the way lots of
"progressive art" does today. Nor do their titles announce
all latest tech processes used to create these photographs.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>--------------------<br>
Ars Electronica 2020:<br>
<a
href=
"'"https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fars.electronica.art%2Fkeplersgardens%2Fen%2F&h=AT2w4OEuuoeVihKs5LjapuFkzEqtX9kuEBqihrvRbLxcuGHrMqRyRMepEAj7BPSSlqJg9BXKo7LkCG_hIaW69JvA5Kxej9OYXAGjkGNmEm3brgToON6XJYp7Et8r5tsIzkFwbrHkPa3zDVfvnsoo2zo5TMf5GxGj"><span
></span>https://ars.electronica.art/keplersgardens/en/</a><br>
</div>
<div>--------------------<br>
Video illustration: Japanese robot at Ars Electronica 2010 -</div>
<div><a
href=
"'"https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DmmabKC1P51A&h=AT0ZZLvc7X9Tf8ucLLR-DUPF7ioMwdtdLBafjgz2Y_Fq9EBhcL-jiyga7ljPRHx0Quc6zpegRFbBFcgLw7VFffy0xT4s9Y_QZ1lFGsTgU2dNuph12NAxFyRRUwNZ0uai5yQJ3nDDib4h4xcmlL6vHlPXM27bHgOHtAZ"><span
></span>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmabKC1P51A</a></div>
<div> </div>
</body>
</html>