Book review of Beyond New
Media Art by
Domenico Quaranta, Link Editions, Brescia, 2013, free e-book
or purchasable soft
cover, 290 pages, ISBN 9781291376975
Published at On-Verge here:
http://www.on-verge.org/reviews/book-review-beyond-new-media-art/
Domenico Quaranta, a curator and art
critic who regularly writes for Flash Art and Artpulse, has just released a new
book Beyond New Media Art that is particularly topical and noteworthy, as it is very much
in the current inclination to formally re-evaluate contemporary art in terms of
a developing post-media understanding. In it Quaranta deftly juxtaposes Peter Weibel's
notions of post-media against those of Rosalind Krauss (who dismisses the
post-medium condition) and FŽlix Guattari (who embraced a critical and
political post-medium condition), questioning their distinctions in a
post-media world in which perhaps it no longer makes sense to distinguish
between art that uses computers and art which doesnÕt. (page 212)
But perhaps it still does.
Possibly there is something strangely cognitively dissonant in the medium-specificity
of computers themselves, as Alan Kay and Adele Goldberg already in a 1977 essay
suggest, with their understand that the Dynabook (an early multimedia computing
system) should be viewed as a medium in and of itself while simultaneously
containing the powers of most other media put together. Hence already proposing
the idea of the computer as metamedium.
But the focus of this book is
tighter than that and begins by telling the history of the gap between the
mainstream curatorial contemporary art world and the so-called new media art world. This little known
history is the crux of this pertinently revised, updated version of an earlier
2010 book Quaranta published in Italian, with the title Media, New Media,
Postmedia
(Postmedia Books, Milan). Through the circulation of interviews around that
book, Quaranta contributed a bit to the heated debate outside of Italy
concerning the majority of powerful contemporary art historians and curatorsÕ
ignoring (in what seemed like a blanket rejection) of new media and digital art
per say, and their enforced taboo against artists who address our era of
digital technology head-on.
In an art world that
seemingly accepts absolutely any hybridity, any material, any theoretical
model, any remediation, any critical inspection, and any aesthetic approach at
all - the extent of which Jed Perl in his recent book of collected essays Magicians
& Charlatans (Eakins Press, 2012) deems a condition of irony drenched,
laisser-faire aesthetics (page 15) - the peculiar question of the rejection of anything raises eyebrows of concern.
What peculiar and dastardly Luddite bias is at work here? And how can it be
eradicated in an era in which digital media are powerfully reshaping the
political, economic, social and cultural organization of the real world?
This problem is an oddity
that has baffled me for over two decades, but now seems to be waning, and this
book both advances and celebrates that wane. Quaranta makes the point that
within a post-media art world, so called technology-based - or new media - art
(digital-based art now is more accurate to our times) has slipped back sideways
into the acceptable means of creating art, provided it does not (1) mention by
name the technological or digital, (2) describe itself as technological or
digital, or (3) lovingly point at anything outside itself that is overtly
technological or digital. In other words, technological or digital connected
art is now acceptable to select art editors, curators and critics so long as it
is an art that dare not speak its name.
But we may question, how did
we get to such an imprecise position today towards once modernist conceptions
of medium-specificity? Can it be merely an overreaction to foolish technologically
determinist positions? This book reviews that issue in depth, as it explores
some of the historical, sociological and conceptual reasons for the weirdly
under-recognized, even marginalized, position of the digital within recent art
history. On the other hand, the book is also an attempt to suggest new critical
and curatorial strategies to turn around this marginalization and to emphasize
the topicality of art that touches on digital media and the issues of the
information age.
It does so by citing some key
examples of the problem. For example, in 2010, this marginalization dispute
flared up around Nicolas BourriaudÕs out-of-hand rejection of digital art in
his statement about new mediaÕs impoverished appreciation of art history and
recent aesthetic and theoretical developments on the panel that Edward Shanken,
author of Art and Electronic Media (Phaidon Press, 2009 & 2011), conducted at the Basel Art Fair.
This was perversely odd, as Bourriaud often defends his metaphoric references to networks and
computer culture as inspirations for his own curatorial work, while refusing
the actuality of computers in art. This, what might at first assumed to be an
anomalous event of unwarranted tactical minorization of art and technology
within a technological society, has been the dominant trend. But in Basel,
Shanken came up vigorously against BourriaudÕs avoidance of the notion of
medium altogether, while Bourriaud pleaded willful ignorance, instead insisting
on developing non-technically determined notions for his curatorial agenda with
terms similar to Krauss', such as automatism and technical support.
We next explicitly saw this
discussion fume up last year around Claire BishopÕs essay in Artforum. These and further biased
persuasions of powerful people within the art institutions of the digital age,
convinced Quaranta to rewrite his 2010 book and release this extensive, very
understandable and attention-grabbing book in English, only a few months ago.
It is a bit wispy on illustrations, but makes for remarkable reading, given the
wild swings in opinion and convoluted rationalizations that must be sat with
here.
To situate us in this maze of
new media marginalization, we must grasp QuarantaÕs point that now it is
already too late to talk about a New Media Art in our time of post-convergence,
a convergence of every medium into digital territory (hence the relevance of
the term post-media). However, Quaranta goes to lengths demonstrating and analyzing
so-called New Media ArtÕs appearance, early reception, rejection and recent
reappearance within the wider field of contemporary art. And he makes some keen
distinctions in this regard, for example defending the outmoded term Media Art,
a term he says that is Òparticularly popular in German academic literature,
extends the reach to all media: press, radio, fax, telephone, satellite
communications, video and television, light, electricity, film, photography,
and also computers, software, the web and video games. As underlined in the
online encyclopedia Medien Kunst Netz, launched in 2004 and edited by the
German scholars Rudolf Frieling and Dieter Daniels, the term Media Art forges a
tradition that goes from Man Ray to Nam June Paik to the current use of
computers and the web, while Digital Art covers at most a story that begins in
the late sixties, the period of the first experiments that used computers to
make art.Ó (page 23) But the book mostly focuses on the last twenty or so years
(generally the mid-90s on), and is thus foremost an explanatory history book
for people that were either too technophobic, too young, or just not paying
attention at the time.
Having actively lived and worked in the thick of
things then, I can attest that Quaranta basically gets the big history right,
if, I suppose inevitably, somewhat partially. I particularly was impressed by
QuarantaÕs ability to fairly accurately report on what happened with new media
and digital art both throughout European capitals and in New York City.
However, a few regrettable errors of omission were made, for example in listing
the history of art galleries that supported/support so-called new media art in
New York (starting with still striving Postmasters). Here one egregious error
was QuarantaÕs omission of the work of Universal Concepts Unlimited, an early
new technology based gallery with a limited but fertile run at 507 West 24th
Street between the years (and tears) of 2000 and 2006. But the rise and fall of
interest for mew media art within the museums at the turn of the century is
rather comprehensive, covering 010101: Art in Technological Times at San FranciscoÕs SFMoMA, Art
Now: Art and Money Online at the Tate curated by Julian Stallabrass, through BitStreams at the Whitney Museum
curated by Lawrence Rinder and Debra Singer, to Data Dynamics, also at the Whitney curated
by Christiane Paul, Telematic Connections: The Virtual Embrace at the Walker Art Center
curated by Steve Dietz (it toured six other venues in 2001), Game Show at MASS MoCA that was
curated by Mark Tribe and Alex Galloway from Rhizome, on to lesser known shows
and venues, such as Dystopia + Identity in the Age of Global Communications that was presented at Tribes
Gallery in New York and was curated by Cristine Wang.
After reviewing this history, Quaranta
essentially concludes that this first wave of acceptance of new media in the
art world waned due to a combination of hubris and blatant self-interest. The
self-interest came in the form of often technology-related corporate
sponsorship. The hubris came from those making overly revolutionary and
technologically determined evaluations by way of claims to superiority based on
the wonder of technological newness alone, as we saw at times with the farcical
claims made for virtual reality, and for example with the always funny field of
teledildonics.
But the major, systemic and deep failure that
Quaranta points to (and here I corroborate him), was that of the critical and
curatorial art communities, with their failure to take an informed and
even-handed interest in art that uses technology. Thus such art in the mid 00s
remained under-recognized, under collected and essentially disregarded. As a
result, many in the critical and curatorial field either unintentionally missed
or intentionally ignored much art that is not bound to, or only about,
technology for its own sake, missing or ignoring art that is content driven (as
is required now, according to Quaranta), with the technological component
playing a crucial but secondary role. And this is what has changed just in the
last three years, a change that started with Christiane PaulÕs Whitney show of
Cory Arcangel, soon followed by some concentrated coverage of Arcangel in Artforum
and other
art magazines.
The book basically winds up with Arcangel;
pointing at a hopeful convergent new realty where now we can accept so-called
new media (or digital media) in art so long as it does not speak its name.
Unfortunately, Quaranta misses the best evidence for his thesis with his
exclusion of Wade Guyton, the digital artist who in 2012 received a rave
retrospective at the Whitney Museum, but whose name does not appear anywhere in
the book. More the pity, for with the financial success of Guyton in the
collector sector (his works regularly sell for more than $1 million at auction
and privately and an untitled Epson UltraChrome inkjet on linen of 2005 established an auction
record for the artist when it sold for $2.4 million at ChristieÕs New York in
2013) Guyton proves QuarantaÕs end point, utterly.
Not that Quaranta always and easily blames those
damnable art critics who were unable to grasp the equal universality and
specificity of digital technology. Nor does he uncritically praise those astute
collectors and Whitney curators; as during the 2000 period and before, new
media artists (and some theoreticians) spoke and acted in conflicted manner -
some desiring understanding, sales, praise and acceptance within the art world
- while others fully rejecting such a goal, often insisting on putting first
the technological component of their work, happily remaining encrusted within
the university context and/or festival circuit, contentedly insisting on the
freedom of the benefits of their marginalization from the market - safe from
within the confines of their techno-ghettoization. So its been a bumpy ride all
the way down, and thus, to explain this colliding dynamic, Quaranta points us,
kind of bizarrely, at The Painted Word, a successful pamphlet on the art world
published in 1975 by the American satirical writer Tom Wolfe.
Quaranta retells how in it, Wolfe ironically
describes Òthe relationship between avant-garde movements and the art
establishment as a bizarre mating ritual, that takes place in two stages: the
Boho dance, Òin which the artist shows his stuff within the circles, coteries,
movements, isms, of the home neighborhood, bohemia itself, as if he doesnÕt
care about anything else,Ó and the consummation, Òin which culturati from
that very same world, le monde, scout the various new movements and new artists of bohemia,
select those who seem the most exciting, original, important, by whatever
standards - and shower them with all the rewards of celebrity.Ó (page 123)
I usually abhor such simplistic thinking such as
WolfeÕs, as I find it massacres the subtle layering of art ideas and art
practices as they enter society at large. But QuarantaÕs conclusion is that
such a consummation is finally at hand.
Joseph Nechvatal
joseph@nechvatal.net