<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How New Media Figures in a Gallery</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.marissaneave.com/2008/05/how-new-media-figures-in-a-gallery/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.marissaneave.com/2008/05/how-new-media-figures-in-a-gallery/</link>
	<description>art + space + audience</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:54:24 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Greg J. Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.marissaneave.com/2008/05/how-new-media-figures-in-a-gallery/comment-page-1/#comment-219</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg J. Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 12:16:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marissaneave.com/?p=47#comment-219</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I sit in a precarious place between honouring an artist’s intentions and making art as accessible as possible to a wide audience. &lt;strong&gt;Which, of course, doesn’t always agree with what an artist intends.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I actually think that curators will be the ones to figure out what to &quot;do&quot; with media art.. not artists. Anyways, talking about how to exhibit, and intent is definitely more interesting than &quot;how to sell&quot; I tend to run and hide from discussions about limited edition DVDs by software artists!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I sit in a precarious place between honouring an artist’s intentions and making art as accessible as possible to a wide audience. <strong>Which, of course, doesn’t always agree with what an artist intends.</strong></p></blockquote>
<p>I actually think that curators will be the ones to figure out what to &#8220;do&#8221; with media art.. not artists. Anyways, talking about how to exhibit, and intent is definitely more interesting than &#8220;how to sell&#8221; I tend to run and hide from discussions about limited edition DVDs by software artists!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marissa</title>
		<link>http://www.marissaneave.com/2008/05/how-new-media-figures-in-a-gallery/comment-page-1/#comment-218</link>
		<dc:creator>Marissa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 20:38:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marissaneave.com/?p=47#comment-218</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re right... I definitely don&#039;t want to be a technocrat and I definitely don&#039;t think that any type of art should be able to tidily fit into some kind of historical category.

I guess my primary interest is how new media is understood as it relates to any artist&#039;s intentions. This obviously varies from person to person, and it&#039;s impossible to have everyone agreeing on how to interpret a piece in a particular space. I sit in a precarious place between honouring an artist&#039;s intentions and making art as accessible as possible to a wide audience. Which, of course, doesn&#039;t always agree with what an artist intends.

Thanks for your points... I&#039;m always looking for new ways to think about and understand new media and I appreciate your feedback. I&#039;m reading the Rhizome article now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re right&#8230; I definitely don&#8217;t want to be a technocrat and I definitely don&#8217;t think that any type of art should be able to tidily fit into some kind of historical category.</p>
<p>I guess my primary interest is how new media is understood as it relates to any artist&#8217;s intentions. This obviously varies from person to person, and it&#8217;s impossible to have everyone agreeing on how to interpret a piece in a particular space. I sit in a precarious place between honouring an artist&#8217;s intentions and making art as accessible as possible to a wide audience. Which, of course, doesn&#8217;t always agree with what an artist intends.</p>
<p>Thanks for your points&#8230; I&#8217;m always looking for new ways to think about and understand new media and I appreciate your feedback. I&#8217;m reading the Rhizome article now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg J. Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.marissaneave.com/2008/05/how-new-media-figures-in-a-gallery/comment-page-1/#comment-217</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg J. Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 20:25:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marissaneave.com/?p=47#comment-217</guid>
		<description>Hi Marissa,

I agree the &quot;newness&quot; of new is a point of contention. New, says who? And for how long? Of course, we don&#039;t want to put ourselves in a position where &quot;new&quot; only refers to recent work with cutting edge technology, then we are simply technocrats. I think &quot;new media&quot; is a catch-all term just like net.art was years back.. it works in the present as a quick way to generally refer to a broad body of work and practices, but the term will stagnate, or &lt;a href=&quot;http://rhizome.org/editorial/fp/blog.php/590&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;perhaps it already has?&lt;/a&gt; 

Media in a social context rather than a white cube can be liberating, but it can also ghettoize the work in relation to socializing. I think media art can still be appreciated as a spectator in the same contexts as more traditional forms.. but I think things get really tricky once you enter the commercial and archival (institutional) bandwidths. 

I like the net for showing work, I know it doesn&#039;t substitute for seeing work in the flesh, but it is a pretty damn democratic space for collective curation. 

Keep the posts coming. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Marissa,</p>
<p>I agree the &#8220;newness&#8221; of new is a point of contention. New, says who? And for how long? Of course, we don&#8217;t want to put ourselves in a position where &#8220;new&#8221; only refers to recent work with cutting edge technology, then we are simply technocrats. I think &#8220;new media&#8221; is a catch-all term just like net.art was years back.. it works in the present as a quick way to generally refer to a broad body of work and practices, but the term will stagnate, or <a href="http://rhizome.org/editorial/fp/blog.php/590" rel="nofollow">perhaps it already has?</a> </p>
<p>Media in a social context rather than a white cube can be liberating, but it can also ghettoize the work in relation to socializing. I think media art can still be appreciated as a spectator in the same contexts as more traditional forms.. but I think things get really tricky once you enter the commercial and archival (institutional) bandwidths. </p>
<p>I like the net for showing work, I know it doesn&#8217;t substitute for seeing work in the flesh, but it is a pretty damn democratic space for collective curation. </p>
<p>Keep the posts coming. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
