Slashdot Mirror


HTML: Is it Art?

joeljones writes "The New York Times (registration, yeah, yeah, yeah) has an interesting story about two artists who use HTML, Javascript, and other web technologies as their medium. Could be an interesting set of test cases for anyone writing a browser." While we're on the subject of artsy sites, I submit Zombo.com for your perusal. I believe it to be the only web site that claims the infinite is possible.

61 of 300 comments (clear)

  1. oh my by ergonal · · Score: 3, Funny

    What did ZOMBO do to annoy CowbowNeal THAT much?

    1. Re:oh my by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know, there are people living outside the US. Actually, the majority of people living on this planet do not live there.

    2. Re:oh my by magead7 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but what percentage of people who cause Slashdottings are from the U.S.? In addition, how many people from Asia and Australia visit Slashdot. It was an honest question to try to find out percents.

    3. Re:oh my by Jade+E.+2 · · Score: 3, Funny
      What did ZOMBO do to annoy CowbowNeal THAT much?

      Go to the site, make sure your sound is on, hit F11 (Assuming you're using Phoenix or IE), sit back, and relax. In about 10 minutes one of three things will happen. Either you'll understand his annoyance, you'll go into a coma, or you'll be hooked for life.

    4. Re:oh my by Ozan · · Score: 4, Funny

      What did ZOMBO do to annoy CowbowNeal THAT much?

      Hmm...

      "Welcome to Zombocom!"

      "This is Zombocom!"

      "You can do anything... at Zombocom!"

      "Anything at all!"

      "The only limit is yourself!"

      "Anything is possible... at Zombocom!"

      "The infinite is possible... at Zombocom!"

      "The unattainable is unknown... at Zombocom!"

      I think it was letting Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf speak the introduction.

      "There are no infidel Americans... at Zombocom!"

  2. computer code as art.. by Unominous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess anything, including code can be artistic if it blends something technical with an art in a subtle way.

    That's the whole idea behind poetry, at least. And computer code can be poetic.

    --
    "Smoking helps you lose weight - one lung at a time" -- A. E. Neumann
    1. Re:computer code as art.. by tankdilla · · Score: 4, Interesting
      --

      -Look lively. LOOK LIVELY!!! --Mr. Shmallow

    2. Re:computer code as art.. by Draigon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wow! I forgot all about that site. Years ago I found a portal to those kinds of sites. If anyone found jodi interesting, check out some of these links. Be forewarned it might not be work safe, and there might even be missing sites because I haven't been to these sites in years.

      http://www.once-upon-a-forest.com/
      http://www.s narg.net/
      http://www.entropy8zuper.org/
      http://w ww.redsmoke.com/
      http://www.absurd.org/
      http://w ww.fakeshop.com/
      http://snudd.sil.at/
      http://www .jodi.org/
      http://www.superbad.com/
      http://www.d 2b.org/
      http://www.silverserver.co.at/lia/

      If you're going to see any, I always liked superbad myself. http://www.superbad.com/

      --
      -Rabbit
  3. zombocom by selderrr · · Score: 3, Funny

    reminds me of the internet in its infancy, where we allready had the really big button that doesn't do anything

  4. Infinite, indeed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Click here to get the plugin."

  5. Art/medium? by six809 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well canvas isn't considered 'art', nor is paint. HTML is just the tool used by the artists. What they come up with can easily be considered art. Examples.

    1. Re:Art/medium? by khakipuce · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It's strange that the "is it art" question really only ever comes up with visual arts. If someone gets up on stage and plays music from Stockhausen to Madonna, Bach to Kylie, no one asks "is it music", we might comment on it being good or bad, but no quesitons what it is.

      One of the few distinguishing fetures of Visual arts is that they have no utility. Anything that has utility is craft, not art.

      So if this has no utility and is put up by it's creators as art then yes, it is art. BUT the real question is IS IT GOOD ART?

      --
      Art is the mathematics of emotion
    2. Re:Art/medium? by TGK · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I'll submit a few examples to the contrary.
      • Japanese and Chinese Writing
      • Japanese Swords
      • Advertisements
      • Fabrigee Eggs (many of which had utility
      • Pretty much anything by Frank Lloyd Wright


      Art and utilitarianism are not necessarily mutualy exclusive. One might argue, instead, that art that actualy does something useful is more deserving of the word than much of what traditional is attached to the word.
      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    3. Re:Art/medium? by gauauu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But there is a lot of "music" that people will debate whether it is actually music. You just happened to name ones that obviously are.

      Listen to some of John Cage's compositions, or other "experimental" music, including lowercase music.

      So no, you are wrong when you say that question only comes up with visual arts...

    4. Re:Art/medium? by russellh · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Art and utilitarianism are not necessarily mutualy exclusive. One might argue, instead, that art that actualy does something useful is more deserving of the word than much of what traditional is attached to the word.

      They are not mutually exclusive, but your second statement is ridiculous. A display-only sword is better than one which is meant to be used? A house which is not meant to be lived in is better than one which is? Absurd. Certainly a craft attains its hightest or purest expression in art, but what is the purpose of a sword? To hang on a wall? To take into battle? If it is for display only, is it really a sword? What is its utility if it is too valuable to use? But in any case, this is why there are schools of thought on the subject - nobody is right. I suggest three books - The Picture of Dorian Gray (Oscar Wilde), From Bauhaus to Our House (Tom Wolfe), and The Voices of Silence (Andre Malraux).

      --
      must... stay... awake...
  6. Deliberately Distorting the Digital Mechanism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Deliberately Distorting the Digital Mechanism
    By MATTHEW MIRAPAUL

    While tinkering recently with one of the first personal computers from the 1980's, the digital artists Joan Heemskerk and Dirk Paesmans took a look at its technical tutorial. As Mr. Paesmans recalled, the on-screen guide delivered a reassuring message: "Remember, don't be scared. You cannot do anything wrong on this computer."

    Since 1994 Ms. Heemskerk and Mr. Paesmans, collaborating under the name Jodi, have created a series of Internet-based artworks that deliberately cause computers to do the wrong thing. Viewers of these online works will find their screens filled with meaningless text and needlessly blinking graphics. Web-browser windows spawn smaller windows that race maddeningly around the screen. Links that appear to lead somewhere yield dead ends. Like a sci-fi thriller, this could be delightful, except that the underlying premise is of computers in complete control. A terrifying thought.

    Beginning tomorrow Jodi will be the subject of a retrospective exhibition, "install.exe," at Eyebeam, a new-media art center in Manhattan. It was organized at Plug.In, a new-media art center in Basel, Switzerland, where it was shown last fall before it traveled to Berlin. The exhibit, which runs through June 14 at Eyebeam's gallery at 540 West 21st Street, contains nearly two dozen works. Many of them can also be viewed online at www.jodi.org, asdfg.jodi.org, 404.jodi.org, wrongbrowser.com and wwwwwwwww.jodi.org.

    Prepare to be disoriented, if not stuck, in a World Wide Web gone awry. The Web is less than a decade old, so it might seem premature to declare that Jodi's works are classics of Internet art. Yet these artists were probably the first to use the Internet's own visual language to create what are in effect paintings of the Internet landscape. They did so by exposing the hidden computer code that makes Web pages do what they do, then altered its odd texts and strange symbols so that they became abstract art. They also took Web features and simulated what would happen if they ran amok. For people who assume that a computer is a benign dictator, these were reminders that the slightest transgression could turn it into a deranged despot.

    Like Cezanne's late works in which the raw canvas is often part of the painting, Jodi's sites force viewers to become conscious of the Web's appealing surface and the digital mechanism that lurks below.

    Annette Schindler, the director of Plug.In and the co-curator of "install .exe," said, "You think you know your computer, but really all you know is a surface on your screen." This state of affairs is based on the foolish hope that our technology, like our cars, will always operate properly, so that we never have to look at the oily, gritty bits under the hood. But Jodi subverts this notion. Visitors to the duo's Web sites, Ms. Schindler said, "immediately have the experience that Jodi wants to give them, which is, `What if everything goes wrong?' "

    In questioning the Internet's rules, Jodi has had a huge influence on digital artists.

    "They are the only Internet-based artists that have created a truly new aesthetic," said the male half of the anonymous digital-art duo known as 0100101110101101.org in a recent phone call. "They have influenced almost everything on the Internet that is related to art," he said. "It's like trying to find a painter who was not influenced by Michelangelo."

    Ms. Heemskerk and Mr. Paesmans were resident artists at San Jose State University in the heart of Silicon Valley in 1994, at the start of the dot-com era. One day while working on a Web project they accidentally omitted a bracket from the computer code, and the resulting Web page was a messy jumble of text and characters. They liked what they saw and began to experiment.

    Mr. Paesmans said they initia

  7. gimmie a break by automag_6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, I'll say it's art, in the same way I'll nod my head and agree when someone tries to convince me that it's a programming language. In my experience, if a person doesn't understand why HTML isn't a programming language, it's not worth my while to explain it, I'll just play along and know the truth. I recon if people start saying it's art, I'll adopt the same aproach. I'm sure there are people who'll flame me for this, but that's thier 2 cents, this, on the other hand, is mine. Mod me as a troll if you like, I just can't sell HTML as a programming language or art.

    1. Re:gimmie a break by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In my experience, if a person doesn't understand why HTML isn't a programming language, it's not worth my while to explain it, I'll just play along and know the truth.

      Programming languages are instructions to be interpreted by a compiler of some sort, eventually resulting into machine code which can be executed.

      HTML surely isn't a Turing complete programming language, but I would say one does program HTML in a sense. Not that I consider HTML a programming language as I do the around ten procedural and object oriented languages I know, but surely HTML is interpreted and indirectly turned into machine code just as Pyhton, Perl, Java, C, Assembler? Not that the result is a stand-program, but the result is your browser generating the machine code to display the page. Much like what a Java virtual machine does with an applet...

      I guess it's like the term hacker. I don't see cracking as being equal to hacking, but I do recognize the fact that for many people that distinction simply doesn't exist. Why be so absolute?

      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    2. Re:gimmie a break by Raffaello · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Art is all in the eye of the beholder."

      How about...
      Science is all in the eye of the beholder
      Engineering is all in the eye of the beholder

      No? Good, now you're catching on. In fact, any discipline is *not* merely in the eye of the beholder, but a consensus defined by the community of competent practitioners.

      If a consensus of scientists think that one person is a crackpot, then, guess what, he's a crackpot.

      If a consensus of artists, and people knowlegeable about art, think that something is not art, then it is not art. And, no, not just the judgement of anyone, just as we don't decide whether something is bogus science based on the opinion of unqualified lay people.

      Art may be a broadly defined word, but to allow anything into the category makes the word meaningless - indistinguishable from the word "thing." If everything is art, then the word art means "thing," and nothing more.

      Any decent definition of art includes two elements: vision, and mastery. A work of art must express an underlying vision (whether that be visual, musical, poetic, sculptural, etc.), and it must demonstrate a mastery of process and materials in doing so.

    3. Re:gimmie a break by liquidsin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now you're trying to confuse science and art. Art can't be classified into good or bad by any simple technical means. There is no solid line you can draw that says 'anything on this side is art, anything on that side is not'. Decorating your house can be art. A computer case can be art (think new iMac). Any time you go beyond function and into form, you are creating art on some level. Simply because some people in "the community" may not like it, it doesn't make it any less of an artwork. Your analogy is flawed, simply because science is (for the most part) based on facts. If someone tries to tell you that the world is flat, then yeah, they're a crackpot. We have factual evidence that the world is round. We can see it from space. We can measure it's curvature. Where's your factual evidence that something is not art, other than the opinions of people who call themselves artists? Art is NOT a science. Are you trying to tell me that if critics don't like a movie, it's not a movie? I mean, hey, they are knowledgeable about movies, right? I'm not sure why it's so hard for technical people to grasp that some things are entirely subjective. Beauty IS in the eye of the beholder, and whether or not someone claiming to be an 'art expert' says something is not art, it can still be art in someone's eyes.

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    4. Re:gimmie a break by JimDabell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Programming languages are instructions to be interpreted by a compiler of some sort, eventually resulting into machine code which can be executed.

      HTML surely isn't a Turing complete programming language, but I would say one does program HTML in a sense.

      No. Like you said, programming involves instructions for the computer. HTML is purely descriptive. When you write <p>, you aren't saying "computer: add a line break and some vertical space please", you are saying "this is beginning of a paragraph".

      surely HTML is interpreted and indirectly turned into machine code

      Not at all. It's data, not code. HTML is not a set of instructions.

      Not that the result is a stand-program, but the result is your browser generating the machine code to display the page.

      By that reasoning, typing your name into a plain text file would also be programming, as when you open the file, the text editor "generates the machine code" to display the file.

      Much like what a Java virtual machine does with an applet...

      Well, no. A Java applet is a standalone program, written for a virtual platform. The VM simply interprets the instructions as is appropriate for the platform it is running on.

      I guess it's like the term hacker. I don't see cracking as being equal to hacking, but I do recognize the fact that for many people that distinction simply doesn't exist. Why be so absolute?

      Because the media doesn't almost exclusively call HTML "programming"? Because two wrongs don't make a right? Because thinking of HTML as a programming language gets you into the wrong frame of mind for developing high-quality websites?

    5. Re:gimmie a break by lineymo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Art is all in the eye of the beholder."

      How about...
      Science is all in the eye of the beholder
      Engineering is all in the eye of the beholder

      No? Good, now you're catching on. In fact, any discipline is *not* merely in the eye of the beholder, but a consensus defined by the community of competent practitioners.

      If a consensus of scientists think that one person is a crackpot, then, guess what, he's a crackpot.

      [snip]
      Wow, let me try:

      If a consensus of scientists think that the world is flat, then, guess what, the world is flat.

      Hmmm, that doesn't sound right. If a consensus of [people group] think [a specific thing], then guess what, you have a consensus, not a truth.

      Truth is external to consensus and is immovable by what a mass of people think.

  8. Infinite is possible - proof! by mccalli · · Score: 3, Funny
    while(1) {
    fprintf(stdout, "Of course it's possible...\n"); }

    Well, at least until the electricity runs out anyway. Or someone redirects stdout to /tmp. Or, or...

    Well, it's nice theory anyway.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  9. HTML: Is it Art? by zonix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. Is a pen or a pencil art? No.

    HTML is a Hypertext Markup Language. :-)

    z
    --
    What would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
    1. Re:HTML: Is it Art? by mirko · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You could also consider consider the Magritte approach, by putting a page like :
      <H1>this is not ART</H1>

      I personally like the pragmatic logic approach :
      art is always composed of both an ethical and an esthetical aspect.
      Should one be missing, the result would not be art.
      Exemples :
      • Constructivism : 100% esthetic, 0% ethics
      • Abstract art : 0% esthetic (Have you seen Joseph Beuys piles of fat, in the Stuttgart modern art museum ?) 100% ethics.
      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
    2. Re:HTML: Is it Art? by zonix · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ah yes, forgot that one!

      As I recall, the blenders were plugged in and people couldn't keep their hands to themselves.

      z
      --
      What would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
  10. Its reminds me spectrum by Kedder · · Score: 2, Funny

    I remember very similar pictures when my zx-spectrum hanged...:)

    Maybe someday BSOD will be considered as an art?

  11. art = comms | got links? by jago25_98 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    to me art = communication,

    just often experimental and two-way in what's usually seen one-way; i.e. painting. (because the viewer acts, sometime with WTF?! which is perfectly fine, artist may not care what message is seen as anyway)

    got any impressive links for me?

  12. Worst of the Web by Michael's+a+Jerk! · · Score: 4, Funny

    Future artists are advised to take a look at This Site for direction... Enjoy.

    --

    I'm not Seth.

  13. What HTML? by insin · · Score: 3, Funny

    How about an example of "why HTML could be considered to be art" which actually uses some HTML?

    zomba.com only uses it to embed a flash movie - "Click here to get the plugin". This one belongs in the "post-html" gallery.

  14. ARRGH! Wrong Link! by Michael's+a+Jerk! · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sorry, I meant This Site instead. The first link contains alot of crap.

    'Webpages that suck' Shows that webpages CAN be art - bad art.

    --

    I'm not Seth.

  15. HTML is just a medium by jolyonr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just in the same way that you can take a piece of paper and paint a masterpiece onto it, or you can print a pizza leaflet onto it. The existence of pizza leaflets doesn't mean that paper can never be used for art. Jolyon

    --


    Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
  16. I don't get it by pubjames · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Is this a joke? I just get some flashing blobs and nothing happens. Am I missing something?

  17. ASCII as Art by notestein · · Score: 4, Funny

    I still prefer old school. ASCII as Art.

    The Female Form
    Cinema

  18. Sound by mike1086 · · Score: 4, Funny

    You need to get some sound dude...it came out in the eighties...man...you're way behind.

    1. Re:Sound by alistair · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually I think sound came out earlier than that, I was born in the late sixties and destinctly remember hearing ABBA records in the 70's, and I have even heard reports that sound was recorded in the 50's and 60's.

  19. Re: Christian Lemmerz by Carthag · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am from Denmark as well.

    Christian Lemmerz is the guy who did the dead pigs. I forgot what the other guy was called.

    Anyway, calling somebody a moron simply because you do not believe something to be art is a pretty cheap ad hominem. It's art because some people think it is. And he's not the only one to think of it as art, I reckon it's art as well.

    The piece in question (with the dead pigs), called 'Scene', was about decay and the temporarity of life. Sure, the pigs are not art, but neither is a canvas and a bucket of paint. I personally find pieces like these very interesting. I really liked his Todesfigur and Gebeine.

    But I digress, my point is, you can always find someone who don't think that a particular piece is art, so you can't write something off as not-art just because you think it's disgusting/irrelevant/stupid/insert term here.

    Check out Dadaism, found art, and other kinds of offstream ways of expression.

  20. Arty websites by supertsaar · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's a frequent poster here (forgot who) that has superbad as his website URL. I kinda like it. Infinite clicks. Good with a beer om a late lonesome friday night.

    --
    The Bigger The Headache The Bigger the Pill
  21. Sure? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can I borrow your aesthetics and ethics meter?

    That objective absolute scale that you found, where did you find it?

    The point I am really trying to make is better explained by the following neo-constructivist abstract post modernist expresion: bullshit.

    Have a nice day.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Sure? by mirko · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Esthetics meter :
      Have you read "Goedel Escher Bach" ?
      In this book, Douglas Hofstadter defines language as "asynchronous crystals" : proof of intelligence, if you prefer.
      Now, if you have a pile of fat or a dead pig, it'll be kinda hard to take it as someone's intended creation.
      Hence the 0%.
      If it comes with a sign that reads "Our sins", then, on the other hand, it might have a serious ethical meaning.
      Now, also, if you see a perfect geometric figure on a sheet of paper, then it'll be esthetically meaningful : it has been worked by a human. But if it's called "circle", then, it has no meaning.

      Of course, your mileage may vary but I hope you found some ethical meaning in my "bullshit".

      Have a wonderful week-end.

      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
  22. The Best Designs by archetypeone · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Checkout www.thebestdesigns.com for some of the latest web art - ok so a lot of it is Flash based but there's some cool html/js stuff there too.

  23. jodi v zombo by friscolr · · Score: 3, Informative
    According to dns, zombo.com has only been around since 1999 but jodi.org has been there since 1995, and i remember first hearing about it in 1996. Also check out http://www.dextro.org/

    As for html being used in art, that's what the second show at http://art.by.arena.ne.jp/ (1995) was all about. Plus some art shows have featured websites as part of their exhibitions for a while - nothing major that i can think of, but groups like http://entity.ummu.umich.edu/. Then there were (are? can't find link) the minimalist competitions - designing in under 5k pages - and the like. If you want pictures made from html then maybe my http://www.blackant.net/code/oth/img-html-src.html will suffice.

    I'm sure i'm missing plenty of other sites and competitions but it's only 7am in my TZ.

    1. Re:jodi v zombo by seizer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Superbad has been knocking around since 1997, and is a pretty decent attempt at web art.

  24. If we're talking art.... by gadders · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would suggest http://www.themanwhofellasleep.com

    Kind of abstract, but very good.

  25. the question isn't "is it art?", it's "do I care?" by Vellmont · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I honestly don't understand why people assign so much value to calling something art. It's as if calling something art assigns it to a higher plane where it can't be questioned.

    I guess I wasn't all that impressed by the sites mentioned in the NYT article. IMO superbad.com is far more cool than the jodi sites. Futhermore superbad has been around for years, so I don't see how these people have created anything all that original or special. For those of you who don't know, superbad is a... surrealistic website where you don't really feel in control of the website since it's never really very apparent just how each page works. I'm sure there's many other people that've created strange websites like this as well.

    As far as the "you're not in control of your computer" theme goes, there's lots of sites (mostly porn) that have all kinds of annoying javascript tricks to open up new windows when you try to kill the old window. Seems like that's the same idea as this. Sure, I guess the sites the NYT talks about are "art", but so is the tracing of my hand I did when I was 5. I think the NYT has missed the boat on this one, and perhaps should have done a bit more homework on what other people have done in this field.

    --
    AccountKiller
  26. Re:Erk? by elementik · · Score: 3, Funny

    Its Art.

    --
    --- Stop the world! I want to get off!
  27. 'Art' is a subjective term... by TrollBridge · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Art cannot be defined for people, art (just like beauty) is in the eye of the beholder.

    If someone can call the Virgin Mary covered in elephant shit 'art', I don't see any reason why HTML can't be.

    --
    There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
  28. Duh, of course it can be by Quila · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Any method used by humans to express themselves can be a vehicle for art. How good that method is for conveying artistic talent is another matter entirely.

  29. Define "art" by simong_oz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Something that has always fascinated me - can ayone provide a definition of "art". I mean the type of art that hangs in galleries and modern art museums and people argue endlessly about whether it really is art or is just plain stupid. The type of art that this is trying to classify HTML under?

    The best one I've found is "the products of human creativity", but that still seems way too broad. Personally I feel that art should have no functional purpose, so something that has a purpose (a building say) can be beautiful, but I don't think it is art.

    --
    "Because it's there." - George Mallory, when asked why he wanted to climb Mt Everest, March 18, 1923 (New York Times)
    1. Re:Define "art" by Malic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think Scott McCloud of Zot fame (http://www.scottmccloud.com) had probably the broadest definition of all - anything that doesn't involve survival or reproduction can potentially be defined as "art".

      The whole point being that you can't just eat and/or have sex all day - you have to find other things to do to fill the time. Thus "art".

      Let the arguements begin...

      --
      I swear by MacOS X. Although I use to swear *at* MacOS 9...
    2. Re:Define "art" by Euro · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Something that has always fascinated me - can ayone provide a definition of "art".

      This reminds me of a quote: "anything that is put up for display and cannot be pissed into is art". I cannot remember who it was that uttered this, but there you go.

      Of course, the reasoning (such as it is) behind is the fact that anything that is put up for display and labeled as art actually becomes art. Therefore any object (or thing) can become art if the artist decides it is art. For example, a toilet seat by itself is not art, but when stripped of its general usefulness (i.e. put for display), placed in nonconventional surroundings and labeled as art it - for some reason - becomes art. Not necessarily good art, but art nevertheless.

      The more interesting questions in my opinion is why some pieces of artwork are considered to be "better" than others.
    3. Re:Define "art" by simong_oz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Anything created for the sense of a message is art.

      I know several people who paint simply because they enjoy to paint. They don't paint for money or for praise or to make cheap presents. There is no poignant statement or message, just simply because they enjoy creating the act of painting.

      Architecture is most certainly art.

      See, I don't agree - which I guess was partly the point of your post! Most architecture has a definite purpose (holding up a roof; not exactly right, but I'm sure you get my meaning) which I don't think is part of "art". The architecture that is created more as an industrial sculpture I would call art, though some of that stuff is pretty stupid. That is of course just a personal opinion that you're free to disagree with, but I really feel that to truly be art the art must be created for no other purpose.

      Take a look sometime at the architecture of Tadao Ando, a Japanese architect. His use of curves and natural light in his buildings are amazing.

      hmmm ... just did some googling and he has created some amazing buildings, and I agree that they are unique and beautiful, but I don't consider them "art". Just like car designs - they may well be beautiful and conjure up all sorts of emotions in people, but they are not art.

      --
      "Because it's there." - George Mallory, when asked why he wanted to climb Mt Everest, March 18, 1923 (New York Times)
    4. Re:Define "art" by schon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know several people who paint simply because they enjoy to paint. They don't paint for money or for praise or to make cheap presents. There is no poignant statement or message, just simply because they enjoy creating the act of painting.

      *sigh* And if a tree falls in the forest, then it doesn't make any sound, right?

      Their paintings are an expression of something inside them, which is a message. Whether anyone else ever sees that message is irrelevant - it's still there.

      Most architecture has a definite purpose (holding up a roof; not exactly right, but I'm sure you get my meaning)

      Most writing has a definite purpose, too (telling a story) - does that mean it's not art either?

      they may well be beautiful and conjure up all sorts of emotions in people, but they are not art.

      Funny, because that's pretty much what art is.

      "Art", as an expression is supposed to invoke a reaction in it's audience. If an object inspires emotion in you (either good or bad), then it's probably art - especially if the person who designed it did so precisely to inspire you.

      Methinks you have too narrow a definition of "art".

  30. Ah, this old chesnut by coldcity · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, the problem with "art" is that it's notoriously difficult to define.

    Let's try something else - can we prove that code can be poetry?

    Poetry also tends to avoid definition; however, I think the best definition I've heard is that poetry is succinct use of language.

    Since, say, C++ affords an enormous economy of expression, and a vast number of ways to accomplish a given task, then performing a given task in an elegant, succint way is surely perfectly valid poetry.

    You can also argue the case with dictionary.com's definition of poetry: "a quality that suggests poetry, as in grace, beauty, or harmony: the poetry of the dancer's movements."

    --
    coldcity
    code, life, art
  31. Art is art by Washizu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The artist makes the medium viable for art, not the other way around. If you can make something creative with popsicle sticks and glue, then that's art. It's the same with anything.

    --
    OddManIn: A Game of guns and game theory.
  32. Really 4BAD.org??? by akiaki007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Did no one else try that? the NYTimes article points to http://0100101110101101.org/, which annoyed me right away with it's javascript alert popup, and then I just threw it into HEX, and the numbers changed into 4BAD...I wonder what the means. There is no 4BAD website, perhaps it's just a complete coinscidense (sp).

    anyway, the site is rather interesting, though I haven't figured out what it is. On could probably spend hours going through all of the "private" email on that computer...

    As for ZOMBO, I have no idea what anyone is talking about, I don't have flash installed (probably for this reason) :)

    --
    "Time is long and life is short, so begin to live while you still can." -EV
  33. medium != product by MellowTigger · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wood is not art. Paint is not art. Iron is not art. String is not art. HTML is not art.

    What someone produces after deliberately arranging them in a design intended to provoke a reaction... that product is art. (I'm not arguing good versus bad. I'm just saying that it's art.)

  34. Why is this news? by superflippy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Head over to netdiver and you'll see dozens of artists who use HTML, Javascript, etc. as their medium and have done so for years.

    Perhaps back in 1998, this was a new art form. Today, there are more "my site is my art" web sites than you can shake a stick at.

    --
    Your fantasies contain the seeds of important concepts.
  35. hampster dance by wadiwood · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't click here Is it art if it makes you laugh and nauseous at the same time? I expect Salvidor Dali and Picasso thought so.

    This Alien Shore by CS Friedman, featured a lot of stuff about code as art, including the interesting idea of "charting a program" to see if it made a "pretty picture".

    I think there may have been some similar concepts in "Crytonomicon", and definitely "Snow Crash" by Neal Stephenson.

    BTW my very first instructions for a computer were pencil on something that looked like a punched card but used pencil marks instead of punch holes, to generate calendars with ascii art pictures. We all wanted the picture of the horse, but mostly we got wizard of id, or Einstein. Ie the picture was selected randomly or sequentially or something but we didn't get to choose it.

    And I'd been playing with the shapes you could make out of lcd numbers on calculators before that. 3838383;8383838 then x / y them etc.

    I always seek "elegance" in mathematical equations and programming code, but I'm not sure that makes it "art".

    --

    -- it must be true, it's on the internet.
  36. Net.Art by vitaflo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I work at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis in the New Media dept, the largest of any museum in the country. We're responsible for all the digital artwork here, including "net.art".

    This is certainly not "news" since net.art has been around for well over 8 years now. jodi.org and 01.org (meantioned in the article) could probably be considered the "grandfathers" of net.art, though I suppose there could be some debate on that, depending on whom you talk to.

    And while it's been around for a while it's only been in the last few years that more museums have been taking it seriously. The Walker, the Whitney and the SF MOMA are the big three that come to mind when thinking about museums with a large new media collections. More and more museums are understanding the significance of it as well.

    And just with any digital medium there are some ethical questions when it comes to the artwork, such as copyright, and if it's ok to make digital copies of artwork, or does that dilute it? How many is too many? Some artwork is based off of other artwork, so it is ok to "steal" (copy) someone else's work (art or not) to make into my own art? There are parallels here with traditional artwork (like found object art), but also issues that are specific to this medium as well.

    Then there's the issue of archiving. If a project runs off a DB and is only usable in Netscape 4, how do we archive it so that in 50 years we can view it? Do we archive just the software? What if future hardware can't run it? Do we archive the hardware as well? What if it relies on some form of online connection, but that online setup changes in the future (think security, etc) so that it cannot be reproduced 100 years from now? Have we then lost this piece forever? Obvioulsy there are a lot of questions that need to be answered in this area.

    I think the real question though isn't "is it art", the question is how much impact will it have in the future. When Picaso made his paintings some people said he was crazy, or didn't think it was art, but in hindsight we know the outcome. The same is true for art in new media. Only time will really tell how much lasting impact it has on the way we think and approach art.