i thought that this article was very interesting because it pointed out all of the things that could go wrong for google now that they purchased youtube. when you think of a successful website like youtube, you think of it as indestructible but according to this article, youtube could be taken out by a lawsuit over copyright infringement. i also thought it was interesting that the author speculated that people may be waiting to for "someone with deep pockets to come along" so that they can sue for more money. google should watch out.
this article also made me really think about TV. especially during this masters program, i am rarely home to watch TV shows that i want to see when they are on. lucky for me, there are a million websites such as surfthechannel.com that have virtually any show or movie ever, [even ones that are still in theaters] available to watch at any time. not to mention that now almost ever major network has their shows on their website on demand. in the article the author says that just as our generation does not differentiate between broadcast TV and cable, its coming to a point where already, there is no difference between watching TV and watching shows on the internet. in fact, the internet may be preferable to watching TV because on the internet there arent commericals.
this article presented many differing opinions about cloning artworks and how thoughts on mechanical reproduction differ over time. the article discusses how plaster casts used to be considered just as acceptable as the orinignal and museums all around the world would settle for a cast or copy of an artwork rather than the original. then the opinion of copies changed and suddenly they were no longer good enough. with the work of greenaway, he is bringing new ideas about copying artwork to the table. his artwork uses copies of master artworks to show these artworks in new and interesting ways. i think that this is ingenious. as it says in the article, for some master artworks, like the mona lisa, the feeling when you finally see it in person is disappointment. the painting is so small and the room is crowded and its behind bullet proof glass. i would rather look at a poster of it. i think greenaway is choosing master artworks to copy because he wants to resuscitate them with new life. i think he is making audiences view these works in a new way and he is bringing them, via their clones, back into the spotlight.
art.net internet art:
i think that this article was interesting because it showed that even teenagers who are familiar with everything at the forefront of the technological wave are confused and caught off guard by internet art projects. i think that this is the essence of what makes them art. these artists are creating conceptual art which is meant to be thought provoking and not always enjoyable. throughout art history, conceptual art is not always pleasant for the viewer, for example Carolee Schneeman's interior scroll performance art piece [see photo], and it is not always greeted with critical acclaim. the conceptual artist expects their work to be met with distain but if they get audiences to ponder their work and to discuss it, even if they are saying bad things, they have succeeded.