Helro

helro

YouTube vs.Boob Tube

Two of the most appealing aspects about YouTube, and web based TV, are creative original content and minimal advertising. Compare what can be found on YouTube and the Internet to what is currently playing on television, and it shouldn’t come as a surprise why YouTube is steadily gaining in popularity. Television is swamped with “reality” shows, unoriginal ideas, and tons of commercials. Saturday Night Live is an excellent example for the over-advertising that is the norm. I remember when there would be at least three or four sketches before a commercial break. Now, there seems to be a commercial after every sketch. Another factor is how much time younger people are spending online, and are naturally looking for entertainment there as well. The young teen and twenty-something audience those advertisers so heavily rely upon are online, not watching television. It’s time for the advertisers, and TV networks, to get online as well.

The closest thing to a solution so far, at least for TV networks, is probably Hulu.com. This is the FOX and NBC online site that allows you to watch movies, full episodes, and clips of many television shows with minimal advertising. I was surprised not to read about Hulu in the article, but then I saw that it was written before Hulu came around. I wonder what Garfield would have to say about Hulu…is it the missing link he was talking about? But does it compete with YouTube? There are also lots of other web-series out there. Maybe the evolution of mass media is the development of web TV networks? YouTube and the web-series could be compared to what TV was to radio when it first was invented. There are many original, interesting, and entertaining web-series out there. Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog, created by Joss Whedon of Buffy the Vampire Slayer fame, that was immensely popular. The Guild, created by Felecia Day, is another example. The people who are creating series like these are at the forefront of the new mass media. It is my hunch that they are the people who advertisers should be paying attention to, and not YouTube.

MONKEYVISION

If the question is : "Is Google a monopoly in the same manner as Hollywood was?" (or in effect, monopolizing mainstream entertainment for bucks that make your head spin?) then, no, not really because Google is latching onto youtube domains that already existed and would exist with or without them perhaps?
Internet politics is very fascinating because copyrights seem very hard to protect once you've posted something and intellectual property is often too much hassle for those who want to attempt to live out their fantasies of "being a star" online.
The amount of control that a viewer has over their pandora radio station or the channels they subscribe to , even the firewalls that block advertisements, is much like a writing a self-directed curriculum. Internet advertising must compete with independent users who can choose to read or listen to an ad at their will unlike in TV, where you have to flip through channels to avoid commercials.

I would say that TV watching enables mental atrophy more than internet entertainment. What does seem unfair is the control over "spiders" that google and other search engines make you pay for.Monkeys are still somewhat of a mystery so please do not talk of their banana habits pejoratively ! The internet relatively speaking, has been one place where ownership is a bit more liberal , I hope google keeps it this way.

youtube vs. boob tube

Youtube vs boob tube
What a great article, it is amazing what a huge affect youtube.com has had across the world. I have to admit that I go on youtube.com to search for comedic video, old Saturday night live clips, new music, etc. Youtube.com is a great form of entertainment and definitely is competing with television. However, some television stations have sold into the online trend by allowing free episodes of their shows online a day after the episodes has premiered. Some even keep the entire season up so you do not have to buy the season in a store. There are advertisements in these free episodes but they are only 30 seconds long, which is a lot more tolerable than commercials on television. I actually prefer to watch television on my computer. I love youtube.com, I think Hurley had a great point saying that everyone wants to be famous and youtube.com is a great way for people to be recognized without the consequences of true fame. I feel that the online world is just beginning and large advertizing firms and television stations better learn how to incorporate “monkeyvision” into their business affairs.

Response 2

Coleman defines internet art as art that is created specifically with and for the online environment. She compares it to conceptual art in that they both emphasize the importance of audience interaction. I understand what “art on the net” refers to, but I’m still struggling to fully grasp what is meant by “internet art”. It seems like the students in the study were equally as confused and frustrated by this new art form. Although they became more accepting of internet art as they became more internet savvy, the students were still more comfortable navigating through traditional websites.“They did not like the fact that with internet art, they weren’t sure what they were looking at”. Whether or not they liked the art they were interacting with online, the fact that they were being taken out of their comfort zone, and were being challenged by the art was in itself an important learning experience.

spring break!

Robot: Zannado

Jen Lorenz Robot

Robot in-class: Wheres the heart?

Swiss family visits the Big Apple

Kimberly Grahamatroid

BINKY THE BULL

HOLLLLAAAA!!

BINKY THE BULL

HOLLLLAAAA!!

Rachel Stepaniuk Robot

maria_mrs.robatou

maria_self_watercolor

maria_self_dig.

Week 2 response

Colman ( 2004) uses lofty language to explain to the complexities of internet art vs. art on the Net . She describes how artists from the 1960's like the Fluxus movement , Eat group and and Dadaists were precursors to the idea that art can work through non-traditional mediums like everyday objects, performance and subsequently technology. She also describes a continuation of this type of art created by Dutch artists, Dirk Paesman and Joan Heemskirk . They used web interfaces as their medium by scrambling the html. code, tables, scrollbars and creating defective looking websites. The internet has become much more than a tool for other more important purposes. It is a purpose within itself , like a museum or like the classic art for arts sake stance . Software such as imaging and web developing programs are initially taught to introduce students with tasks that will increase employment potential. Colman seems to imply that learning how to use software for specific job-oriented processes undermines its potential as a medium or resource at times.
Colman (2004), made me reconsider the art of obsolescence, which fuels the technological economy. If obsolete technologies could be reused for art objects, if they could be broken apart and examined , students could learn about the physical engineering of computers as an art object and recreate their own motors. Most internet users just know how to use it but have no idea about how it works and I think this habit of use without understanding could speak to the difference between internet art and art on the Net.
The reading uses a lot of buzz words relevant for education and perceptual reform like, decentralization, continuum, strategies and deconstruction. Some of the research from Alder and Alder and others was interesting. Particularly, the students who defined internet art as a funhouse where the interface wasn't didactic or clear like commercial websites. It made me think of discovery learning vs. passive learning within the interface of the internet. What is the main difference between the web and the internet?

Internet Art to the Digital Art Curriculum

This article was particularly interesting to me since prior to reading it I had no idea that there was such a thing as Internet art.  The idea is an interesting one, and I think would be fascinating to discuss with high school classes.  It's another perfect example for the argument "what is art?"  The students involved seem to get a good grasp of the concept of Internet art through this series of lessons.   Although it appears to be a challenging topic - I'm not sure I completely understand what Internet art is yet, myself - our goal as art teachers is to challenge our students in order to help them grow and learn creatively.  High school students are often under the impression that all art has to be drawing and painting, but by teaching them concepts such as Internet art, educators are broadening horizons, indicating that there is always more to be seen and understood.  What I liked best about the lesson was that rather than lecturing the students about what Internet art actually is, the instructor gave them a chance to put what they learned to the test by having them create their own Internet art.  I think that Internet art is an excellent subject for art educators to teach.

Internet Art

After reading Introducing Internet Art to the Digital Art Curriculum, and browsing some of the sights suggested (Internet art), I was not surprised at the students difficulties in understanding this work. Although these students (teens) use the internet on a regular basis, I suspect their contact with conceptual and new media art must be limited. I often am confused when visiting Chelsea galleries, by some of the art I see, especially when looking at new media stuff, that I don't know how it was made, and sometimes am unsure of the message it is trying to convey, or even my reaction. As a graduate student, having gone to Parsons for Fine Arts, I sometime have to go home, digest the work, read the artist statement, talk about it over with a friend or read a review before having a more complete thought that I can verbalize, so if high school students have difficulties with this material it is to be expected. I think this is a great program to get students to think critically about art, and their society. I also think that the way she is going to present the project now, after doing this research, is going to be much more effective.

Internet Art

This reading made me think back to when I was first introduced to Internet art in college. I had years of experience making art, but when it came to Internet art, I could not grasp the concept.

I can only imagine the difficulty high school students might have understanding Internet art. Students now spend so much time on the Internet, and have such a strong idea of what the Internet is to them, and what its function is. It is not surprising to me that the students in this study had difficulties making sense of the Internet art that they viewed. I still have a hard time understanding some of these pieces.

This study was very interesting. I like how it introduced a new aspect of the Internet to the students. Internet art is foreign to many who are completely savvy in other areas of the Internet. It is interesting how one can navigate through a webpage with ease, but when it comes to navigating through Internet art, everything changes. This would most likely hold true with a majority of people – not only students.

At the end of the reading, the writer talks about what she could have done differently in presenting this study. I agree that time needs to be spent easing into the area of Internet art. Such as having discussions with students about what they use the Internet for and using that to transition into Internet art and its differences from web pages. Also, guiding the students and helping them make sense of some Internet art would greatly help in their understanding.

Internet Art

It doesn’t surprise me that “internet savviness did not translate into knowing how to navigate through and understand Internet art”. Internet art is not always very inviting. By it’s very nature it can be confusing in that the user doesn’t always know how to navigate through it – even if you are versed in art criticism and have been exposed to Internet art previously. Internet art tends to require a lot of interaction and engagement on the viewers part and not everyone is willing to put in the effort to try to understand it. Art in general is subjective and Internet art will not necessarily appeal to all.

That said, I do think Internet art is a great topic to bring up during a lesson about designing web pages. Internet art tends to defy all conventions of web design and it’s important for students to be introduced to alternative design possibilities before getting stuck following web design conventions.

Who knew that there was such a thing as “internet art”? I personally have never heard of the term or have ever experience any Internet art. I suppose the reality of this art movement doesn’t really surprise me at all. Artists are always looking for new ways of expressing themselves in different mediums. I found it interesting that Colman in some sense assumed that the high school students would accept Internet art as art. Considering the dependences that most high school students tend to have towards the Internet, they initially were not impressed by the Internet Art. This situation is similar to when Marcel Duchamp revealed to the world his Fountain. Many criticized his turned up side down urinal not to be art. However, he challenged the initial reactions to his artwork through the conceptual idea and meaning behind the ready-made. So I guess I can say, why can’t Internet art be considered art? As art educators, we want to challenge our students not only to see what they see but see behind the actually thing to understand the meaning and the creative process of create art.

frontline

I just saw the PBS "Growing Up Online" documentary and I was impressed with that one teacher that was saying that you have to embrace that fact that kids are going to be using on line sources for writing reports, etc... and that those are the skills they are going to be using once they leave school. I agree with him because you can't expect students to ignore all the short cuts available to them. I know that I don't have the time to do all the reading I need to do, so I skim through things, and pay attention to what my class mates say and try to add to that, say something constructive and mildly original, but it is not always the most relative. Over all I thought the show was neutral, they gave both sides of the story, parents and students points of view. Some stories were sad (eating disorders, bullying, suicide...) but I think "Autumn's" father said it all with his final statement. You find what you want online, if you are looking for something good, it's there, if you are looking for something bad it will be there too, everything is accentuated and privacy is almost entirely a thing of the past. :(

Introducing Internet Art to the Digintal Art Curriculum

This article introduced me to the concept of Internet art. Prior to this I would have said that Internet art is an image of an actual work of art... posted on the Internet. Now, after viewing jodi.org, I see that the Internet can be used as a media.
Art today includes everything.. There are no longer boarders, which define what is art and what is not art. I think post-post modernist art is primarily about thoughts and statements, however in my opinion this usually means that aesthetics are sacrificed. This is clearly the case for jodi.org and the art show. While the idea is interesting, I don't like the piece and I don't have much appreciation for Internet art. However my opinion is biased because I am an artist who is primarily a craftsperson. I use clay, which is one of the oldest art media known to man. For me one of my personal criteria for a good work of art is if has been well crafted, if something is just crafted by using a key board, I don't think that is art, but as I said before, anything goes in art these days.

I went to look at one of  the pieces mentioned in the article, entitled"my boyfriend came back from the war" and I think it was amazing. I have never looked at internet art or had any desire to. My automatic reaction has been closed mindedness because my own skills are so feeble, but I have to say there's a world of possibilities out there for self expression if one can get past the initial self destruction phase inherent in the frustration of not understanding how to use the tools. the ability to layer images and messsages and the capacity for alternating patterns of meaning and interpretatioin is very interesting to me. The literal ability to dig deeper under the surface of an image is a very powerfull tool to work with. I think the social political power structure of the web, much of which is based on commerce, is a subject ripe for the picking so to speak. That is, commentary needs to be made and who better than artists to subvert the contents and meaning of the web we've all become so happily ensnared in. It is interesting to take another look at somthing we are so accustomed to using in particular ways and readjust our vision to see the hidden agenda,  alternate realities floating below the surface waiting to be exposed, examined, made meaning of. I certainly understand the students discomfort at being thrown out of their comfort zone without a  reference point, without a compass. One student said "I put in what I want and it gives me what I want." What a perfect image. The internet as a tool to get what we want (or what others want us to get) As a communication tool, we can reach so many. the world is at our fingertips and mouspad. But often communication is truncated. there's only so much depth you can get in a chat room and never the same imformation you'll get watching someone's body language or looking into someone's eyes. I think the points the author make about walking her class through the process of looking at internet art step by step critically discussing how each part makes them feel and what the artist's intention might have been is a great way to introduce students to the process of questioning and thinking analytically, symbolically and deeply. Eventually, hopefully, they will be able to do it for themselves.

Clements: Week 2 Response

Based on my undergraduate work and degree in new media design and imaging I would consider myself someone who is adept and familiar with digital art, particularly in regard to the Internet. There are quite a few issues I could address, however, my response would be incredibly lengthy so I will try to limit my comments to a few aspects of the reading…

My first issue with the article is Colman’s statement, “Recent use of Java and Flash does little to enhance the participatory and interactive character of the Internet; instead, it increases its allure as spectacle.” Spending years working in Flash, I can absolutely attest that this statement is false. There are so many more components and levels of interactivity that you can include using Flash and Java that absolutely cannot be achieved simply through the use of html. I find this statement somewhat ironic because from what I gather, Colman probably has little to no experience with these specific digital technologies. I am not necessarily advocating or implying that Flash and Java be used in all circumstances, but they should not be ruled out. Like any project, you need to think about the most effective approach and medium to produce your desired outcome or facilitate your expressive or exploratory experience.

Secondly, as a web/interactive designer, I disagree that informative “typical” websites cannot be considered art. In my opinion, unique approaches and the thoughtful consideration of information design, layout, and typography definitely employ the use of creativity. Colman includes one of her students’ definitions of art as being anything with a creative process or displays creativity regardless of the medium. Like many other forms of art, informational websites etc. pose a question which, when responded to thoughtfully can truly provide a unique “creative” experience for the viewer. (I do however realize that many websites are haphazardly thrown together and I would not consider these sites to be art…but that is a whole other issue that can be examined in depth…)

I do agree with some aspects of Colman’s suggested lesson plans; particularly the need for the lesson to introduce the students to ways of looking at, discussing, and critiquing the work they see online. She also mentions the need for sufficient time and “suspend[ing] certain expectations of the Web…” This is definitely both helpful and necessary when you want to explore a new medium with open-mindedness. In order to have a rich experience in viewing any form of art, the process cannot be rushed. Overall, I think when you are teaching technology course it is important to find a delicate balance between teaching methods for using software and having students employ what they have learned in a creative and thoughtful manner in their own artwork.

Internet Art.

While I have yet to encounter much internet art that I enjoy, I think introducing the medium to students is a useful tool in getting them to think about and approach art in new ways. As was discussed in the article, the students' initial reactions to internet art were negative. Such a strong reaction to a particular piece of art, or in this case a particular medium, can be a good starting point to engage students in a critical discussion about art and art making practices. Why did you hate it? Do you think it's art? What would you do to make it more enjoyable/approachable? Showing students art that is difficult and will most likely elicit a negative reaction can also be a way to introduce and discuss ideas about postmodernism. If I were to have my students create their own internet art I feel it would have to come after a lot of practice thinking about and discussing art in a critical way.
After looking at some of the works that are mentioned in the article, I do have an appreciation for the interactive quality of the works. If I were to introduce internet art to a class, I might ask the students to think of ways they could create non-digital art that incorporates some of the aspects of internet art. for example, how could you make a piece that was interactive and guided by the viewer? Again, I am not totally sold on internet art but I do think the medium and the concepts behind it provide a lot of interesting material to discuss with students.

Joe Second Article

I found this article interesting in that I often make similar assumptions in regards to modern high school students and computer technology. I often assume that computer or internet technology would form an instant connection between these student’s interests and the subject matter. I think that their familiarity and daily use of this technology would automatically lend some sort of added interest to making or looking at artwork, as opposed to when using more traditional means. I guess this assumption is rather like saying an art student who loves to draw would find more interest in math because one works out math problems in pencil.
I still feel that there is some sort of added interest based on the use of technology they are familiar and comfortable with. As the author states, there was likely a problem with the way the topic was introduced to the students. Some of the difficulty was caused more by a lack of familiarity with art criticism rather than with internet technology.

Joebot

Dunsten

robot

46 Zee

maureen

popbot

HW

Reading 1

After reading Net.art and Net.pedagogy: Introducing Internet Art to the digital Art Curriculum I am left feeling slightly indifferent. I believe that everything in this world is art but I do not particularly enjoy internet art as I do other arts. When I went to Jodi.org I felt confused and angry like the author described the students in the case study. I think that this type of art could be very stimulating to people who know html and other similar programs but it is a bit too post modern for my tastes. I feel like I don’t get all of the humor, like I’m out of the loop.

Video 1

I felt angry when the mother made her daughter erase her entire myspace. I think I was most upset that the mother had no idea that her daughter was so unhappy and felt so alienated and instead of trying to get to know her daughter she shut down her creative outlet. Teenagers are sexual beings and for the mother to deny that fact and dismiss the notion of educating her daughter seems ludicrous. The internet can be a very dangerous place but the mother should have became savvy enough with the machine before it was brought into their house, let alone allowed in her daughter’s bedroom.

blah blah

Internet Art

I visited the websites mentioned in this study and had the same reaction as the students. Some were not particularly user friendly and they didn’t seem to have a purpose. I can understand the frustration of the students having to provide in-depth critiques of these pieces of “internet art” and I can understand how people would not be receptive towards them. The fact that I have never heard of internet art and then having a similar reaction to the participants in the study, makes me think that internet art isn’t all that popular. If it is something that actually has a large following I would be willing to learn more about it. I am more for traditional art though, and feel that the internet should mainly be used for communication, research and information. The internet art did not really hold my attention, but I understand that as an art educator I might eventually have to be more open towards it.

self portrait.

this is my picture from the first class.



& these are 2 self portraits i took a couple years ago.

growing up online

the part of this video that affected me the most was the part about the middle school boy who killed himself because of bullies.

my younger brother was bullied a lot in middle school, kids threatened to kill him, and he would come home crying everyday. he eventually had to change schools and from there his life spiraled downward and he has yet to bounce back. i honestly feel like the bullying he was a victim of was a major catalyst in his life and led him to make more and more bad choices in hopes of being accepted and having friends. i feel so lucky that despite all of the problems he was facing he did not do anything drastic like the boy in the film. my heart goes out to him and his family.

Internet Art

This is actually the first time I have ever heard of the term "internet art". It really is just anything that has been scanned or taken a photo of, and as soon as it's on the net, its internet art. The scary thing about internet art is that once you post something online, it is no longer yours. This is a really touchy subject for me as an artist, who runs a website and daily blog, uploading artwork and images all the time. Basically, I do this to get exposure, gain clients, etc. 

The market is huge on the internet. Someone can now base their entire career on the web, through a website, an online store, a blog, etc. It is amazing how fast the internet has grown and how many new jobs it has created. 

The internet can be viewed as art if you really think about it. Every web page is designed...even the crappy ones. Children and students who use the internet are exposed to this every time they open up a web browser. It is only natural to give more information on the internet as an educator, and to understand and learn from them as well.

Response: Reading 2

After reading the piece I found the authors final "wrap up" to be helpful.  His reflections of what was done correctly and how he would change certain parts of the unit were really interesting.  On a broader note, the piece was helpful in giving a description of how one can approach the teaching of internet art in the high school classroom.  The student's initial lack of care in the subject was strange, considering how immersed their lives are in the internet.  The students craved the comforts of the utilitarian basic website format, while struggling through worksheets about specific internet works of art.  

It is safe to say that this need for comfort disconnected the students from the artwork in the initial phases and caused lots of frustration.  The teacher brilliantly used these struggles to engage in the "what is art?" debate with the students.  This debate is important to have in all art classrooms, especially those that are introducing new media to skeptical students.  There really isn't one answer to this debate, but by opening up conversations in class, sometimes you can nudge open a close-minded student or open up the eyes of another.    

Internet Art

The term “Internet Art” was a new term that I learned by reading the article. I did not realize that website design would be part of “internet Art”; I would have thought it was a type of design. I guess it is understandable about when someone take a picture of their artwork and later put on their computer is a whole new medium. This would be where people tend to lose their copyrights on their own artwork. Since the internet is so easy to access, the person could just copy and paste the images on to their computer. They could add a dot or two and claim the image to be theirs. Similar to Duchamp’s “Mona Lisa”.

self portraits...oops I did it wrong.

I didn't see the post about the change in assignments on here until right now as I was about to upload my self portrait from last week... I already re-interpreted the digital one from class instead...here's that and an old self portrait of myself I did as part of a series a couple years ago.  

Internet Art

I had actually never heard the term, internet art, before reading this article. I noticed that the article was written in 2004. That may seem recent, but Myspace was just getting started as a social networking site and Facebook had not launched yet. I remember teaching art at camp in 2004 and do not recall the campers (ages 7-18) too concerned with the limited internet access at camp. I suspect that the students’ responses to internet art would be very different had the study been conducted today.

The portion of the article that resonated with me was under the heading, “Form and Function: Internet Art versus “Typical” Websites". The students’ confusion about internet art versus websites with a clear function sounded like a typical reaction from a student to a perplexing piece of Postmodern artwork. I think the debate of internet art may fall more appropriately under the art versus design distinction. I personally feel that while there may be defining characteristics between the two, design still falls under the category of art.

I am not nostalgic when it comes to the definition of art, and I believe that new genres should be acknowledged, explored and analyzed in an art classroom. The depth that the teacher goes into internet art should depend on whether it is a digital arts class or a general art class.

Net.art Response

I was surprised that the students Colman worked with had such difficulty with Internet Art. I thought that because students are so familiar with the Internet they would have been able to understand it, or at least discover out how to interact with it and make meaning of it as they went along. Is it because the Internet is something so familiar to them as a non-art form that seeing it used in a new way made such a huge impact they were not sure how to react? Was it just the shock of being presented with the familiar in an unfamiliar way? I wonder, if Colman had started off by comparing Internet art to other art forms would students have had the same reaction?

It seems to me that introducing Internet Art in a visual arts class, especially a technology class, makes complete sense. Introducing students to as many different art forms as possible is part of the job of an art educator. The fact that Internet Art is such a new art form makes it an especially interesting topic to introduce. It is not very often that a new art form is introduced, and being able to learn about a new art form, as it is being explored and debated, is a very rare opportunity for teacher and students. Not only will it enable the students to consider their own understanding of what art is, it requires students to reflect upon the Internet, as well as technology, and its use and meaning in their own lives. The Internet has become another aspect of life that students, and people in general, take for granted. People are used to using the Internet to get information almost instantly. It has become just another routine in daily life. Internet Art, like any other art form, makes you stop and think about what you are seeing and how you are interacting with it. Internet Art is another tool for teaching students to reflect on and understand what they see and experience.