Tyler Green is the host and producer of the Modern Art Notes Podcast. It’s an interesting fact that the present environment will have to change, and a lot, for indepth, informed journalism about art to return. None of so it’s to say people won’t write about art. They will. Considering the above said. Given the rise of contemporary art history degree programs, we’ll see more academic writing on art aimed at a narrower and narrower audience. Also, the ghettoization of art will intensify. On top of that, we’ll see more hobbyist writing, since publishing is free. While blockquoting very similar sources, the handful of sites that publish art news daily the borndigital publications, whose publishing models are different from ‘mainstreammedia’ outlets and the art magazines that run websites to supplement their monthlies recycle identical stories. It’s a well the art world doesn’t have a bunch of news stories. In a better world, the glut of art blogging should mean more coverage for littleknown artists. Anyways, willa Köerner is an exmuseum worker, serial art world lurker, and curator at Kickstarter.
She writes about digital culture, sometimes makes art, and thinks about the future a lot. In part two of our series on the future of this field, we posed these questions to array of commentators, cultural producers, and journalists from critic Brian Droitcour to podcast producer Tyler Green, museum technologist Koven Smith to Kickstarter curator Willa Köerner. Value given to professionalism and, by extension, the quality of art writing shall be increasingly important, as more ‘e noise’ infiltrates the Internet. So here is the question.
How good would this be for the arts, and for arts writers particularly?
Imagine a time when our ability to share our ideas and perspectives in experiential ways could be unprecedented, and where the public’s hunger for deep, ‘mind challenging’ experiences should be greater than ever before.
Whenever leaving only one expanded and interconnected reality, in the future, IRL and digital experiences could be seamlessly integrated essentially, the line between offline and online will melt away.
With ourselves, technology is changing our relationship not only with culture. Anyway, machines and algorithms are already disrupting the way we work, and as finely tuned smart systems backed by bigger and bigger data find more ways to assist us with our routines, their persistent guidance will begin to automate us in ways we’d be smart to anticipate, and in any scenario. It is while acting as embedded, connected extensions of the human body and mind, while the smartphones of today are clumsy and distracting, the devices of the future going to be invisible and unnoticeable. Nonsystematized flow of ideas and discourse prompted by odd, beautiful, purposeful artworks may save us from becoming human operating systems.
I see the arts as a way to cling to our humanness, as budding technologies become more sophisticated and harder to escape.
In ten years, the #artselfie might be the art historical nail clipping of our time, a symbol of growth that we must jettison with haste.
In order for this to happen, however, we need to equip our fleet with the right tools to be certain our voices are heard, and understood. As for arts writing, and I think that in a virtually ‘hive minded’, highly automated society, individual voices speaking clearly and thoughtfully about human truths will resonate quite well. Brian Droitcour is a critic and associate editor at Art in America. He edited The Animated Reader, a poetry collection published as a companion to the New Museum’s 2015 Triennial, and Klaus eBooks, a series of digital artists’ books published by Klaus von Nichtssagend Gallery. Criticism lives in 140 characters, filters, and emojis and has become more diverse and so democratic. Of course, today official opinion for my generation is generated on Instagram, Twitter, and Tumblr. In the early 2000s, the blogger took back opinion from the critic. Social allow the work to speak to the viewer more directly as the curatorial and artistic thinking lives mostly visually.
In my opinion digital has led to increased visibility and has allowed more people to see art, most of us know that there is this tension still since some people place a premium on print. Antwaun Sargent is a culture writer based in New York City. Human beings are hungry to connect with each other and culture is amongst the very best and most meaningful ways to do that. Over the past few years I’ve worked closely with museums and had. It’s critical that museums learn from that and get this right, in the last decade we’ve seen book publishers stumble by failing to pivot toward a greater connection and service to their communities. There are three broad ideas I believe museums especially will wantconsider, as the technology landscape shifts. With that said, i’m sure we’ll be reading and writing about the arts in ten years just as vibrantly as we are now.
Rob Giampietro is a designer and writer.
His essay School Days was published in the Walker Art Center’s Graphic Design.
From 2010 to 2015 he was principal at Project Projects, New York City. He was also the 20142015″ Katherine Edwards Gordon Rome Prize Fellow in Design at the American Academy in Rome. Only if these new reality altering technologies are understood, and used in the most engaging and thoughtful ways possible, art critics. Arts interested people alike going to be able to share insights with ‘coexperiencers’ in highly engaging ways that might be quite transformative. Nonetheless, in ten years, I expect to see a media landscape awash with immersive experiences. Nevertheless, Undoubtedly it’s no longer enough to think it’s wonderful that museums are digitizing their artworks/have created mobile apps/have flashy websites, nor is it helpful to dismiss any of these things as the end of civilization as we know it. You should take it into account. By the way, the media must hold museums’ digital feet to the fire and really question and critique the digital moves that museums make.
Current criticism of museums’ digital efforts tends towards either gee whiz excitement or reactionary conservatism. Journalists must now critique these efforts with similar rigor and thoughtfulness that they should a traditional museum exhibition. Whenever activated, bearing opinions that, have the potential to transform art history, coming from an art archive in Asia. Await translation, or sit decaying in studios. Ideas, voices, and conversations that were once distant will increasingly feel relevant, entangled, and urgent. Now let me tell you something. We will understand that just as pervasive theory circulates today as universal and ‘crossculturally’ applicable, parallel ideas and their expressions through art writing can also resonate with us all. Oftentimes subjectivities will shift as we continue to reference ourselves and any another, past materials and texts going to be extensively translated, and put into conversation with established writings and experiences, as such.
It has the capacity to intervene and prompt us to question the status quo, Cyberspace is a network for texts and ideas to circulate.
There therefore online exhibitions as if these things are somehow special. It’s possible that the answer to that last question is no, and we may just have to accept that. So it’s equally possible that we in museums simply haven’t yet tried hard enough to define what makes material culture special in the digital domain. How will we be reading and writing on the arts in 10 years? Technology will have a lot to say about that, and I’m not a futurist.
Kelly Crow has covered the art market for the Wall Street Journal for nearly a decade. She wrote for the NYC Times and graduated from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism, before that.