The Martha Rosler reading is another origin story of video art. It mentions the portable equipment becoming available in the 1960s and that the early uses were a critique of Western art institutions. Video was a tool for rebellious people to fight back against the system they were a part of. The writing is split up into four sections: Prehistory, History, Myth, and Conclusion. Prehistory discusses the technology of the past that was the predecessor video capabilities and the people of the time's interaction with them. History discusses the varying levels of legitimacy that video art has been viewed of having. Myth is primarily an attack on Nam June Paik. It basically sets up the notion that everything traditional video art history credits Paik with doing is incorrect. It alludes to him working within the mass media that he claimed to be fighting against and taking control of. It went on to praise McLuhan for being more focused on the powers of the artist and not on that of mass media. Conclusion summed up the information that was given throughout the reading.
This reading is more accusatory than the others so far. It makes claims like that mass media has power over western culture and that artists were fighting in almost a warlike scenario of "the culture industry versus the consciousness industry. The part that mainly grabbed my attention was the Myth portion. I wouldn't call myself a huge Paik fan (I barely knew of him until a few weeks ago) but I found myself feeling almost defensive of him while reading. The author discredits many of the accomplishment he is traditionally known for making in the field. She makes it sound like he wasn't successful at all in fighting against television and mass media. I think regardless of your personal opinion of his work, he should at least be credited with being one of the first artists to make this a central concept in his work and bring it to the forefront of the medium.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment