Net. Aesthetics, Net. History, Net. Criticism: Introducing
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NET.AESTHETICS, NET.HISTORY, NET.CRITICISM: INTRODUCING NET.ART INTO A COMPUTER ART AND GRAPHICS CURRICULUM DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Alison R. Colman, B.F.A., M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2003 Dissertation Committee: Professor Vesta A. H. Daniel, Adviser Approved by: Professor Georgianna Short Professor Wayne Carlson ______________________________ Adviser Professor Brian Rotman Department of Art Education ABSTRACT Net.art is an art form that uses the Internet as a medium, and has been created specifically for viewing on the World Wide Web. For the art instructor whose curriculum includes art criticism, art history and aesthetics with studio activities, including net.art in such a way that encourages critical thinking and new perspectives on art as well as the Internet is a daunting challenge. The art instructor needs the computer skills necessary to assist students in creating net.art, as well as an understanding of the cultural, technological and theoretical underpinnings of net.art in order to demystify it for students. Net.art tends to be highly conceptual, strongly challenges commonly held notions regarding art, and often requires the viewer to have some knowledge of the history of the Internet. It also requires the viewer to understand the Internet as a cultural phenomenon rather than a technological tool. My primary empirical objective was to formulate effective pedagogical strategies for the high school art instructor incorporating net.art into their curriculum in such a way that would facilitate students’ critical thinking, meaning making, and deeper understanding of the cultural aspects of the Internet. The principal research question is: how can net.art be integrated into a high-school level computer art and graphics curriculum? ii Over the course of the study, the principal investigator engaged in reflective practices that enabled her to devise pedagogical strategies that, in turn, facilitated a demystification process that enabled the students to overcome their initial disorientation and became increasingly able to appreciate and understand net.art. Despite the students’ familiarity with the Internet and traditional art forms, however, they were not able to translate their knowledge gained from these experiences into an adequate vocabulary in which to describe and interpret net.art as an artistic form. When asked to compare the web sites they are more accustomed to with net.art, these students defined a typical web site in terms of its functionality, how its form is dependent on its functionality, and its content; in direct contrast to a “typical” web site, most of the students described net.art’s form and function as something quite opposite. iii Dedicated to Jaron Bernstein, my wonderful spouse iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my adviser, Dr. Vesta A. H. Daniel, for the support, patience, encouragement and opportunities she has given me throughout my graduate career. I also am grateful for the calm support she has lent me during my first year as an assistant professor while I was working on my dissertation. I also wish to thank Dr. Sam Short for the cheerful guidance and support she provided me while I took a sabbatical from my dissertation to pursue a teaching certificate. Dr. Short, I am truly appreciative and grateful for your being there for me when I needed you! You taught me much about being an art educator. I thank Dr. Wayne Carlson and Dr. Brian Rotman for their intellectual support, as well as their stimulating classroom discussions. I also thank Dr. Anne Burkhart and Ron Aman, my Art Education colleagues at Ohio University, for their encouragement, advice, moral support and collegiality. To Dainta Teeple, someone I am proud to consider a fellow art educator: I am extremely thankful for your friendship and support. You are someone I can always count on, especially when I need a “You go girl!!!!!” Many, many thanks to my parents Barri and Warren Colman, my grandmother Ada Golbus, and my great-aunt Esther Fox, for your love, enthusiastic encouragement and, well, everything else. What more can I say? v And finally, my most wholehearted thanks goes to Jaron Bernstein, the most loving, patient and supportive life partner I could ever ask for. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Despite what you may think, I couldn’t have done this without you. vi VITA December 22, 1969 …………………………… Born - Skokie, Illinois 1991 ……………………………………………B.F.A. Fine Arts, Carnegie Mellon. 1997 ……………………………………………M.A. Art Education, The Ohio State University. 1995 – 2001 ……………………………………Graduate Teaching Associate, The Ohio State University 2002 – present ………………………………….Assistant Professor School of Art, Ohio University PUBLICATIONS Colman, A. (2000). African culture transformed twice: The Kwanzaa Playground and the Kwanzaa Playground website. Art Education, 53(2), 12-17. FIELDS OF STUDY Major field: Art Education Secondary fields: New Media Studies, Digital Visual Culture Studies, Cyberculture Studies, Curriculum and Instruction, New Media Archaeology vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract ..............................................................................................................................ii Dedication ……………………………………………………………………………… iv Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………………… v Vita ……………………………………………………………………………………. vii Chapters: 1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………….. 1 1.1 Need for the study …………………………………………………………….. 1 1.2 Statement of problem …………………………………………………………. 4 1.3 Overview: Related literature on computer technologies in art education ….…..7 1.4 Significance of the study …………………………………………………….. 11 1.5 Chapters summary …………………………………………………………....12 2. Definitions, critical perspectives and a survey: What is net.art? …………………...16 2.1 Defining net.art ……………………………………………………………… 18 2.1.1 Defining net.art: Nettime.org ………………………………………...20 2.2 Discussions about net.art ……………………………………………………. 26 2.3 A decade of net.art: A survey from 1993 to 2003 ……………………………32 2.3.1 Early net.art: 1993 – 1994 …………………………………………...34 2.3.2 Art as communication and communication as art: The proliferation of net.art from 1995 to 1997 ………………………………………....42 2.3.3 From web pages to networked applications: Net.art from 1998 to 2000 …………………………………………………………………..55 2.3.4 Current directions: Net.art from 2001 to the present ………………....65 2.3.5 Epilogue ……………………………………………………………....76 viii 3. Visions of technology …………………………………………………………….…78 3.1 Theoretical positions on technology ……………………………………….... 82 3.1.1 Technological optimists ……………………………………………..83 3.1.2 Technological pessimists …………………………………………....88 3.1.3 Technological optimism and the Internet …………………………...92 3.1.4 Technological pessimism and the Internet …………………………..96 3.1.5 Contextualism and a critical theory of technology ……………….....98 3.2 Walter Benjamin ……………………………………………………………..103 3.3 Art, technology and social practices ………………………………………....109 3.3.1 King’s Cross Phone-In ……………………………………………..110 3.3.2 Toywar ……………………………………………………………..112 3.3.3 Teleporting an Unknown State …………………………………….115 4. Methodology …………………………………………………………………….....118 4.1 Defining Qualitative Research …………………………………………….. 120 4.2 The Constructivist Paradigm ………………………………………………..123 4.3 Issues of Validity …………………………………………………………...127 4.3.1 Triangulation ………………………………………………………131 4.3.2 Construct validity ………………………………………………….131 4.3.3 Face validity ……………………………………………………….132 4.3.4 Catalytic validity ……………………..……………………………132 4.4 Research Design ……………………………………………………………135 4.4.1 Definition of a Case Study ………………………………………...135 4.4.2 Types of Case Studies ……………………………………………..137 4.5 Framework of the Study ……………………………………………………139 4.5.1 Participatory Action Research (PAR)……………………………...140 4.5.2 Action research ……………………………………………………143 4.5.3 A Brief History of Action Research in Education ………………...144 4.5.4 Teacher-as-researcher ……………………………………………..147 4.6 Research location …………………………………………………………..150 4.7 Research participants ………………………………………………………151 4.8 Timeline of study ………………………………………………………......153 4.9 Methods of data collection …………………………………………………155 4.9.1 Observation ………………………………………………………...155 4.9.2 Interviews …………………………………………………………..156 4.9.3 Personal experience methods ………………………………………158 4.10 Data analysis ……………………………………………………………….160 4.10.1 Specific analysis structures ………………………………………...163 4.10.2 Specific assessment structures ……………………………………..164 4.11 Limitations of the study ……………………………………………………168 ix 5. Methodology redux: Telling the tale ……………………………………………...170 5.1 How I met my participating art educator ……………………………………171 5.2 Research direction …………………………………………………………..173 5.3 Gaining entry ………………………………………………………………..175 5.4 Teaching philosophy ………………………………………………………..178 5.5 Week one ……………………………………………………………………180 5.6 Week two …………………………………………………………………....189 5.7 Week three ………………………………………………………………......204 5.8 Week four …………………………………………………………………...216 5.9 Epilogue ……………………………………………………………………..219 6. Findings …………………………………………………………………………..221 6.1 Demystifying net.art ………………………………………………………...223 6.2 But is it art? …………………………………………………………………242 6.2.1 Comparison between net.art and other art forms …………………..252 6.3 The form and function of web sites and net.art ……………………………..255 6.4 The final project – applying their knowledge ………………………………261 7. Conclusions and implications …………………………………………………….269 7.1 The art educator’s knowledge base ...............................................................271