Presentation final work 22.11.13: net.flag (Mark Napier, 2002)

Source:
http://adisdigitalvision.blogspot.hk/2013/10/netflag-800-flags.html




Introduction of the work

• Artist: Mark Napier 

• Name: net.flag – a flag for the Internet 

• Release year: 2002

• Where: http://webart.guggenheim.org/netflag/
  commissioned by Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York

A detailed description of the work

Work in detail

http://webart.guggenheim.org/netflag/



What is interesting / unusual / thought-provoking / aesthetically / pleasing / puzzling about this artwork 

• National identity vs global citizenship

• Internet as a new territory

"In the new millenium we see nations trying to lay claim to a new kind of territory, the Internet. This virtual territory is no longer a geographic location, a new land with resources to be claimed. It is a space created by man-made infrastructure that carries the potential of information, group identity, economic and political advantage. Nations and terrorists alike use the Internet to carry out their agendas. Those who control the structures, both hard and soft, that make this new space, control the nature of the space itself, providing or limiting access to the resources of the network" (Napier, 2002).

"net.flag creates a parody of what flags try to be. Flags try to fly over one territory and to unify people, when in fact the tendency is for people to diverge and to tear down, change, or negate flags" (Ippolito, 2003).

• Meaning of flag symbols beyond its context

• Flags' unlimited visual language

Selection of user-contributed flags

An evaluation of the work in terms of the chosen issue focused on Network Digital Art

Issue: National identity

One example in detail

• Indentity has always been an issue in Digital Art

“Many New Media Artists have used the Internet as a tool to explore the construction and perception of identity" (Tribe, 2009).

• Finding a national identity for the Internet

• Using flags as a metaphor for national identity

"The visual manifestations of national identity are familiar to all – flags, for example are probably the most potent visual expression of national identity" (Dinnie, 2008).

• The Internet's identity is only temporary

Features that the artwork shares with earlier art movements such as Dada

• Provoking

• Political message

• Collage-like

 




































Are formal instructions, the concept rather than the art object, audience participation and chance important elements in this work?

• Importance of the concept

• Audience are the artists

• Based on random events

• Formal instructions (Support Navigation / Statistics)

What is remarkable or noteworthy about this artwork?

• 10 years after releasing, the artwork's issue is still very relevant

• Combining one of the oldest communication tool (flags) with one of the newest (Internet)

• Pioneer in collecting and preserving Internet Art (online archive)

References

Dinnie, K. (2008). National Branding. Concepts, Issues, Practice. Oxford: Elsevier. 113-116.

Ippolito, J. (2003). Mark Napier, net.flag. In: Depocas, A., Ippolito, J. and Jones, C. The Variable Media Approach. Permanence through Change. New York: Guggenheim Museum Publications. 108-114.

Naper, M. (2002). About net.flag. Available: http://webart.guggenheim.org/netflag/. Last accessed 22nd Nov 2013.

Tribe, M. (2009). Art in the Age of Digital Distribution. In: Jana, R. and Tribe, M. New Media Art. Koeln: Taschen. 6-25.

Youtube and Participatory Visual Culture

Bus Uncle scene

A dispute during a bus ride in Hong Kong became a viral star in 2006 and makes two random people famous overnight. Especially Roger Chan, who is the main attraction in this Youtube video, which has been watched over 1 million times. His angry reaction after an other passenger ask him to clam down his voice while phoning with his girlfriend, are becoming an inspiration for several hobby-filmmakers, who posted their personal version on Youtube as well. Some expressions used in the video are becoming catchphrases for the Internet society (e.g."everybody has pressure"). The popularity of the video brought also the industry on the scene, which has used Roger Chan and his ionic expressions for its own selling purposes.

Original version

Re-used version

There are many other examples like Bus Uncle, which became famous overnight, thanks to social media platforms like Youtube, and were re-used from the Internet community in different context. The community’s adopted videos show the creative potential, which is slumbering in today’s society. But it also indicates that own ideas are getting rare, because in the end they only coping existing content and mash it with other existing content. It can be seen as a kind of content recycling. On the other hand, the increasing participation creativity uses the collective intelligence, which is a common procedure in creating innovation, too. That means for example that 10 people have more ideas then just one. So, there is a real potential for the growth of new ideas. But the problem is, this potential isn't often used in the way it could, cause most creators of such videos just want to attract attention from the audience and for that they publish content which is disruptive, but not primarily creative.

Another aspect, which has to be mentioned, especially in the Bus Uncle story, is the ethical point of view. More and more people are becoming the amusement for others without their approval. It’s kind a open voyeurism. On the other hand, videos like Bus Uncle points out the problems a society has. Here it was particularly the frustration potential caused by society pressure, which could heading to an overreaction like this.

Nevertheless, Youtube & co. gives a lot people the chance to show their abilities and ideas to a big audience. Although the comment function is a feature of all social media platforms, nowadays senders become the feedback from the audience indirect through the community's re-use of their content.

"In our context, circulation of ideas means that there is no direct flow back to the sender. The transfer back gets substituted by a creative and productive re-usage of ideas once emitted into circulation.” (Marek, 2009).

In this way, ideas really have the possibility to growth and becoming something big, cause of the usage of the collective intelligence. But in the other way, the question will be arisen, who will be the owner of the idea in the end, especially if an idea become a commercial success. This question can end up in a legal argument between participants because the own part on the successful idea, developed in a participative way, will be blurred eventually. Anyway, this is a risk in participatory culture and it’s good that this isn’t regulated from the beginning, otherwise the creative potential will be limited.


References
Marek, R. (2009). Creativity meets circulation: internet videos, amateurs and the process of evaluation. 


More information

• Article about Bus Uncle (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) 

 

Technologised Bodies

A technologised body uses mechanical elements to extend or change the human body. Terms like "Cyborg" or "Posthuman body" will be named in the same context. There are plenty of benefits for humans becoming a cyborg. E.g. they can extend their abilities, broken body parts can be replaced, possibility to communicate all the time and life can just get more convenient. But such body mutations aren't always an improvement, sometimes it’s just different to a normal human body without any benefits. Furthermore, it can also be dangerous. E.g. loss of control, loss of direct contact with humans, overpopulation and the disappearance of human differences.

Stelarc, Third Hand, 1980

Several artists, especially performance artists, have attended to this topic. So it has Stelarc, an Australian artist, who has experimented with all kinds of human body extensions and changes. In his eyes the human body is just a structure, which can be improved with technology beyond its abilities. His work can be seen as a kind of self directed evolution. One very famous artwork was called ”Third Hand”, which will be discussed in the following videos, leaded by three questions.

Describe the work in detail

 

How does the work use technology to extend or change the abilities of the human body?

 

What issues does this work raise e.g. about today's society / about the effects of existing technologies / about the potential or possibilities that new technologies might have?

 
More information

• Stelarc - Third Hand

Digital Cinema & Photography

Scene from "Mission to Mars"

According to Lev Manovich's screening "Mission to Earth", the characteristics of digital cinema will be explored.

What is new or different about digital cinema compared to traditional filmmaking? Consider the story, the structure and the appearance of the film.

• Narrative structure
• Different levels / screening
• Use of database, scenes could change every time (randomly)
• Like a website, which puts together different things

Similarity to traditional (earlier) films:

• Repetition (repetitive pattern)
• No high expression
• Usage of the brain (not like today’s movies, which use cheap tricks like special effects / music)
• Avoiding emotions

What other art forms (e.g. film, digital art, painting, websites etc.) does this film remind you of? Explain each similarity.

• Mondrian, because of his simple compositions 

More information

• Lev Manovich
• Softcinema
• Korsakow