New media artists, and work, encounter different expectations from
artists who work with old media. I wouldn't say it's easier to be a
painter than a new media artist, but the following discussion (taken
from the Tech90s BBS at www.tech90s.net) touches on some of the ways
technology complicates the reception of the artist and his/her art.

Alex Galloway's response to this challenge is brave – see why he thinks
"sites [should] *crumble* under [their] own weight."

+ + +

Benjamin Weil wrote:

the use of technology once again raises the issue of the importance of
mastery in the practice of the arts. Indeed, art has often been
evaluated in terms of the artist's "hand skills", her or his ability to
paint or sculpt well, etc. the intricacies of technology often call for
a collaboration between the artist as "concept" developer and the
technician as the person who is in charge of implementing those
concepts. There has been extensive discussions as to what an artist
needs to know about technology to experiement with it. It seems
interesting to note, however, that the use of video (at least in its
early stage) did not seem to raise such issue: artists appropriated the
technology and freely experimented with it. When it comes to "new
media", it seems like the issue is raised differently. Is it a matter of
the audience it reaches out to?

Rachel Greene responded:

Interesting point about the use of video, and how new media art is
handled differently. Low production values, and the use of video as a
degraded form reflect a current, and safe, trend. Shock lit, indie rock,
street fashion, indie film, all of these reflect a trend towards the
unpolished. Are high production values a turn off? Is this a gesture
towards more democratic, accessible forms? Perhaps, but I find it still
image based (and ultimately shallow).

I think new media art gets stuck with regard to this aesthetic. It seems
that when technology is involved, people still want to see simple,
coherent, pretty things. And artists like Ken Feingold have different
agendas – ones that don't necessarily involve "pretty things." (I mean,
even I found myself wishing for a nice, clean design-y interface after
seeing Ken's challenging work.) But then again, the technology can't be
too flawless. It becomes a target when it's too clever and clean.
Critics respond as if technology "tricks" render the artist into a David
Copperfield kind of performer.

Alex Galloway weighed in:

I've thought about that too… how can digital art make use of a
degraded form?

many types of tech-based artistic production have capitalized upon their
own technological shortcomings to produce degraded forms. the super8
camera, the xerox machine, the tape recorder… I just can't see new
media art that uses no javascript, no frames, a gray background, black
font and those silly horizontal lines.

I think this calls for a radically new form of digital creativity.
remember how long it took for musicians to use digital feedback from CDs
as a compositional tool? let's explore ways we can make a site *crumble*
under its own weight.