In reply to the comments by Markus Merkel and Josephine Bosma regarding
net.art criticism [available at http://www.rhizome.org/query], I do not
think that there is any real danger of critics "killing the infant
during birth". If the baby is strong enough it will survive in any case.
Nevertheless, any new form of art does need to be tenderly nurtured by
being raised with care, attention and a modicum of discipline, and this
is the task of critics and curators. Where would Impressionism have got
to had it not been for the critical response of Baudelaire?
Unfortunately there are (so far) woefully few critics or curators who
are prepared to take net.art seriously. Catharine David's efforts,
although flawed, are at least a step in the right direction, as are the
excellent articles published in magazines like Mute. (Compare these, for
example, with the minimal, token-like coverage in Artforum). Take a look
at Switch (http://switch.sjsu.edu/) which has a thoughtful 2-part study
of art on the Web, including its 'ontological' implications. Or check
out the Reviews section of my own magazine site Why not Sneeze?
(http://www.ccc.nl/sneeze/), which includes reprints of the articles I
have been writing for the last year or so for the British art magazine
Art Monthly.

Even though the medium is still young, there is already a great deal of
interesting net.art around–Louise Lawler's Birdcalls piece is my
current favourite (and I have to thank Tina LaPorta for bringing the
feminist dimension of the piece to my attention). It is perhaps
significant that Louise Lawler established her name as an artist not by
doing net.art but in other media, and that she shows in traditional
galleries and museums. The same goes for Lawrence Weiner or Matt
Mullican who have also successfully ventured into net.art. Mature
artists such as these do not need to seek "validation" by critics, but
it does behoove the critic to respond to their work. It seems to me that
only insecure, inexperienced artists are worried about acceptance by
critics, whom they tend to regard with misplaced paranoia and ignorance.
Young artists' refusal to accept "validation" by critics is not
necessarily a sign of vitality, rather it displays an unwillingness to
enter the lively field of discourse and discussion. To return to the
"baby" metaphor, it is tantamount to suicide through self-imposed
neglect.