I've been doing some research on related stuff recently and it's
beginning to lead into a kind of strange direction. What I'm going to
say is not about digital art in general but about Net-Art in general.
For a long time I've been touting the merits of the abstract and do
in fact feel that it's one of *the* most important moves in recent
art. So important that to simply abandon it as old fashioned would be
a shame. It's definitely important stuff. But as far as Net-Art is
concerned, it's hard to ignore the Pop-Artness of it. It uses
elements of mass culture and due it's (most often) screen-based
nature, it tends to have a graphic-design quality to it. On top of
that, it has one more very significant feature that Pop-Art didn't
have. Almost anyone can experience it in an environment of their own
choosing.

Here's a good description of net art, it's: "popular, transient,
expendable, low-cost, mass-produced, young, witty, sexy, gimmicky,
glamorous, and Big Business"

Only, this list wasn't devised as a description of net art. It's
Richard Hamilton describing Pop-Art in the late 50's. Eery, eh?
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
> subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/
> 29.php
>

--
Pall Thayer
p_thay@alcor.concordia.ca
http://www.this.is/pallit