Paddy Johnson has responded to my response of her article, “Don’t Follow Twitter Art.” We obviously disagree and I think we’ve made our opinions rather clear, so you can make up your own mind. But before I move on to other points about art that uses Twitter I want to make a few points of clarification, particularly since Johnson is particularly harsh toward An Xiao’s work (she calls it “vacuous”) without having taken any time to get to know it with more than a passing familiarity.
First off, An Xiao’s “Being Telepresent” (2010), which I curated into #TheSocialGraph, was an opening night (not closing night) project, and the fact that she was actually in the gallery was not the point—the work was planned regardless of her location. In fact, she waited until the end, and after most people left, so that she could surprise her friends and some stragglers with her unexpected presence. But the work in no way was about that element of surprise. Instead, it was intended to be viewed as part of her continuing fascination with party photographers and the ideas of event openings and microfame, something she experimented with in another project, “Photoglam” (2010), during #Class. She was actually the party photographer for the event and I don’t know what one work — which she admits has nothing to do with Twitter and her article — has to do with the other. It is questionable why Paddy chose to attack another work without getting all the facts to justify her first misstep.
Art (and Criticism) That’s Social
But back to the bigger issues that this dialogue has created and that William Powhida touched upon in the comment section of Johnson’s most recent post:
… I think social media also poses a broader problem that Paddy started to get to at the end of her post when thinking about self-promotion. Building networks requires a lot of ‘liking’ and positive affirmation. Critique, criticism, negativity, cynicism … not so much. I feel like my ability to critique anything has been compromised by the relationships social media fosters. This is counter-intuitive, ‘social media brings people together!” Well, perhaps the artist and critic should not be so engaged, so part of the community if it means we start to lose our ability to see clearly and have honest discussions without worrying about upsetting somebody or losing a few hundred followers.
While that may be a concern, I don’t think it’s unique to social media. If anything, I think it lays bare the machinations that are usually obfuscated by the art world. I believe in engaged criticism, one that actively explores the work you are encountering and requires being part of a conversation. Removing yourself from the medium doesn’t necessarily guarantee any more access to truth than engagement; the only difference is the bias is less obvious at times.
Critics of social media encounter reactions to our opinions faster than critics who avoid it altogether. My concern is not any kind of positive feedback loop but a type of reality TV syndrome, where conflict attracts attention, followers and more conflict, often without any resolution … step and repeat. The secret of conflict on social media is that regardless of whether you’re right or wrong, the attention (maybe we should call them ratings?) is being generated and “rewarded” by followers. Sure, people may unfollow you for spamming them too much, but when it comes to content there is little you can do to offend everyone (and often it gains you a new following).
I also disagree with the idea that social media brings us “together.” I don’t know if that type of utopian idea was ever true. But social media does have the ability to connect people easier.
Getting to the Bottom of It
Now, what’s the way forward?
In my opinion, social media is often used as an easy out — which is also true of some artists who use animated GIFs — for many artists who have little programming knowledge. These media provide artists with the ability to create work online (often with few resources) without the need to spend hours perfecting their technical craft. I wish more artists would grapple with the technology itself. I wish they would play with the way information is transmitted, transform the way information is received or question the corporate entities that create the systems most of us use without a second thought.
Man Bartlett spoke to me once about finding a way to transmit video online without the corporate frame that Livestream, Ustream or other entities provide. But with limited financial resources, it is a challenge for any emerging artist to avoid these free services. I liked his instinct to challenge the frame or context provided by social media while maintaining a connection to its huge audience of users.
One of the reasons I chose the title #TheSocialGraph for the November exhibition last year was that I felt that artists were only starting to engage with the bigger revolution at work in social media. It’s neither the instanteous nature of communication, nor the access it provides, but the potential to learn from interactions with others and create new things or experiences based on that information.
The terms Social Media, Social Network, and the Social Graph are often used interchangeably but there are important, if sometimes minor, differences between them. I asked Hyperallergic publisher, Veken Gueyikian, who is also an interactive marketer and thinks about this topic quite a bit, to help me out by proving me with some clear definitions. Here they are:
Have artists been able to grapple with the first two? Yes. Have they had any success with the third? Not yet.
The title of the social media art exhibition I created was aspirational. Only one project, Benjamin Lotan’s “The Social Printshop” (2010– ), grappled with anything even remotely approaching the idea of the social graph, but his focus was more on the idea of the social media startup itself and not on the technology and social graph. My hope is that social media-related art will take up that challenge one day. How artists will do that is not yet clear.
Columbia University exhibition thwarts the de-politicization of postwar abstract art with a series of provocative questions.
Some 500 satirical guerilla billboard ads posted across Europe featured texts such as “#SayYesToTheEndOfTheWorld” and “Low Fares to Plastic island.”
Funding options at UB include full-tuition scholarships for MFA students, the Arthur A. Schomburg Fellowship Program, and additional opportunities for MA students.
Despite his reportedly encyclopedic knowledge of the region’s geologic and mineral makeup, Heizer has displayed a baffling incuriousness about the larger story of the land he digs, cuts, and plows.
Using the pressures of adolescence and indoctrination of the church as a framework, Campbell captures the stress endured by young women and their bodies.
This exhibition presents new commissions by Bay Area artists Sadie Barnette, Angela Hennessy, Clare Rojas, and Zio Ziegler alongside work from the McEvoy Family Collection.
The investigation represents the first step of a process to return the works to families and descendants of those who originally owned them.
The menial work, combined $17/hour pay, no benefits, and a lack of support from higher-ups has reportedly led to severe staff shortages.
Open to scholars, artists, curators, and writers, this new fellowship embraces the interdisciplinary spirit of a pioneering fiber artist and comes with a $30,000 stipend.
Eliza Naranjo Morse and Jamison Chas Banks envisioned Giving Growth as a response to the forced isolation brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Although Latinos represent 18.7% of the United States’s population as of the 2020 census, only 3.1% of lead roles in television shows feature them.
The museum and union have yet to agree on wages and healthcare.