Notes
“Art & Tech” versus “Art & Science”
- in 1965, more science-oriented and non-political, because a) world was less political (pre-vietnam, counterculture, etc.), b) access to tools required day jobs in big labs
- “Op Art” can be “happy art” (usually science-oriented) but also disturbing (bordering on political, e.g. Bridget Riley, Vasulkas)
Issues of “Delivery” (i.e., new medium)
- “Flash art” is different from text only and from 16mm film
- If new delivery form, how can a critic review it?
- How much “personality” can be in it?
- How reflexive is it?
- Value of “no frills” but “stylized
Art and “Value”
- Issues around permanence (important for collectors only?)
- What do patrons “buy?” (e.g., supporting perfomance)
- Collecting artifacts versus collecting art (e.g., Guggenheim collecting Matta-Clark documents)
- Issues around cost (is it a factor in judging quality?, What about judging proposals?)
Leads
--- Howard Wise gallery, NYC (big player in 70s)
--- Bridget Riley (british op art painter)
--- Robert Smithson (earth art)
--- Christo (environmental art)
--- Woody and Steina Vasulka (early video art)
--- cybernetic serendipity show – London – c1967
--- art and technology show – LA museum of contemporary art – c 1972
--- 9 evenings show – NYC – c1969
--- art/funding at burning man