How do I break into the glamourous international world of new media/digital art?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I've recently decided this is the way to go for me. Any suggestions?

― slutsky (slutsky), Friday, 9 May 2003 00:48 (twenty-two years ago)

You don't. Train as a plumber.

― Pete (Pete), Friday, 9 May 2003 08:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Handsome SoundArtist to thread! (Though he would probably say the same thing as Pete)

― kate, Friday, 9 May 2003 08:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Just keep doing what you're doing, slutsky. You already have a memorable name and a global (on ILX, anyway) profile. But find a wealthy benefactor!

― Nordicskillz (Nordicskillz), Friday, 9 May 2003 08:53 (twenty-two years ago)

you're 4 years too late slutsky, but never mind...

― stevem (blueski), Friday, 9 May 2003 10:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Web monkey = ~£25k + endless hassle from idiot clients, a life in front of a monitor. Potential for RSI and eyestrain.
Plumber = ~£200k + endless opportunities to rip off idiot clients, a life eating sausage sarnies in a van. Potential for bored housewifes.

Where I can sign up to retrain (in London), (seriously!)?

― Simeon (Simeon), Friday, 9 May 2003 10:23 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, thank you very much everybody for all the support.

― slutsky (slutsky), Friday, 9 May 2003 15:03 (twenty-two years ago)

Slutsky I can put you in touch with a friend who does this in NY. Email me.

Can you program?

― amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 9 May 2003 15:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Not really. But I can try. I'll email you.

― slutsky (slutsky), Friday, 9 May 2003 15:35 (twenty-two years ago)

whats your skillset slutsky?

― stevem (blueski), Friday, 9 May 2003 16:07 (twenty-two years ago)

also i have yet to earn £25k pa, but then i don't do much programming :(

― stevem (blueski), Friday, 9 May 2003 16:08 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, let me put it this way. I have very little knowledge of how the art world at large (as opposed to say the music or film world) operates. This is what I'd like to learn a little more about--say, how to find other venues outside of Montreal (festivals eg) for an installation that myself and one other put on here last year.

― slutsky (slutsky), Friday, 9 May 2003 17:16 (twenty-two years ago)

tell us more about the installation, i'm intriiiiigued...

― stevem (blueski), Friday, 9 May 2003 19:21 (twenty-two years ago)

It was basically an attempt to meet girls through video art.

― slutsky (slutsky), Friday, 9 May 2003 23:42 (twenty-two years ago)

1. piss on a national monument while being watched by millions via webcam

2. ????

3. profit!!!

― Millar (Millar), Saturday, 10 May 2003 00:02 (twenty-two years ago)

It was basically an attempt to meet girls through video art.

a.k.a.Girls Gone Wild

― amateurist (amateurist), Saturday, 10 May 2003 03:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, yeah, like that, only classier.

― slutsky (slutsky), Saturday, 10 May 2003 06:00 (twenty-two years ago)

We have reached a point in art where the use of excrement is equal to class. Discuss.

― Millar (Millar), Saturday, 10 May 2003 06:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Hey man, I didn't say it, you did.

― slutsky (slutsky), Saturday, 10 May 2003 06:10 (twenty-two years ago)

no but really, me being drunk and all, what else is there left? Art or otherwise?

― Millar (Millar), Saturday, 10 May 2003 06:28 (twenty-two years ago)

It was basically an attempt to meet girls through video art.

You mean there are other justifications for video art?

And you basically want to meet more girls, but on an international scale?

― Nordicskillz (Nordicskillz), Saturday, 10 May 2003 07:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Millar i was saying similar things yesterday - art (esp. music) has peaked (long ago you may argue) and its future is now (or has been for a while even) utterly dependent on technology for invention/novelty: discuss etc.

― stevem (blueski), Saturday, 10 May 2003 13:59 (twenty-two years ago)

1917 marcel duchamp places a urinal on display as art.
the art world has been going duuuuuhhhhh ever since.
technology is a (relatively) new tool and has changed the face of "modern" (todays) art. this change is only superficial - there isn't any sort of philosophy or thinking behind it.

― dyson (dyson), Saturday, 10 May 2003 14:46 (twenty-two years ago)

dyson: what the hell? technology is a NEW tool relative to what? the time before people started reacting to new things?! there's no THINKING/critical theory about what digi-tech means to art out there? but yes there is!

steve,: art has 'peaked' - this is an essentially meaningless phrase, i think. do you mean (do you mean the idea to mean, rather) that there are no more possibilities left in the creation of a 'naturalistic' art/music? how why what etc?

― mitch lastnamewithheld (mitchlnw), Saturday, 10 May 2003 15:27 (twenty-two years ago)

what thinking is that¿ what is the driving philosophy behind the technlogy then¿ there a differnce between thinking "about what digi-tech means to art" and an actual ideaoligy driving it.

― dyson (dyson), Saturday, 10 May 2003 15:39 (twenty-two years ago)

I am in agreement with dyson. Show me the money. While digital technology has definitely changed parts of the art world, there's no specific movement going along with. People have made endless remarks about the new British school being nothing really new - this applies to pretty much everything else, too. Artwise this planet is in a dead heat with Venus for innovation. Then again I can't think of anything 'new' either.

― Millar (Millar), Saturday, 10 May 2003 15:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, Venus is great. I particularly liked De Milo.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 10 May 2003 16:13 (twenty-two years ago)

PUNS ARE THE NEW ART

― Millar (Millar), Saturday, 10 May 2003 16:15 (twenty-two years ago)

there are no more UNTOUCHED possibilities left in the creation of a 'naturalistic' art/music...for a while now i have been thinking this yes - does it seem so ridiculous? don't just assume that there will always be something else...but feel free to lambast me for just being cynical and unimaginative while the jury is (and may forever be) out

― stevem (blueski), Saturday, 10 May 2003 17:12 (twenty-two years ago)

even technology may not provide genuinely NEW artistically conceived/realised experiences. but please provide examples of recent innovations/newness in art if you wish.

― stevem (blueski), Saturday, 10 May 2003 17:14 (twenty-two years ago)

the lesson of the 20th century is that your parents already did everything cool, give up

― Millar (Millar), Saturday, 10 May 2003 17:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Stevem, the last show I went to see was Days Like These at Tate Britain. Among the stuff there I liked were a bunch of naturalistic paintings that struck me as wholly original, if originality is so important (I don't think it has to be). They were quiet shots of like parts of council estates, some garages here, a footpath among a few trees there. I thought they were terrific. There is still scope for fresh approaches even to the most old-fashioned and, according to many, played out kinds of art.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 10 May 2003 17:38 (twenty-two years ago)

my parents never loitered on ILX...oh wait, you said everything COOL

I'm sure those paintings are good Martin, but what do they offer that is really new/different? If they were photographs it would be no big deal, were they essentially 'photo-realistic' in style or somehow abstract? I recognise they're relatively unconventional in their choice of subject (ie garages as opposed to rolling hills or whatever) but it's especially hard to see how painting as a medium can offer anything new (thats not to say it cannot still offer pleasure at all), in the same way that music (and even sound art) seem to have reached limits both conceptually AND technically.

― stevem (blueski), Saturday, 10 May 2003 18:35 (twenty-two years ago)

They are naturalistic, realistic. If you are going to talk about such a narrow area, it is then utterly unreasonable to expect innovation - you can't insist on tight boundaries then complain they aren't breaking them. What I am saying is that even within such a stylistically narrow and circumscribed area as genuinely realistic painting, there are new things to be depicted, new moods and feelings to be expressed. If you're talking about painting as a whole, there always seem to be some wonderful things being done, but I don't know how much there is to do that is genuinely new, in pure painting.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 10 May 2003 18:52 (twenty-two years ago)

You mean there are other justifications for video art?

And you basically want to meet more girls, but on an international scale?

This would be a happy side benefit of my international artstardom, yes.

― slutsky (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 May 2003 19:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Plumbing sounds like a good deal. We had one in today, and he's charging nearly $300 for two hours worth of work!

― rosemary (rosemary), Tuesday, 13 May 2003 21:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Run a bar. You get free booze.

― Matt (Matt), Wednesday, 14 May 2003 00:27 (twenty-two years ago)

five months pass...

― adaml (adaml), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 19:50 (twenty-two years ago)

haha I agreed with dyson on this thread! I'm shitting my pants RIGHT NOW

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 14 October 2003 20:10 (twenty-two years ago)

www.cycling74.com

― Girolamo Savonarola, Wednesday, 15 October 2003 02:16 (twenty-two years ago)

one year passes...

― adam.r.l. (nordicskilla), Monday, 14 February 2005 22:44 (twenty-one years ago)

More what?

― Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Tuesday, 15 February 2005 00:11 (twenty-one years ago)

how do you like it?

― kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 15 February 2005 00:23 (twenty-one years ago)

LIKE WHAT?

― Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Tuesday, 15 February 2005 00:32 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.