MIT is going to save art from what, exactly?
Post #827 • July 10, 2006, 4:41 PM • 16 Comments
The MexiCat - a scruffy feline sporting a poncho and sombrero - was originally a black and white creature. He was sold off, and his new owner colored him in. A later owner posed him next to a giant Corona bottle. In the future, somebody might decide to stick the MexiCat inside a beer bottle, or give him taco shits. The possibilities are endless.
And endless possibilities mean freedom: freedom for art to do anything. Including suck.
The aforementioned creature is an entity haunting the OPENSTUDIO, as reported upon by Paul McMorrow. In a nutshell, the idea is to fold art creation tools into a social networking application, and create a play-money marketplace for the art that people make inside the community. They hope to discover, among other things, new models for supporting the creative process.
On one hand, I wish more contemporary art theory was trying as hard to generate ideas that apply to the real world. I prefer this infinitely to what passes for advanced thinking about contemporary art much of the time: semiotic analysis that amounts to image streaming, and is excused from all rigor as long as it employs the approved jargon, tone, and talking points. At least they're doing real research. On the other hand, well, look at the work. The project seems to be proving, in spite of itself, that collaborative art-making is no more productive than collaborative breathing. As is the case in any relationship, the best unions consist of strong individuals, people who can function at a high level on their own. Otherwise, they tend to do better by themselves.
Update: I meant to add that work on the OPENSTUDIO site needs to be compared to the cover art of the issue of Dig in which the McMorrow piece appeared, Pin-Ups After Work by a French illustrator named Bengal.