Thinking of light and obstructing light as the first art form gives a different perspective of the way we express ourselves. As that interacts with our contemporary view of video art we certainly have a different perspective. Oftentimes video art can come across as confusing and in many ways video is the optimal form of critique for the modern distribution of media. Nauman makes a direct reference to historical representation of humans in art with his Contrapposto within a small designated moving area. Critique of modern media consumption can be seen in Nam June Paik, Specifically Zen for Film, 1964 the immersion of screens in a highly saturated color format along with foliage adds a context from our origins to gather in the wild. The implication being our modern gathering for survival is through the screen. One of the biggest questions I have for video art is the interaction between display and consumption. There are many artists who display their work in curated spaces as well as on internet spaces like youtube. In the comments you can see the interaction between pop culture fans and those who saw the art in person and describe a very different experience. This can mostly be seen by Cory Archangel whom some say is a great modern video artist. The question I have for some of his work is the parameters of acceptance for video art. For example a hacked Video Game like Mario, or having two programs play chess in the comments of various instagram comment sections. Further questions I have are can simply the recording and redistribution of a screen be expanded upon for the future of video art?
baratheonpilled
titsay