Research paper update: Paper is due March 5.
In Greg's class on March 5, we'll discuss the exhibit "Random Access: Data as Art" in the Montserrat gallery.
So see the exhibit and read:
= The catalogue essays.
= "Random stuff: Versteeg’s ‘In advance of Another Thing’ at RISD" by Greg Cook, Providence Phoenix, April 28, 2010.
= "Science to Art, and Vice Versa" by Amy Wallace, New York Times, July 9, 2011.
In your response consider:
Does the transformation of data into art "reveal its meaning or true nature"? How? When is it effective? When isn't it? Is the picture worth more than the data's 1,000 words? Is it satisfying aesthetically? Is it satisfying conceptually? Does the finished art convey the information that serves as its source? Does it need to? Does it feel random? Is randomness good? Does it help make sense of the data? How does this compare to other conceptual art? Does the art speak for itself? Does it require explanation (via wall texts)? How does it relate to other conceptual projects that turn archives into art (as described in the Holland Cotter essay below)?
For extra (nonrequired) fun, consider:
= Catalogue to "Data Mining: Artists' Constructs" at Columbia College, Chicago, 2010.
= "Well, It Looks Like Truth" review of "Archive Fever: Uses of the Document in Contemporary Art” at the International Center of Photography, by Holland Cotter, New York Times, 2008.