The digital zeitgeist in San Diego - a reposting of my first artblog

I began my art blogging with UTSanDiego four years ago.  My starting point was a reference to digital art.  Digital was an exploding force in the commercial side of artmaking - in print publications and FX movies.  The impact in the fine art world was less discernible for a number of reasons. Just like photography was distrusted as an art form when it emerged in the 19th century; there was also the fear that digital toolsets would mask the assumed creativity of 'traditional' methods; and, when considering multiples, the digital world could create an infinite number of prints and democratize the commercial value of limited editions to the point of zero. 

Yet, change has come; digital tools and digital creations have become more welcome.  

I have also been affected by this recent history of how technology has impacted artmaking. Many of my artblogs have focused on non-digital images, sculptural forms and even performance.  I've learned about artists and artmaking by writing about others are doing in their own art adventure - digital or otherwise.  

I've also focused on art outside the large institutions.  Artmaking abounds in homes, private studios, small and mid-sized galleries, in the many parts of the world outside the major museums and biennales.  Wandering in and out of the large and small places in which we encounter art is an adventure that parallels my journey in cultural anthropology.  

So, here is my first artblog posted with the UTSanDiego when it first experimented (and then discontinued) in the blogging phenomenon.

The digital zeitgeist in San Diego

 
Art in digital media has been around for several decades. Most of us marvel at digital FX movies. These are generally among the highest grossing movies. And San Diego is proud of its Comic Con. This eye candy is often a mix of analog and digital media. More importantly, these examples point to a healthy recognition that digital media extends the toolsets used to make art — both commercial and fine art.

But when we look at our art institutions, digital media doesn't get the respect it deserves. The current exhibit at MoPA has begun to rectify this transformation in the art scene. New Realities nicely juxtaposes old school and new school technology; both Jerry Uelsmann and Maggie Taylor find fantastical visions in their respective toolsets. Maggie Taylor, the digital artist, is quoted in the SDUT: "If I didn’t have Photoshop, I probably would have moved on to making three-dimensional collages at some point and left photography to do some other things."

Yes, Photoshop is that important —along with Painter, Ultrafractals, Lightwave, Maya, Lightroom, Aperture, Adobe Camera Raw and a host of other digital software. The toolsets have changed, but the vision quest is still what drives the artist. Digital artists are just like oil-paint artists or acrylic-paint artists, or watercolorists, or sculptors, or architects or photographers.

There is some interesting San Diego art history worth recalling. In 2003, the San Diego City Council issued a Resolution proclaiming the importance of digital art in San Diego. Here is an excerpt from what was probably the first ever political resolution about digital art:

*WHEREAS, the digital art community invites all to envision the convergence of design and technology, art and animation, entertainment, education, and research at the SIGGRAPH 2003 Conference and San Diego community digital art shows; 

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mayor and Council of the City Of San Diego, that this Council, for and on behalf of the citizens of San Diego, does hereby recognize SIGGRAPH 2003 and the digital artists and institutions of San Diego for their efforts to make art interesting, accessible and fun, and heartily congratulates SIGGRAPH 2003 and the local digital art community.*

Photo credit: Diana Jeon Joe Nalven walking through FogScreeen at SIGGRAPH 2003

Okay. I admit having a hand in crafting the resolution, especially the fun part. And you can scoff at politicians somehow having a handle on art, let alone digital art.

But there are important issues here: Who gets to say what is art? Who gets to say where art is located? Who gets to name that this is art and that is not, that this is beautiful or strong or significant and that is not? 

Looking back in time, we can say, "Tut, tut — a tempest in a teapot; moving from wood panels to canvas, not such a big thing after all." But looking forward? There's a lot to be said and no one has all the answers. There's some devilish fun to be had in exploring the art thing in San Diego.

There is also a second benchmark in San Diego worth noting. SONY made a large contribution to the San Diego Art Institute to host its First International Digital Fine Art Exhibition (2006). Marilyn Kushner, one of the leading prints curators from the Brooklyn Museum of Art was brought in as the juror. The San Diego Union Tribune paid attention.

Maybe not a big thing when measured against major shows in San Diego, let alone New York, Paris, Venice and the like. But, in getting a sense of the moorings of the new surface in art (the digital surface) and being part of the new reality, these tokens of history are worth acknowledging in locating the digital zeitgeist.

Joe Nalven Editor, Digital Art Guild ezine 

Oct 13, 2010