are websites art?
Fiona Webster
I've been so busy with putting together a Patti Smith website, I haven't
had time to do anything else, even write. (Ms. Smith is a wonderfully
fluid poet, though, so her influence is salutary.)
I'm a little puzzled to find so many threads here devoted to what I think
of as politics -- people accusing other people of being bigoted, people
defending themselves against the accusations, and endless nuances of the
nuances. What does all that have to do with writing...oh, I guess it
doesn't matter, so long as we *are* writing -- which y'all seem to be
doing more of, than I have been, lately.
What do y'all think about websites, anyway? Do they count as a
legitimate art form? Is a website a form of writing?
--happy happy,
Fiona
Deck Deckert
What do y'all think about websites, anyway? Do they count as a
legitimate art form? Is a website a form of writing?
Only to the degree that a department store display window is an art form.
Deck
Fiona Webster
> What do y'all think about websites, anyway? Do they count as a
> legitimate art form? Is a website a form of writing?
Deck wrote:
>Only to the degree that a department store display window is an art
form.
Huh. Maybe I'm just slowed down by all the food I ate today, but
I fail to see the similarity between a website and a display window.
Or maybe you've been to different places on the Web than where I've
been. Do you not think hypertext is a legitimate medium for writing,
Deck?
--Fiona
Steve Shah
: Fiona Webster wrote:
: What do y'all think about websites, anyway? Do they count as a
: legitimate art form? Is a website a form of writing?
: Only to the degree that a department store display window is an art form.
Er, I beg to differ. It really depends on the site -- some sites are truly
a work of art. They often combine the technology with creativeness making
something unique on the net. That I believe qualifies as art. I don't think
creating a web site is a form of writing though. The text itself may be
writing, but the text may exist anywhere, not just a web site. If the text
is something that could only exist on the web, then it probably has more
to do with programming than it does writing. (Should you consider HTML
to be a real programming language... Now Java.... <grin>)
-SjS
--
______________________________________________________________________________
Steve Shah (ss...@cs.ucr.edu) |"It's not God. I'm down with God; it's the
WWW: http://cs.ucr.edu/~sshah | damn fan club that pisses me off." -dberger
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Let's get together and build a beat..."
youngblood
>I fail to see the similarity between a website and a display window.
>Or maybe you've been to different places on the Web than where I've
>been. Do you not think hypertext is a legitimate medium for writing,
>Deck?
Perhaps HTML is more akin to coding or programming than it is to
writing. It's a hoot, isn't it? Great fun. I think that web sites are
very artistic by their nature and the writing one finds there is as
important as any a writer will ever do.
*
youngblood * * * *
- - - - - -- -- -- --- ---- ------- ---------<>]==- *
http://www.io.com/~stargazr/ * *
*
Deck Deckert
I fail to see the similarity between a website and a display
window. Or maybe you've been to different places on the Web
than where I've been. Do you not think hypertext is a
legitimate medium for writing, Deck?
To the degree that I understand what hypertext is (I've seen some pretty
disparate definitions) I agree with your implied opinion that it is a
legitimate medium for writing.
But part of your original question was whether web sites are an art form.
Web sites in general appear to be more showcases than anything else --
for company products, for individual crafts (including writing), etc. --
hence my department store window display analogy.
Deck
Pat Middleton
well as write and find that producing a good web page incites the same
excitement in me that putting out a good book does.
You have to think of how to visually present information in an entirely
new medium; figure out how to market it; figure out your audience;
everything you have to do when you produce a book. Only in this case it
is so experimental, everybody is learning (and helping) everyone else.
It's like getting in on the first days of radio or television. Fun stuff!
Pat
THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER HOME PAGE
http://www.geopages.com/athens/1547/
John Fisher
> Deck Deckert (de...@gate.net) wrote:
> : Fiona Webster wrote:
> : What do y'all think about websites, anyway? Do they count as a
> : legitimate art form? Is a website a form of writing?
> :
> : Only to the degree that a department store display window is an art form.
>
> .... some sites are truly
> a work of art. They often combine the technology with creativeness making
> something unique on the net. That I believe qualifies as art
Of course websites are art. So are department store display windows.
Deck's comment "Only to the degree ..." is certainly true but in no way
denigrates
the website art form. He could have just as accurately said "Only to the degree
that poetry|watercolor|oratory|architecture|basket weaving|guitar playing
[choose one] is an art form."
Now, are websites a form of writing? I don't think so.
krb
: Of course websites are art. So are department store display windows.
Fine, but what makes a website art...why is it art.
--
-------------------------
Ken
k...@netcom.com
-------------------------
John Fisher
With the risk of starting a never ending "What is art?" philosophical
discussion, here is what I think:
(By the way,I am presuming that "web site" means the same thing as "web
page" or "home page." If not, I'll have to reconsider every thing that I
have said so far.)
A web site is art because the creator has expressed an idea or
communicated a personal message by controlling and manipulating the
appearance and function of the end product.
Definitions of art will vary considerably but I believe that the key words
"control" and "communication" are essential.
Fiona Webster
>A web site is art because the creator has expressed an idea or
>communicated a personal message by controlling and manipulating the
>appearance and function of the end product.
>
>Definitions of art will vary considerably but I believe that the key
>words "control" and "communication" are essential.
But "control" and "communication" apply to things that are not art, such
as the label on a bottle of prescription medicine. I think a proper
definition of art has to include the word "beauty" or "aesthetic."
--just myope-in-yan,
Fiona
Engkent
> ... I don't think
>creating a web site is a form of writing though. The text itself may be
>writing, but the text may exist anywhere, not just a web site. If the text
>is something that could only exist on the web, then it probably has more
>to do with programming than it does writing. (Should you consider HTML
>to be a real programming language... Now Java.... <grin>)
Web sites need good writing. Web page designers pay too little attention to
the text. They get caught up in their cool graphics and links and neglect the
words. They dump in text from another medium or have error-filled garbage on
the screen. And if you suggest improvements to the text, you find that no one
cares if the text is badly-written. (I know, I'm grumbling again, but I didn't
get to Grinch enough over Christmas.)
Writing text for web sites is an art. Information has to be well-organized,
explanations have to be concise, and words have to be effective. Now, if we
could just convince more techies...
Lucia
Fiona Webster
>The primary purpose of a web site NOW -- whatever it may once have been
>-- is to put wares on display.
I manage to surf the Web for hours on end, without ever visiting any
commercial sites. I don't think the Web is defined by commerce. Look at
all the home pages for individuals -- those are more like personal
essays, than they are like commercial displays.
--Fiona
lmac...@greenheart.com
>
> I wrote:
> > What do y'all think about websites, anyway? Do they count as a
> > legitimate art form? Is a website a form of writing?
>
> >Only to the degree that a department store display window is an art
> form.
>
> Or maybe you've been to different places on the Web than where I've
> been. Do you not think hypertext is a legitimate medium for writing,
> Deck?
Actually, I agree with Deck here. The primary purpose of a web site NOW
-- whatever it may once have been -- is to put wares on display. Some
stores (the Gumps Christmas Window comes to mind) do an elegant display.
Some stores just slap a few things in the window, seeing as how they're
paying for it anyway and it would otherwise be empty. Most stores do
something in between -- sometimes eye-catching, sometimes annoying, but
seldom very memorable.
That's pretty much how I see web pages. And I write them, from time to
time.
--
Loren J. MacGregor -- lmac...@greenheart.com
--Technical & Fictional Writing and Editing--
Kateri/Mary Anne
Engkent <eng...@inforamp.net> wrote:
>Web sites need good writing. Web page designers pay too little attention to
>the text. They get caught up in their cool graphics and links and neglect the
>words. They dump in text from another medium or have error-filled garbage on
>the screen. And if you suggest improvements to the text, you find that no one
>cares if the text is badly-written. (I know, I'm grumbling again, but I didn't
>get to Grinch enough over Christmas.)
>Lucia
<grin> Try my site for far more text than you'd ever need.
http://mud.bsd.uchicago.edu/~mohanraj/home.html
and I do believe that a web page can be a work of art -- heck, I think
mine is. Though it could use some more graphics.
- Mary Anne
--
"When they took the 4th Amendment, I was quiet because I didn't deal
drugs. When they took the 6th Amendment, I was quiet because I am innocent.
When they took the 2nd Amendment, I was quiet because I don't own a gun.
Now they have taken the 1st Amendment, and I can only be quiet." -Rick Kelly
krb
<material deleted..I felt like it...a matter of creativity I suppose
: A web site is art because the creator has expressed an idea or
: communicated a personal message by controlling and manipulating the
: appearance and function of the end product.
Some time ago, there was a usenet group called 12hr binaries, something
like that...for all I know it may not exist anymore. At any rate the
individual responsible for this usenet group set it up in such a way that
every twelve hours a picture was posted to the usenet group according to
a script he wrote. The pictures were outdoor stuff, streets, street lights
etc etc. Now it was all very interesting and he, in effect, followed the
above standards you outlined.....now as I said it was interesting I'd also
argue that it wasn't art, neither in a tradition nor non-traditional sense.
I suspect something is art because it has generated a universal
acceptence as art. The label on a can of corn may be art to the creator
of the label, maybe to their spouse and children but..................
Elizabeth A. Hendricks
: What do y'all think about websites, anyway? Do they count as a
: legitimate art form? Is a website a form of writing?
Perhaps they can be. However mine merely exists as a spot where people who
share my medical condition can find a bibliography I have compiled of
relevant articles and can use links to other possibly helpful sites. It
saves me sending out a lot of e-mail and helps people find the
information, which is otherwise hard to find for the average person.
While I have taken pains with head levels and rules and the like, to make
it easy to read and follow, it's merely functional.
BTW, how about a thread on copyrights and web pages---what kinds of
(possibly) copyrighted materials can you use? When do you need to get
permission?
Elizabeth
Axinar
: In article <engkent.39...@inforamp.net>,
: Engkent <eng...@inforamp.net> wrote:
:
: >Web sites need good writing. Web page designers pay too little attention to
: >the text. They get caught up in their cool graphics and links and neglect the
: >words. They dump in text from another medium or have error-filled garbage on
: >the screen. And if you suggest improvements to the text, you find that no one
: >cares if the text is badly-written. (I know, I'm grumbling again, but I didn't
: >get to Grinch enough over Christmas.)
:
: >Lucia
:
: <grin> Try my site for far more text than you'd ever need.
That much is certain. And EXCELLENT text if I might add.
Mary Anne's site, IMHO, has THE best original readable content of
any site I have seen -- including just about everything that
I saw pre-WWW.
: http://mud.bsd.uchicago.edu/~mohanraj/home.html
Excellent, excellent, excellent site (have I made myself clear?? <<Grin>>)
: and I do believe that a web page can be a work of art -- heck, I think
: mine is. Though it could use some more graphics.
Well, for the total counter balance of graphics and little original
content, check out my page:
This is "Axinar's World" -- mostly links to other places ...
a massive, self-indulgent bookmark file is what it is (all
seven pages of it). I would say that it is a work of art ...
there are a couple of original graphics there and I do
put up some of my excellent (IMHO) photography from time to
time.
I think a good personal web site should give you some insite
into the personality of the author. Mary Anne's certainly does ...
and if you leave my site with ANY doubt that I've taken a bit
of a turn around the bend, you haven't seen enough of it <<Grin>>.
Ax
Thomas Armagost
Shakespeare may be found. Why not a web page?
The best cartoon ever drawn by James Thurber, in fact possibly the
greatest cartoon in all history, a brilliant combination of art and
text, was drawn by him on hotel stationery. In 1989, it was on
display at the Royal Albert and Victoria Museum in London, part of a
tour of the New Yorker's finest cartoons. I saw it there and then.
Several columns of numbers he'd scribbled on the other side of the
page, probably a balance of his trivial daily expenses, could be
clearly seen through the paper.
FW> Fiona Webster (f...@access.digex.net) wrote:
DD> Deck Deckert (de...@gate.net) wrote:
SS> Steve Shah (ss...@cs.ucr.edu) wrote:
PM> Pat Middleton (midd...@mail.uwlax.edu) wrote:
E> Engkent (eng...@inforamp.net) wrote:
K> Ken (k...@netcom.com) wrote:
FW> What do y'all think about websites, anyway? Do they count as a
FW> legitimate art form? Is a website a form of writing?
DD> Only to the degree that a department store display window is an
DD> art form.
FW> Maybe I'm just slowed down by all the food I ate today, but I fail
FW> to see the similarity between a website and a display window.
SS> It really depends on the site -- some sites are truly a work of
SS> art.
PM> I publish books as well as write and find that producing a good
PM> web page incites the same excitement in me that putting out a good
PM> book does.
PM> It's like getting in on the first days of radio or television.
E> Web page designers pay too little attention to the text. They get
E> caught up in their cool graphics and links and neglect the words.
K> The label on a can of corn may be art to the creator of the label,
K> maybe to their spouse and children but...
Alan Langford
: I suspect something is art because it has generated a universal
: acceptence as art. The label on a can of corn may be art to the creator
: of the label, maybe to their spouse and children but..................
As far as Andy Warhol and a large portion of the artistic community is
concerned, both the 12 hour newsgroup and the label _are_ art. The 12
hour newsgroup would probably have met with positive critical reviews,
if there was a critic hip enough to know about it.
I'm not saying any of this is good or bad, by the way. I don't have any
idea what art is, and very little interest in defining it. I just hope
that what I do gets to be considered art by others. They can use
whatever definition suits them.
Julie Mangin
Fiona Webster <f...@access.digex.net> wrote:
>I manage to surf the Web for hours on end, without ever visiting any
>commercial sites. I don't think the Web is defined by commerce. Look at
>all the home pages for individuals -- those are more like personal
>essays, than they are like commercial displays.
I think web sites *can* be art, but they aren't always. Pictures of soup
cans can be used to advertise, unless the pictures are by Andy Warhol.
Julie Mangin Internet: jma...@access.digex.net
_______________________________________________________________________
"Eventually people realized that the Information Superhighway was
essentially CB radio, but with more typing." --From Dave Barry's _The
90's: Dave Barry looks back at the decade._
Leonie Winson
or whether websites are legitimate pieces of writing in their own
right, is the label its self.
There is not just one sort of website, some are very personal others
are just a biblography of links to other resourses. Then there are
sites like the 'NDT interactive novel' that could not be viewed in
any other form but on the web.
It's like the old argument what is literature. I don't think there can
ever be total agreement. You can't compare a Mills and Boon to Jane
Austen and yet they are both books. Web pages come in all styles and
sizes you can not make a final decision for the whole of the genre,
only for individual cases.
Even then it is only your opinion.
Keep writing
Leonie
-- L J Winson E-Mail:l...@reactant.demon.co.uk
Now open! URL:http://webzone1.co.uk/www/reactant
The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.
Edward J. Phelps
Lorrill Buyens
>John Fisher writes:
>>A web site is art because the creator has expressed an idea or
>>communicated a personal message by controlling and manipulating the
>>appearance and function of the end product.
>>
>>Definitions of art will vary considerably but I believe that the key
>>words "control" and "communication" are essential.
>But "control" and "communication" apply to things that are not art, such
>as the label on a bottle of prescription medicine. I think a proper
>definition of art has to include the word "beauty" or "aesthetic."
But one man's Beauty is another man's Beast. For example, I happen to
like abstract art, therefore I find it attractive. Someone who *didn't* like
abstract art, however, might find it hideous. When beauty is literally in the
eye of the beholder, an objective definition of it cannot readily be arrived at.
Lorrill
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Doctor Fraud |Always believe six|
|Mad Inventor & Purveyor of Pseudopsychology |impossible things |
| Weird Science At Bargain Rates |before breakfast. |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Where did Robinson Crusoe go | "On a double |
| with Friday on Saturday night?" - Al Jolson | date?" - Me|
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kathy Vincent
(This discussion, by the way, reminds me of Scott Elyard's .sig,
only part of which I can remember -- "But is it art?")
Thomas Armagost wrote:
: Upon an ordinary scrap of paper a sketch by Da Vinci or a sonnet by
: Shakespeare may be found. Why not a web page?
: The best cartoon ever drawn by James Thurber, in fact possibly the
: greatest cartoon in all history, a brilliant combination of art and
: text, was drawn by him on hotel stationery. In 1989, it was on
: display at the Royal Albert and Victoria Museum in London, part of a
: tour of the New Yorker's finest cartoons. I saw it there and then.
: Several columns of numbers he'd scribbled on the other side of the
: page, probably a balance of his trivial daily expenses, could be
: clearly seen through the paper.
Now _there's_ an excellent point ... Thank you, Thomas, for making it.
Perhaps a rewording of the question is in order. Not "are
websites art," but, rather, "can art be found on websites" or "is
there art to be found on websites"?
After all, canvas and paint are not, of themselves, art. Well,
generally speaking. I don't think of bricks as "art" either, but
I've seen them on display as art -- just lying on a floor -- in a
museum of modern art. No fancy design, no nothing. Just bricks.
And, of course, in the eye of a gifted photographer, bricks may
be or may become art -- all by themselves. And the electrons
that carry a website from its home to yours -- those electrons
are, to a physicist, a form of art ...
Oops ... Now we have to define what "art" is ... A much more
difficult problem. But before we can decide whether art is to be
found on websites, we have to know what art is: How do you find
something if you don't know what you're looking for? if you
won't know it when you see it? "I don't know much about art,
but I know what I like" or "I don't know much about art, but I
know it when I see it" ... Really? How will you know? "I just
want to be happy." How will you know when you are "happy"? How
is happiness manifested in one's life? Is it the same for
everyone? How is art manifested in the world?
I was auditing a graduate course in detective/whodunnit/mystery
fiction last spring. One of the questions: Is
detective/whodunnit/mystery fiction literature? First we have to
decide what literature is ... Who knows? It's not something
easily defined -- or, once defined, the definition is rarely
agreed upon by everyone. "We'll know it when we see it."
More like "some is and some isn't," and which some and whether
some is depends who you are and how you define your terms,
which definitions may not be universally agreed upon.
Everyone sees different things and sees them in different ways ...
To ask a unilateral question like that is to ignore the shades
of grey that exist in the questioner, in the definitions, in art --
in everything everywhere.
Which does not, however, mean the question is not worth discussing.
Not at all.
Keats, wasn't it, said, "Beauty is Truth and Truth is Beauty,
and that's all you need to know." Maybe. Maybe some people would
insist mixing a little passion with their Truth before they'd
label the concoction "Beauty." Maybe Truth is too "cold" a concept
in some ways to translate exactly, synonymously into Beauty.
--
Kathy Vincent
vinc...@wfu.edu
http://www.wfu.edu/~vincentk
Jerry Kindall
A. Hendricks) wrote:
>BTW, how about a thread on copyrights and web pages---what kinds of
>(possibly) copyrighted materials can you use? When do you need to get
>permission?
This gets tricky. What if you use an image like this:
<IMG SRC=http://www.other.com/picture.gif>
... in other words, retrieving a copy of a picture from someone else's Web
site and placing it into your page? You have copied nothing; you have
merely instructed the reader's browser to display a picture from another
server at the indicated location in the document -- perfectly valid HTML.
Yet the overall effect is that it LOOKS like you have copied the image.
This is considered rude not only because of the copyright issue, but also
because now every time someone accesses YOUR page the other guy's server
takes a hit, increasing the amount of bandwidth he needs (and in some
cases the price he pays). But is it illegal? And more importantly to
some, can you STOP people from doing it?
There have been lots of interesting discussions of this on the
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html newsgroup. It'd be a good place to
get background information (if rather technical).
>Elizabeth
--
Jerry Kindall (kin...@manual.com)
Manual Labor: We Wrote The Book!
http://www.manual.com/home/