IRC-Galleria

Art as we know it has existed for a few hundred years and gone through various socio-historical changes -- now, we are often talking about the end of history in various contexts, art included. During the past few decades contemporary art has undoubtedly experienced certain ideological and formal changes, which have a direct connection to technology and the above-discussed concept of representation. About hundred years ago, modernism famously aimed to make art less elitist and more accessible for anyone by proto-conceptualizing art through manifestos and movements, attacking towards the classical, back then traditionalized understanding of art. Exhibition of art shifted from bourgeois salons to the white cube, which has remained as the dominant form of exhibition space until the contemporary times -- elitism was not wiped out, but it took a different disguise. Also postmodernists were concerned about somewhat similar topics, but whereas the US became the centre of art, art became more complex and less accessible to the general public partially because of the risen importance of art theory. At the latest then, concepts such as representation (simulation), originality and connectivity have been under constant discussion and argumentation.
As the internet has become a part of the ‘real’, online artworks and exhibitions have become significant parts of fine art, challenging its historical and institutional tradition in a completely unseen manner. Domenico Quaranta writes, similarly to the views of Hito Steyerl (see chapter 2): “Art takes place in a playground where the internet exists as a component part, as is the case on any other level of our lives. Simply put, the relationship between reality and its online mirror has changed to the point where the real and the digital have merged into a single thing.” (Cornell & Hartel, 425) Boris Groys compares the effect emergence of the internet has had in arts to the invention (and popularization) of photography roughly a century ago: ”Instead of reproducing and representing images of nature, art came to dissolve, deconstruct, and transform these images. The attention thus shifted from the image itself to the analysis of image production and presentation. Similarly, the internet made the museum’s function of representing art history obsolete. Of course, in the case of the internet, spectators lose direct access to the original artworks—and thus the aura of authenticity gets lost. ” (Groys, 2013; pg. 18)
Whereas the so-called ‘flatness’ was once a popular and celebrated quality in early postmodern art and especially painting, (in)famously pushed forward by Clement Greenberg and his followers (Dix, pg. 4), the term has now made its return into the core of contemporary art. “The digital image is supplanting the art object. All works, regardless of their material constituents, are flattened, scaled down to several hundred pixels. Consequently, the digital photographic image can be understood as the homogenizing, ubiquitous medium of our era.” (Abrams, pg. 1) At the same time, the function of the gallery space (white cube) is transforming: it is no more the dominant space for viewers to see the exhibition, but it provides a necessary, institutionalized context and a “photographic backdrop” for the online deliverance of the exhibition. (ibid, pg. 2-3) Natalya Serkova, the co-founder of Tzvetnik, a popular internet platform for exhibiting art, refers to Abrams’ findings about contemporary art and poses certain questions regarding the ‘actual existence’ and documentation of physical, white-cube exhibitions, which we encounter daily in social media, with a reference to the development of photo editing programs: “... are you sure that were you to step by the gallery at any given moment, you would be able to see the show in its actual physical form and in exactly the form and the shaper in which you beheld it on your computer screen?” (Serkova, pg. 1) She finds that the virtual spaces used to (re)present the art objects are becoming more real than the physical ones, but as well generalizes them to be less informative and more unreliable. (ibid, pg. 5) Ultimately and perhaps not surprisingly, she states that “The best of these images join the class of Internet memes, and their reproduction is enhanced and prolonged in time.“ (ibid, pg. 6)
In the past few years, websites such as Serkova’s Tzvetnik (http://tzvetnik.online), promoting experimental artistic practice, as for instance the so-called off-site shows, has become an important internet platform especially for the younger generation of artists, who do not necessarily have much experience, contacts or recognition in the art world. The featured exhibitions are often held outside of the traditional white cube-spaces and other institutional sites, making site-specificity a central part of the integrities of the exhibitions. In Tzvetnik’s case, exhibition documentation is the most important matter regarding the accessibility of the featured art pieces; some of the featured exhibitions were not necessarily open to the public or easily approachable, but the representations of them are made approachable on the internet. Because the platform is easily accessible and trendy in the post-internet artistic sphere, getting featured on Tzvetnik can be even considered as more valuable than having an exhibition in a traditional gallery space.
Contemporary artists such as Tilmann Hornig and Paul Barsch are inspiring and as well vanguarding examples of the ‘off-site phenomena’; they often hold exhibitions in spontaneous spaces, as for example in a moving limousine (ATPDiary, pg. 2) and then circulate the documentation photographs on the internet. The artists created a web-based platform called New Scenario, which exhibits artworks in the same manner; the documentation becomes the new original. In their words: “The online exhibition can practically last forever. The New Scenario platform is more like an archive where one can always go back to and watch a show. [...] The physical installation, that what used to be the exhibition becomes the production site and what used to be the documentation becomes some sort of exhibition. It’s far more complex than that, but in easy terms there is this shift. The production lasts half a day, the exhibition can be on forever.” (ibid, pg. 4)
Somewhat similarly to the ideas of Tilman Hornig and Paul Barsch, a notable artist creating works based in the virtual environment is Martin Kohout. However, some of his early projects, such as “Watching”, consisting of hundreds of webcam videos, uses Youtube as its exhibition platform and as a point of reference instead of websites specifically designed for showcasing art. In all of the videos, the viewer sees Kohout staring at his computer, watching different videos on Youtube and reacting to them. The titles of the videos give the viewers direct information about what Kohout is watching and the sounds in the background come from the videos he watches, giving the viewers an index and proof of his action. Whereas he uses a nickname ‘martin0kohout’ and reveals his ‘real’, offline identity, he gives the viewers a certain kind of image of himself virtually, and at the same time puts himself into a vulnerable position -- anyone can comment on them behind a nickname, without revealing their identity. The project plays with Youtube’s algorithm: Kohout’s videos pop up when the Youtube users are searching for the original videos he watches in his videos; not surprisingly, some of his videos have thousands of views and dozens of hateful comments. However, because his Youtube profile has a link to his website, it becomes clear that the profile is an art project, which keeps on going through constant deterritorialization through the actions made by other Youtube users. Nonetheless there would be no more new content added by Kohout to the profile, the social media as an exhibition platform attracts other users to give the videos new meanings.