The Living Thing / Notebooks :

New media art

My working definition:

Art made using any medium \(X\) such that in most art schools, the Department of \(X\) is less than 50 years old.

Alternative definition:

Anything that science fiction of the 1930s to 1980s hypothesized we’d be doing In The Future, and we finally got around to doing it.

or

Stuff that is hard to get funding for because it looks suspiciously like video games, perhaps because it is video games.

See generative art for my personal favourite strand thereof.

For an alternative perspective, let me excerpt Near Future Laboratory’s criteria for new media art (from 2008), who claim the indicators of new media art are that:

Degentrified: Dirty New Media

Regine Debatty interview: Jon Satrom, conversation with a bug maker and tamer:

I like mobilizing the term “Dirty New Media” because there’s a self-awareness to it. It seems like–at the turn of the century–the term “New” Media began to gentrify the various networked-neighbourhoods of: net.art, software art and other dynamic cybercultures. Areas of digital expression/dissent/engagement that I found to be super inspiring and exciting were crystalizing and becoming codified. A “Dirty” New Media starts with the fact that, by using media in the first place (old && new), we are already compromised by the systems/conventions/resolutions of the media. Tagging these genres as simply “New” places one in an uncritical masturbatory state of expectation for the “next”.[…]

Groups like PaperRad and Beige were using the term “dirt style” to describe cultural and technical dumpster-diving–which gently poked at issues of obsolescence, pop-trends and nostalgia. […] Dirty New Media recognizes that the entire system is unstable. It’s raw, honest, and celebrates the rough-edges, the raw bits, the exposed wires and glitches inherent to the systems that rule major aspects of our lives.