Art110 Is Full Of Hackers!!!
This week’s project seemed to be confusing and full of irony. So many people only answered the questions and did not give any reaction or meaning to what they wrote. It was very disheartening because i was looking forward to the reactions.
Also, there were a lot of people who spent their time talking about their “why i hate Eva and Franco”. Last time i checked, that wasn’t what P4 was about. I appreciate that they gave us their opinion but besides that, couldn’t they have given us a “why Eva and Franco did what they did”
Another thing that was painful to read was the spelling mistakes. People, it is EVA & FRANCO, not “Franko” or “Frcanco”. Although…Franco might appreciate it. He might use it as his next alias!
It was also interesting to see people’s view on the University Library vs. Starbucks Library debate. For the papers i read, the results turned out as follows.
It’s funny how over 80% of people think it should not be named Starbucks Library when everyday we are exposed to places like the Staples Center and the Honda Center. Only some people go into the library to study and a huge portion of the people that go into the library don’t go there for the books. It’d be interesting to see what portion of the 88% of people who voted no, actually go to the library for the books.
I think the most ironic thing i found in this project is when people practically wanted to slap the cuffs on Eva and Franco because they were stealing art. I think it’s safe to say that half the papers i read described Net.Art as “a Post-Modern Avant-Garde website”!!! Now I may be wrong here but there are a couple of possibilities as to why that is. 1. half the class got together to do their P4 and they decided to phrase it this way or 2. they all copied that line out of the book. It sounds to me like half of 11a learned a little more than what Hacktivism is. I’m almost certain these are the same people who wanted to call the cops on Eva and Franco.
The best advice i can give for when the class reads Chapter 2 is to use your own words when talking about the reading.
“Eva & Franco are very brave in my opinion because they also exposed themselves, quoting “privacy is stupid”. Without any limits they let the world know what they were doing and up too. Their project Life Sharing made them no longer know what was real or not, what is private or public, their aim was to be one with the computer and be dispersed through the internet.”
“In my opinion these two need to be booked and thrown in jail and then they can have fun creating art on the cell walls. Though I hate to admit it, I do feel as if their “art theft” does say something about art. The two of them demonstrate how art does not only have to be appreciated by those who are sophisticated and does not have to be sold to those who have money. Art should be appreciated and affordable to E V E R Y O N E.”
“Quaranta writes that “reality is not something fixed and unchangeable, but exists only in our perception. Manipulating that perception…means altering reality.” Eva and Franco don’t consider themselves to be artists, and maybe they’re not. Perhaps they’re more akin to modern day philosophers. Either way, there is no doubt that their works have radically changed the definition and meaning of both art and reality – at least for this writer.”
“Now I would be lying if I said that like many, their shinanigans didn’t tick me off or strike a chord of irritation. But in hindsight you realize thats the brilliance of it all and you certainly aren’t one to judge them for it. I mean invoking such a strong reaction out of others, well thats the whole purpose. Why stage such horrendous deaths similar to images that can be found on sites like rotten.com? Why fake the joy of an ended war to so many people? Why point out the hypocrosies of top tier private corporations and mass media?”