From Net Art to Post-Internet Art: The Cyclical Nature of Art Movements

Abstract

It makes sense to look back at the experience of net art in the 1990s. This was an era of innocence, eagerness and heroes of a kind, when net art works as art were brand new. In the 1990s, art had to be brought to the internet, settled there and only then was it possible to see how the environment influenced the content, whereas in the current post-digital and post-internet era, the internet environment is like nature: it surrounds us. The most significant names were Alexei Shulgin, Olia Lialina, Jodi.org, Vuc Ćosić, Graham Harwood and Heath Bunting, and the theoreticians were Tilman Baumgärtel, Josephine Bosma, Geert Lovink, Pit Schultz and others. The brightest star was Shulgin, the author of the fictitious birth story of the term “net.art”. I am discussing work of a great emotional potential by Estonian Laur Tiidemann “Piano” (2000). How to characterize artistic trends in context of following terms: post-internet art, post-digital, post-media? I am drawing sketchy development curve from net art to post-internet art. The critical voices on net art were heard since its birth. In 1997 I interviewed Lev Manovich, Geert Lovink, Andreas Broeckmann and Alexei Shulgin, tentatively touching upon the emerging trend. The rising “wave” was clearly perceived. I am discussing terms: post-media, the post-media condition, Mainstream Contemporary Art (MCA) and New Media Art (NMA). The last ones as they were proposed by Edward Shanken in an article in 2010 and dicussed during Art Basel in 2010 between the curators Nicolas Bourriaud and Peter Weibel. Finally I am diving into list of post-internet art definitions to ask a question about new media trends in context of the history of last 25 years.