By: Margaret Stapleton
The second row of Ted Gioia’s Cultural Bondage chart says, “Web users obsessively scroll through images online, but… art museum attendance is down, especially at large premier institutions”. This statement is claiming that people have started consuming art through social media rather than at large institutionalized art museums. This has happened because people are nowable to curate their own art collection online. Through social media people can be fed content that is chosen specifically for them, therefore there is no need for someone to go to a fine art museum. People are now more inclined to look at a personalized art collection online than pay an institution to see art that they deemed worthy.
I believe that this recent trend is a good thing. Social media allows for tailored content to pop up on the users feed which means people can be more unique by viewing art that aligns with their tastes. A large institution like an art museum is taking specific pieces and telling their audience that they should like that piece. However, social media is doing the opposite by allowing people to figure out what they like on their own and create their own appreciation for art. I think that this trend will only continue to grow over time and more and more people will start curating an online art gallery for themselves. I also think that more apps will be created for the sole purpose of allowing people to express themselves through art without any allegiance to corporate institutions.
For example, there is an app called VSCO that is specifically made for posting photos that you want in your gallery. The gallery is made up of photos that you take and post on the app along with pictures from other users that you repost. This allows for you to build a unique collection of pieces. This app is avoiding institutions because it does not show any likes or followers counts and does not turn posting on social media into a competition. This app is truly used for the purpose of creating your own collection of things that you find beautiful and the art that you create. Another popular app that does not rely on an institution to force its definition of art, is Pinterest. This app allows you to create boards filled with different things that are beautiful to you. Beauty means something different to every person and Pinterest does a wonderful jobof allowing someone the opportunity to find that beauty. An art museum is not able to offer the same experience because its gallery is filled with pieces that they are trying to convince us are important.
Social media is becoming a common source of art for people. This is because it is made up of a personalized feed for each user who has a different definition of beautiful art. Overall, this is making looking at art a more enjoyable experience for people. The institutionalized art museum is not as popular as they used to be.
I completely agree with what you said about the use of social media. I think that the influx of social media in our world has allowed for more people to experience art than before. I think that this is also in part because some people don’t have access to art installments and galleries as much as they do the internet. High quality scans of works of art as also allowed more people to experience art through the screen in a seemingly in person manner. Overall I agree with what you have written about in your blog post and find your takes very interesting.
Blog post 3 by Marshall Knight
Ted Goias’s piece about the new cultural lines becoming more blurred in society mentions the various facades of art representation or lack thereof. The issue from his chart I have chosen to address is the fact that web users compulsively scroll through images online, but museum attendance is low when pertaining to larger institutions. The implications of this issue stem not only from the advancement of technology but also from the creation of short-form content that can give the user an experience in short, digestible bites ranging from videos of never-before-seen places to pictures of artifacts that one would need to pay to see in a museum. The easy access, as well as the wide collection of historical artifacts and destinations, eliminate the hassle, cost of transportation, and awe of what could be shown in any museum. For example, there are even VR headsets that can place the user right in a historical landmark. Another contributing factor is likely the impact of COVID-19. Covid made even more online material as far as history and art and made for a more introverted society that is more oriented upon the comfort of the home. With apps that deliver food, groceries, and basically anything within reason to one’s door, the necessity for human interaction and connection is negated, as well as with art. Regarding whether the trend is positive or negative, there are pros and cons, as there are to every trend. Some pros are that it gives those without the means, ability, and time needed to travel to museums and see art and scope into the beautiful, never-before-seen world that previously would have been accessible without the use of technology. This allows more communities to become invested and edited when pertaining to all facades of art, not just art or history showcased in museums and other specified venues. As far as the negative implications of this trend, Most seem to stem from the lack of social and human interaction with the art and those in the museum. It cuts out cause for conversation and interpretation due to the short format that is primarily presented on the internet. This can cause negative impacts as far as decreased necessity for interaction and a societal unity and connection that is again ed through seeing art in its physical glory. This can create a less educated society due to the short-form format and echo chambers that dictate what one interacts with and sees online, limiting the scope of one’s arthritis experience. As far as where the trend is going, with the ever-increasing advancement of technology and the short-form format, it seems that the lessened interactions with museums and larger institutions will be further diminished. This could have dire consequences for the preservation, conservation, and importance of the art world as a concept. Without the physical interaction with the art, the need for its protection could quickly become obsolete, thus creating a further division in social interaction due to short-term content that is viewed exclusively online. This could create a society without self-expressionism and art altogether eventually if the trend reaches an extreme.