Translation Results Requested Through Conyac Made Public

In a Post-Internet society we find that most of all our art experiences are mediated online, as an art existing through various forms of digital documentation. If all Post-Internet artists have one thing in common it is that all their artwork is digitized and may be regarded as existing in immaterial formats as immaterial entities, regardless of intention. However, a conflict can be observed from these commonalities: certainly not all digitized, immaterial artworks have the same intentions. While all contemporary art may very well be immaterialized online and equalized in this vein, it is because each artist utilizes these platforms so differently, for different purposes and with different agendas that conflicting notions of display emerge. If we follow these conflicts, what we arrive at is an art that is digitized through conversion and an art that is digitized from inception. The former would include art objects that have been digitally documented, and the latter would include websites, digital images, videos, sound pieces, etc., essentially all media that doesn’t require exhibition outside one’s own private computing space; an art strictly created on the computer (or through digital technologies) meant for viewing on the computer (or projection, monitor, etc.). This type of art likely regards the gallery context display of itself as an ornamental one, unnecessary for the experience of such works. There is a difference then, in an art that chooses to exist outside of a browser window and an art that chooses to stay within it; that continues to stay digitized and immaterial. This difference also means recognizing the distinct polarities between online and offline art models and the translations that occur from one space to the other. It is here a potential severance between participants exists and as such, ultimately comes down to the philosophies and politics of the artist: between the traditional and the ideal.