Douglas David and the temporality of digital art.

Searching for references, I arrived into a book of Santiago Sierra.

Between the pages, I found a piece of paper, it said

I though it would be a project from a student. Where he or she leaves these small pieces of advertising as a teaser in the library, one of the places where more students go.

I opened the browser and wrote the link. My suprise was that was in sale.

Screen Shot 2014-01-20 at 16.31.04

An error? an unfinished project? or was it just the first part, without any answer at the end?

Usually, when an url doesn’t exist, it even opens. Try with

Screen Shot 2014-01-20 at 16.42.57

So, if the link redirects into a business page, it means that it has been previously bought by someone. There was actually something in that url, but now it’s gone.

Few weeks before, I read an article about the restoration of an old work of Douglas Davis. Code has changed as well as the protocols of the Internet. Now the Whitney Museum is restoring one of his most famous artworks: The World’s First Collaborative Sentence.

douglas davis collaborative sentence

That makes me think that in digital art, there’s a question of time. It’s nature is ephemeral, due to the changes surroundingdo us. The piece of art doesn’t rot, but its environment evolves, making the piece of art “unreadable” for our current technologies.

Is the nature of “the digital” ephemeral?



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: