“Because if the internet becomes one of your main sources of artistic nourishment, whether as a curator or a creator, you will starve some of the most pure and vital parts of yourself.”— Theremina, via everythinginthesky, via claytoncubitt
This pisses me off. Because this is equally true if you get all of your artistic nourishment from the novel, the art gallery, the television or the stage. But no one says that, because the internet is new, and therefore not artistically valid.
Three of the four people on this reblog chain in front of me are only known to me due to the internet. That’s the validity, the range… That’s why it’s my main source of information, art or otherwise. Would I suggest it’s the only source you need? Of course not.
But saying that my use of the internet as a (not THE, A) main source to learn about the world, to interact with art, wounds me somehow? You’re assuming I use the internet as a channel for things that don’t challenge me, never stepping outside of my comfort zone.
If you deny that a platform as powerful and varied as the internet can deliver art in a way that is nourishing to the self and the soul, I’m baffled that you’re here. This isn’t a sad little addition to the REAL world, to the gallery or the stage or the novel. The internet is real life, too.
Exclude any one of these things to your great detriment.
