News of the second phase of...
We are delighted to announce that we have won an AHRC standard grant of £680,000 to enable us to continue this project from summer 2015 until the end of 2018....
We are delighted to announce that we have won an AHRC standard grant of £680,000 to enable us to continue this project from summer 2015 until the end of 2018....
On Monday 12 May 2014 Dr Giuliana Pieri met with two highly experienced teachers of Italian, Carmela Amodio Johnson and Barbara Romito to talk about their experience of interdisciplinarity in the classroom in a...
One of the key questions of the project relates to the ways in which interdisciplinarity in both theory and practice can inspire new patterns of teaching. Our collaboration with teachers...
The 2013 conference of the Association for the Study of Modern Italy, which took place on 22 and 23 November at the Institute of Modern Languages Research, London, put in...
The interest in taking interdisciplinary and interartistic approaches to Italian cultural figures continues, as a new project is announced on Luigi Ghirri: “Viewing and writing Italian Landscape: Luigi Ghirri and...
On the occasion of the last SIS Biennial Conference (Durham, 7-11 July), I organized a panel entitled “Italian transmedia culture: stories and storytelling across media” which included papers presented by...
Giuliana Pieri, in her paper on “Vision and Visuality in Italian Studies”, explored a surprising blind spot in the current field of Italian studies: the interdisciplinary field of Visual Studies....
Before the radical changes to the languages curriculum that began in the late 1980s, the study of literature and the language required to read it were the unique focus of...
Interdisciplinarity is everywhere seen as normative, necessary, and part of what we do, and need to do, as academics.It’s good, isn’t it, to bring in documentaries when we teach history?...
Experiment/Experience Pierpaolo Antonello’s contribution to the third Interdisciplinary Italy Workshop held at University College London, Saturday, 11th May 2013, can be accessed here: experimentexperience powerpoint ExperimentExperience paper
Fotografia circa 1968 I focus on the chiasmus that occurred between art, and photography in particular, around 1968 in Italy. By then artists had begun to creatively use photographic documents,...
Music/ theatre/ virtuosity: Berio, Berberian and Eco at the Studio di Fonologia Dr Steve Halfyard examined the work Luciano Berio did involving language with Umberto Eco and Cathy Berberian at...
In 1986, the Venice Biennale gave much attention to a renewed interest in the relationship between art and science: a thematic umbrella under which the latest developments in the field of communication technology were featured. Nonetheless, exhibition settings and layouts resulted in difficulties in viewer’s interpretation and experience. Curatorial models for new media art were a concern for museum and gallery curators, and the experimental aspects of both the artwork and how it was proposed caused an uneasy response from both the public and critics. Artist, critic, and art historian Gillo Dorfles, warned “not to confuse the technological equipment with the artistic result.”
The approach to new media art was insecure, due in part to the early relationship between communication technology with private industries and military technology, and in part to the intrinsic interdisciplinarity of new media, which made it difficult to categorize. As noted by Maria Grazia Mattei, at the beginning of the 1980s the “official culture was totally disinterested in new artistic expressions and in the use of the computer outside of the sphere of labour.” Further, many critics, art historians and curators interpreted new available technology simply as tools that marked a continuation of the long relationship between art and science. This was indeed the approach of the Venice Biennale in 1986. At the same time, as originally suggested by the exhibition Information held at the Museum of Modern Art in New York in 1970, new media art had been included in the realm of conceptual art. However, such a definition might have prevented a committed study of new media art in relation to its medium contingency and its interdisciplinarity. In those same years, new media art curators, artists and activists, were convinced that these newly available tools marked a paradigm shift and had a greater impact on artistic practices.
Their approach found a voice in events such as the Electronic Art Festival of Camerino, a joint venture between the public university of Camerino, in the region of Marche, and tech-companies interested in the potentialities of employing new technologies in art. The annual festival ran from 1983 to 1990. Thanks to the collaboration with the private technology industry, the festival was able to fund experimental work such as that presented by artists Franco Angeli, Alighiero Boetti, and Giulio Turcato in 1984. Even though, as noted by scholar Francesca Gallo, the atmosphere around newly available technology was permeated with words such as ‘Renaissance’ or ‘Electronic Resurgence,’ due to the more prominent position of those who embraced the non-medium-contingency-approach, and a recalcitrant attitude towards working with younger artists, these experiences were at the mercy of events with a relatively short life span or that could not guarantee, or have not planned for, a proper presentation and conservation of the work on display. If exhibited in larger contexts, new media art work remained permeated by a halo of uneasiness; if exhibited in dedicated festivals and venues, artists and curators were accused of producing “initiatives […] meant for a minority of elitists.” [1] This conundrum was resolved once information technology started to permeate the artist studio to such an extent that it was no longer possible to push it back.
[1] Lettera di Lola Bonora a Mario (Convertino?) Archivio Centro Video Arte, U-TAPE ’86, 1986, Fasc. 585