Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

HTML: Is it Art?

CowboyNeal posted more than 11 years ago | from the cool-online-art-besides-superbad dept.

Graphics 309

joeljones writes "The New York Times (registration, yeah, yeah, yeah) has an interesting story about two artists who use HTML, Javascript, and other web technologies as their medium. Could be an interesting set of test cases for anyone writing a browser." While we're on the subject of artsy sites, I submit Zombo.com for your perusal. I believe it to be the only web site that claims the infinite is possible.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

oh my (3, Funny)

ergonal (609484) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806938)

What did ZOMBO do to annoy CowbowNeal THAT much?

Re:oh my (1, Interesting)

magead7 (575109) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806943)

Is slashdotting still an effective weapon even at 6 a.m. Eastern Time Zone (in the U.S.)?

Re:oh my (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5806956)

You know, there are people living outside the US. Actually, the majority of people living on this planet do not live there.

Re:oh my (2, Interesting)

magead7 (575109) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806998)

Yes, but what percentage of people who cause Slashdottings are from the U.S.? In addition, how many people from Asia and Australia visit Slashdot. It was an honest question to try to find out percents.

Re:oh my (1)

magead7 (575109) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807010)

Hmm, math would be a good thing to use for me. I guess it's more likelyt o be people from Europe on right now, in the late night. Which would mean more people than I had thought, but is it still nearly as many as in the U.S.?

Re:oh my (1)

itsme1234 (199680) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807050)

The question would be: how many people ARE in Australia.

Re:oh my (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807170)

Well I've just run a quick survey here and I can categorically state that 100% of people are from Australia and also that 100% of people read /.

Not sure if those stats are much help to you, but I do what I can.

Re:oh my (3, Funny)

Jade E. 2 (313290) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807018)

What did ZOMBO do to annoy CowbowNeal THAT much?

Go to the site, make sure your sound is on, hit F11 (Assuming you're using Phoenix or IE), sit back, and relax. In about 10 minutes one of three things will happen. Either you'll understand his annoyance, you'll go into a coma, or you'll be hooked for life.

understanding annoyance (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807091)

I feel like I've just been on the wrong end of a zen koan lesson.

Re:oh my (1, Insightful)

Radiantal (302895) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807027)

I waited 5 minutes to see t-shirts with Zombo.com logos and sh*t? Oh I need a life.... or rather someone else does too...

Re:oh my (1, Funny)

ergonal (609484) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807045)

FP AND +5! I really need to start drinking more often! Come on people, mod me down. It wasn't that funny, and it was really obvious. Let something interesting take the spot on the "Highest Scores First" sort order! Something like this [slashdot.org] .

Re:oh my (0)

ergonal (609484) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807128)

Whichever mod just did that, thank you!

Re:oh my (4, Funny)

Ozan (176854) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807088)

What did ZOMBO do to annoy CowbowNeal THAT much?


"Welcome to Zombocom!"

"This is Zombocom!"

"You can do anything... at Zombocom!"

"Anything at all!"

"The only limit is yourself!"

"Anything is possible... at Zombocom!"

"The infinite is possible... at Zombocom!"

"The unattainable is unknown... at Zombocom!"

I think it was letting Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf speak the introduction.

"There are no infidel Americans... at Zombocom!"

Html is art?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5806941)

Does that mean all the first post trolls can unionize?

computer code as art.. (4, Insightful)

Unominous Coward (651680) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806948)

I guess anything, including code can be artistic if it blends something technical with an art in a subtle way.

That's the whole idea behind poetry, at least. And computer code can be poetic [perlmonks.org] .

-1, Offtopic: (0)

HoneyBunchesOfGoats (619017) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806980)

Look at that poll on perlmonks.org! It's miles above the polls here at slashdot. What would it take to get such polls here?

Re:computer code as art.. (2, Informative)

Draigon (172034) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807060)

Wow! I forgot all about that site. Years ago I found a portal to those kinds of sites. If anyone found jodi interesting, check out some of these links. Be forewarned it might not be work safe, and there might even be missing sites because I haven't been to these sites in years.

http://www.s narg.net/
http://w ww.redsmoke.com/
http://w ww.fakeshop.com/
http://www .jodi.org/
http://www.d 2b.org/

If you're going to see any, I always liked superbad myself. http://www.superbad.com/

Re:computer code as art.. (links) (4, Interesting)

Draigon (172034) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807069)

(sorry for double post, should have previewed first, here they are linked)

http://www.once-upon-a-forest.com/ [once-upon-a-forest.com]
http://www.snarg.net/ [snarg.net]
http://www.entropy8zuper.org/ [entropy8zuper.org]
http://www.redsmoke.com/ [redsmoke.com]
http://www.absurd.org/ [absurd.org]
http://www.fakeshop.com/ [fakeshop.com]
http://snudd.sil.at/ [snudd.sil.at]
http://www.jodi.org/ [jodi.org]
http://www.superbad.com/ [superbad.com]
http://www.d2b.org/ [d2b.org]
http://www.silverserver.co.at/lia/ [silverserver.co.at]

zombocom (3, Funny)

selderrr (523988) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806949)

reminds me of the internet in its infancy, where we allready had the really big button that doesn't do anything [pixelscapes.com]

Re:zombocom (1)

quizwedge (324481) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807099)

Ah, but by the time it reloads the page, the page seems to "jump" so the mystery has been solved. The button DOES do something. (sound of heavenly music heard)

Infinite is possible... (-1, Flamebait)

MosesJones (55544) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806950)

Of course it bloody is... in maths and in theory. Nice advert for what I assume is a friend's site, but saying this is the only site that says the infinite is possible is

a) Rubbish
b) Rubbish

I know thats really only ONE reason but its such a big one I thought I'd say it twice (credits to Red Dwarf).

Infinite, indeed. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5806951)

"Click here to get the plugin."

Re:Infinite, indeed. (1)

KDan (90353) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806997)

I guess I could wait an infinite amount of time and it still wouldn't show up on this browser =P (linux/moz)


Art/medium? (4, Insightful)

six809 (1961) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806952)

Well canvas isn't considered 'art', nor is paint. HTML is just the tool used by the artists. What they come up with can easily be considered art. Examples [bbc.co.uk] .

Re:Art/medium? (0)

terrox (555131) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806985)

haha, yes that is a good reply. /me files that one down for future use. HTML != art.

Re:Art/medium? (5, Insightful)

khakipuce (625944) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807052)

It's strange that the "is it art" question really only ever comes up with visual arts. If someone gets up on stage and plays music from Stockhausen to Madonna, Bach to Kylie, no one asks "is it music", we might comment on it being good or bad, but no quesitons what it is.

One of the few distinguishing fetures of Visual arts is that they have no utility. Anything that has utility is craft, not art.

So if this has no utility and is put up by it's creators as art then yes, it is art. BUT the real question is IS IT GOOD ART?

Re:Art/medium? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807066)

I either have a serious case of deja vu, or this is ripped off from somewhere else.

Re:Art/medium? (5, Insightful)

TGK (262438) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807124)

I'll submit a few examples to the contrary.
  • Japanese and Chinese Writing
  • Japanese Swords
  • Advertisements
  • Fabrigee Eggs (many of which had utility
  • Pretty much anything by Frank Lloyd Wright

Art and utilitarianism are not necessarily mutualy exclusive. One might argue, instead, that art that actualy does something useful is more deserving of the word than much of what traditional is attached to the word.

dyslexia (1)

n3k5 (606163) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807145)

it's Fabergé [faberge.de]

Deliberately Distorting the Digital Mechanism (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5806953)

Deliberately Distorting the Digital Mechanism [nytimes.com]

While tinkering recently with one of the first personal computers from the 1980's, the digital artists Joan Heemskerk and Dirk Paesmans took a look at its technical tutorial. As Mr. Paesmans recalled, the on-screen guide delivered a reassuring message: "Remember, don't be scared. You cannot do anything wrong on this computer."

Since 1994 Ms. Heemskerk and Mr. Paesmans, collaborating under the name Jodi, have created a series of Internet-based artworks that deliberately cause computers to do the wrong thing. Viewers of these online works will find their screens filled with meaningless text and needlessly blinking graphics. Web-browser windows spawn smaller windows that race maddeningly around the screen. Links that appear to lead somewhere yield dead ends. Like a sci-fi thriller, this could be delightful, except that the underlying premise is of computers in complete control. A terrifying thought.

Beginning tomorrow Jodi will be the subject of a retrospective exhibition, "install.exe," at Eyebeam, a new-media art center in Manhattan. It was organized at Plug.In, a new-media art center in Basel, Switzerland, where it was shown last fall before it traveled to Berlin. The exhibit, which runs through June 14 at Eyebeam's gallery at 540 West 21st Street, contains nearly two dozen works. Many of them can also be viewed online at www.jodi.org, asdfg.jodi.org, 404.jodi.org, wrongbrowser.com and wwwwwwwww.jodi.org.

Prepare to be disoriented, if not stuck, in a World Wide Web gone awry. The Web is less than a decade old, so it might seem premature to declare that Jodi's works are classics of Internet art. Yet these artists were probably the first to use the Internet's own visual language to create what are in effect paintings of the Internet landscape. They did so by exposing the hidden computer code that makes Web pages do what they do, then altered its odd texts and strange symbols so that they became abstract art. They also took Web features and simulated what would happen if they ran amok. For people who assume that a computer is a benign dictator, these were reminders that the slightest transgression could turn it into a deranged despot.

Like Cezanne's late works in which the raw canvas is often part of the painting, Jodi's sites force viewers to become conscious of the Web's appealing surface and the digital mechanism that lurks below.

Annette Schindler, the director of Plug.In and the co-curator of "install .exe," said, "You think you know your computer, but really all you know is a surface on your screen." This state of affairs is based on the foolish hope that our technology, like our cars, will always operate properly, so that we never have to look at the oily, gritty bits under the hood. But Jodi subverts this notion. Visitors to the duo's Web sites, Ms. Schindler said, "immediately have the experience that Jodi wants to give them, which is, `What if everything goes wrong?' "

In questioning the Internet's rules, Jodi has had a huge influence on digital artists.

"They are the only Internet-based artists that have created a truly new aesthetic," said the male half of the anonymous digital-art duo known as 0100101110101101.org in a recent phone call. "They have influenced almost everything on the Internet that is related to art," he said. "It's like trying to find a painter who was not influenced by Michelangelo."

Ms. Heemskerk and Mr. Paesmans were resident artists at San Jose State University in the heart of Silicon Valley in 1994, at the start of the dot-com era. One day while working on a Web project they accidentally omitted a bracket from the computer code, and the resulting Web page was a messy jumble of text and characters. They liked what they saw and began to experiment.

Mr. Paesmans said they initially wondered if it was ethical to transmit the "wrong" code to others. "But we found out quite fast that when you make mistakes in this code, it doesn't affect anything other than the image it creates," he said. They began to put their works online, where the results were intensely perplexing to those expecting clear information and helpful links. They became even more interested in the Internet once they realized that they were "disillusioning the beliefs of people," Mr. Paesmans said.

They called themselves Jodi, a combination of the first two letters of their first names. Each new project attracted greater attention and not just in Internet-art circles. Their dark, impenetrable works contributed to the early Web's spirit of coolness. Ms. Heemskerk, from the Netherlands, and Mr. Paesmans, from Belgium, moved to Barcelona and gave few interviews, making themselves even more mysterious.

Like many digital artists they have started to work with computer games. But while others' projects typically keep a game's realistic setting while making minor modifications to its scenery or characters, Jodi is again making abstract art. For its version of the Wolfenstein game, for instance, the dog becomes a black square and a dwarf the white one. And in their adaption of the first Quake game, the viewer sees only a white screen and must navigate through the 3-D spaces on sound alone. In an art form where excess is the rule, Jodi has stripped games to digital skeletons.

All of these works, along with several recent game and video projects, will be shown in the "install.exe" exhibition. Installing screen-based work, usually viewed in private, in a vast public gallery like Eyebeam's will certainly be a different kind of challenge to Jodi, but it may also attract a larger audience.

Benjamin Weil, Eyebeam's curator, said that for most people the gallery was "an interface that's a lot more accessible than the Internet." But Jodi is still seeking fresh ways to disorient. Visitors who want to view the online works must carry one of the gallery's laptop computers to a foam-cube seat. When they open the computer, its screen shows a view from the seat, as though the computer were functioning as a live camera.

Tilman Baumgaertel, the exhibition's co-curator and the editor of its catalog, said Jodi's vision was "about the deconstruction of technology, the abuse of technology and looking for different opportunities within the technology."

Mr. Paesmans put it this way: He wants people to understand that they "have the freedom to be irresponsible in front of your computer."

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

Re:Deliberately Distorting the Digital Mechanism (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807011)

It's probably unnecessary to post NYT articles here, I think they can handle the load from /. users.

Re:Deliberately Distorting the Digital Mechanism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807026)

But can they handle all the fake logins [majcher.com] that ./ users will create just to view the article?

Great (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5806954)

The last thing we need is nerdy art fags.

Lets kill all the art professors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5806957)

Let's temper our enthusiasm with a little art school experience.

Just like new scientific theories sometimes aren't accepted till the old scientists die off, I suspect most art professors will continue having trouble with HTML+ as art.

OK, so I'm a tad bitter. Can you tell? A sure sign of artistic success being on its way for me, no doubt.

gimmie a break (5, Insightful)

automag_6 (540022) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806959)

Sure, I'll say it's art, in the same way I'll nod my head and agree when someone tries to convince me that it's a programming language. In my experience, if a person doesn't understand why HTML isn't a programming language, it's not worth my while to explain it, I'll just play along and know the truth. I recon if people start saying it's art, I'll adopt the same aproach. I'm sure there are people who'll flame me for this, but that's thier 2 cents, this, on the other hand, is mine. Mod me as a troll if you like, I just can't sell HTML as a programming language or art.

Re:gimmie a break (2, Insightful)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807049)

In my experience, if a person doesn't understand why HTML isn't a programming language, it's not worth my while to explain it, I'll just play along and know the truth.

Programming languages are instructions to be interpreted by a compiler of some sort, eventually resulting into machine code which can be executed.

HTML surely isn't a Turing complete programming language, but I would say one does program HTML in a sense. Not that I consider HTML a programming language as I do the around ten procedural and object oriented languages I know, but surely HTML is interpreted and indirectly turned into machine code just as Pyhton, Perl, Java, C, Assembler? Not that the result is a stand-program, but the result is your browser generating the machine code to display the page. Much like what a Java virtual machine does with an applet...

I guess it's like the term hacker. I don't see cracking as being equal to hacking, but I do recognize the fact that for many people that distinction simply doesn't exist. Why be so absolute?

Re:gimmie a break (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807168)

You are wrong.

Re:gimmie a break (-1, Flamebait)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807176)

You are wrong.

I might well be. But surely not as wrong as you are unable to back up your oppinions in any way.

Re:gimmie a break (1)

supertsaar (540181) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807068)

Well, this is obvious to me: Paint isn't art. Strings arent't music.

Re:gimmie a break (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807084)

"...thier 2 cents..."

I before E except after C ;)

Oh goody (1)

Koos (6812) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806960)

Now a certain type of web designers can call it art when they create sites that look awful in anything else then their browser on their screen.

Time for a title different from web designer that implies "Someone who can put accessible information on a website".

No! (1, Funny)

borgdows (599861) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806963)

HTML is not art!
If HTML is Art, then posting something 'Html Formatted' on Slasdhot is Art too!

Uhh (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5806965)

Who really cares about what this ass-clown Cowboyneal has to say? Post your personal internet friend links elsewhere, Dildo.

Thank you.

Re:Uhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5806974)

You, given that you are reading his website. How many hits does your website get? Dumbass.

Infinite is possible - proof! (3, Funny)

mccalli (323026) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806966)

while(1) {
fprintf(stdout, "Of course it's possible...\n"); }

Well, at least until the electricity runs out anyway. Or someone redirects stdout to /tmp. Or, or...

Well, it's nice theory anyway.


Re:Infinite is possible - proof! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807004)

Why not:

while(1) {
printf("Of course it's possible...\n");

Anyway, why the fuck does it keep on saying "Zombo com", it's "Zombo dot com".

Re:Infinite is possible - proof! (1)

mccalli (323026) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807023)

Why not: printf("Of course it's possible...\n");

No rational reason. It's a habit I fell into quite a while ago (where "quite a while ago" is defined as about fifteen years ago...).


Re:Infinite is possible - proof! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807139)

for (;;)
puts("Of course it's possible...");

HTML: Is it Art? (5, Insightful)

zonix (592337) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806970)

No. Is a pen or a pencil art? No.

HTML is a Hypertext Markup Language. :-)


Re:HTML: Is it Art? (4, Insightful)

mirko (198274) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806977)

You could also consider consider the Magritte approach, by putting a page like :
<H1>this is not ART</H1>

I personally like the pragmatic logic approach :
art is always composed of both an ethical and an esthetical aspect.
Should one be missing, the result would not be art.
Exemples :
  • Constructivism : 100% esthetic, 0% ethics
  • Abstract art : 0% esthetic (Have you seen Joseph Beuys piles of fat, in the Stuttgart modern art museum ?) 100% ethics.

Re:HTML: Is it Art? (1)

zonix (592337) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807032)


Have you seen Joseph Beuys piles of fat, in the Stuttgart modern art museum ?

No I haven't, but we had a moron here in Denmark who put a bunch of dead pigs on display at a museum - proclaiming it to be art. Of course, within a week or so they began to rot and stink, and people were guite pissed off. It caused quite a stir!

Also, another moron - artist? - had a wrecked bus (on it's side) and a couple of cars (with smashed windows, etc) put on display right in the middle of our most beloved old square, Kongens Nytorv in Copenhagen, right in front of the exclusive hotel, The Dangleterre, and The Royal Theatre. It took months before it was decided it was a bad idea.

Does that qualify as abstract? :-)


Re:HTML: Is it Art? (1)

mirko (198274) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807058)

Does that qualify as abstract?
Yep : it is conceptual rather than esthetical.
The method of creation of this conceptual art could however be art, it depends if the pigs'death or the bus wreckage were part of a choregraphy or not...
But in this case, we still agree : the choregraphy may be art, not the corpses.

Re: Christian Lemmerz (3, Interesting)

Carthag (643047) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807071)

I am from Denmark as well.

Christian Lemmerz is the guy who did the dead pigs. I forgot what the other guy was called.

Anyway, calling somebody a moron simply because you do not believe something to be art is a pretty cheap ad hominem. It's art because some people think it is. And he's not the only one to think of it as art, I reckon it's art as well.

The piece in question (with the dead pigs), called 'Scene', was about decay and the temporarity of life. Sure, the pigs are not art, but neither is a canvas and a bucket of paint. I personally find pieces like these very interesting. I really liked his Todesfigur and Gebeine.

But I digress, my point is, you can always find someone who don't think that a particular piece is art, so you can't write something off as not-art just because you think it's disgusting/irrelevant/stupid/insert term here.

Check out Dadaism, found art, and other kinds of offstream ways of expression.

Sure? (2, Funny)

jotaeleemeese (303437) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807074)

Can I borrow your aesthetics and ethics meter?

That objective absolute scale that you found, where did you find it?

The point I am really trying to make is better explained by the following neo-constructivist abstract post modernist expresion: bullshit.

Have a nice day.

Re:Sure? (2, Interesting)

mirko (198274) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807097)

Esthetics meter :
Have you read "Goedel Escher Bach" ?
In this book, Douglas Hofstadter defines language as "asynchronous crystals" : proof of intelligence, if you prefer.
Now, if you have a pile of fat or a dead pig, it'll be kinda hard to take it as someone's intended creation.
Hence the 0%.
If it comes with a sign that reads "Our sins", then, on the other hand, it might have a serious ethical meaning.
Now, also, if you see a perfect geometric figure on a sheet of paper, then it'll be esthetically meaningful : it has been worked by a human. But if it's called "circle", then, it has no meaning.

Of course, your mileage may vary but I hope you found some ethical meaning in my "bullshit".

Have a wonderful week-end.

Re:HTML: Is it Art? (1, Funny)

rosbif (71236) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807112)

I think Magritte would have said...
this is not HTML

Re:HTML: Is it Art? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807160)

the question was "HTML : is it art" :)

Its reminds me spectrum (2, Funny)

Kedder (529127) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806984)

I remember very similar pictures when my zx-spectrum hanged...:)

Maybe someday BSOD will be considered as an art?

art = comms | got links? (3, Insightful)

jago25_98 (566531) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806990)

to me art = communication,

just often experimental and two-way in what's usually seen one-way; i.e. painting. (because the viewer acts, sometime with WTF?! which is perfectly fine, artist may not care what message is seen as anyway)

got any impressive links for me?

Re:art = comms | got links? (1, Funny)

hemanman (35302) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807051)

Oh, so you mean XML is art then?


Re:art = comms | got links? (0)

gold collector (662968) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807077)

Actually ... art is the 'quality' of communication.

Worst of the Web (4, Funny)

Michael's a Jerk! (668185) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806991)

Future artists are advised to take a look at This Site [worstoftheweb.com] for direction... Enjoy.

ARRGH! Wrong Link! (3, Insightful)

Michael's a Jerk! (668185) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807017)

Sorry, I meant This Site [webpagesthatsuck.com] instead. The first link contains alot of crap.

'Webpages that suck' Shows that webpages CAN be art - bad art.

Erk? (1)

JanusFury (452699) | more than 11 years ago | (#5806992)

Nytimes.com is freaking out on me... did we actually slashdot the new york times? It said something about server errors and now i'm getting garbled pages and broken pages.

Re:Erk? (3, Funny)

elementik (622741) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807109)

Its Art.

Dupe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807005)

is it just me or does anyone else remember this story from a long time ago?

Rant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807012)

Jeez, all these people complaining about the subject line. Are Slashdotters now so lazy that they don't even read the summary anymore? I thought it was bad enough having to say RTFA.

Open System! (1)

billstr78 (535271) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807013)

The article refrences a site that is something between a crackers object of desire and an annoying javascript experiment gone wrong.

http://0100101110101101.org/ [0100101110101101.org]

What HTML? (3, Funny)

insin (579557) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807014)

How about an example of "why HTML could be considered to be art" which actually uses some HTML?

zomba.com only uses it to embed a flash movie - "Click here to get the plugin". This one belongs in the "post-html" gallery.

I can do anything at Zombo.com! (0)

wrexsoul (48981) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807030)

I wonder if the guy got tired of reading "Welcome to Zombo-com" in various voices...

HTML is just a medium (4, Insightful)

jolyonr (560227) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807035)

Just in the same way that you can take a piece of paper and paint a masterpiece onto it, or you can print a pizza leaflet onto it. The existence of pizza leaflets doesn't mean that paper can never be used for art. Jolyon

I don't get it (2, Insightful)

pubjames (468013) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807044)

Is this a joke? I just get some flashing blobs and nothing happens. Am I missing something?

Sound (4, Funny)

mike1086 (188761) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807057)

You need to get some sound dude...it came out in the eighties...man...you're way behind.

Yes (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807061)

You're missing the sound!

ASCII as Art (4, Funny)

notestein (445412) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807053)

I still prefer old school. ASCII as Art.

The Female Form [asciibabes.com]
Cinema [asciimation.co.nz]

Huh? (1)

Asterax (522761) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807054)

This sounds like a spin-off from the controversial, and old, topic: "Is computer generated/enhanced art, real art?"

Zombo.com (0)

gold collector (662968) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807070)

A more useless site I have never seen.

Arty websites (2, Informative)

supertsaar (540181) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807073)

There's a frequent poster here (forgot who) that has superbad [superbad.com] as his website URL. I kinda like it. Infinite clicks. Good with a beer om a late lonesome friday night.

Speaking of art (1)

Lord Fren (189373) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807080)

I know this is almost off topic..
But this was kinda freaky at first..
Start playing:
Space Manoevres - Stage One
by Sasha & Digweed
And then goto Zombo.com.

If you don't have it, well it's free on some Internet radio sites. (free to listen anyway)

Re:Speaking of art (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807121)

Into the void - black sabbath.
I thought I was hearing things...



Here's the thing... (5, Interesting)

ccbaxter (660318) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807081)

The question is not so much 'can HTML be art?', buy can something produced with HTML (or any other web technology for that matter) be art?

Among the web developer community there is a slightly condescending attitude to people who design for the web using tools such as Dreamweaver (real men code HTML by hand don't you know?), designers will maintain that they should be free to design with primarily visual tools only handling raw code to check for bugs. There is a difference between a designer and an artist not least in terms of intent. I know a lot of artists and designers as well as hardcore coders. What has struck me is that pure artists have more in common with coders in terms of personality and thought process and overall vision. Both types of people are good at abstract thought and holding a concept in their heads that they then translate into a finished work (getting them to explain these thought processes can be an...interesting experience to say the least). I've met a few coders who have been accomplished at some other creative endeavour, especially music.

None of this is to denigrate designers in any way, and many of them have similar attributes. But in terms of single-minded pursuit of an idea, my artist and coder friends are more similar to each other than they realise.

There are some supremely talented web designers out there who use tools that are primarily visual (as well as those who code by hand), but not many would say that what they produce is a work of art in the way that a pure visual artist such as a sculptor would.

I leave it to individual slashdotters to decide for themselves if any of the sites that proclaim themselves as works of art are indeed worthy of that status. For the record I am neither a designer, artist or a coder, so this is entirely based on observation. Maybe some other readers have a different perspective.

Flash sites are never art, by the way;)

Dude, where's my Karma?

great! (1)

the-build-chicken (644253) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807083)

Click now to enlarge your penis...artistically

The Best Designs (3, Interesting)

archetypeone (599370) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807086)

Checkout www.thebestdesigns.com [thebestdesigns.com] for some of the latest web art - ok so a lot of it is Flash based but there's some cool html/js stuff there too.

Re:The Best Designs (1)

archetypeone (599370) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807153)

And I forgot www.bakteria.org [bakteria.org]

zombo? (1)

autopr0n (534291) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807089)

There are far, far more artistic sites then zombo.com. Geez.

Honestly I don't even see why this is a question, Certanly page layout on paper is art, why wouldn't it be so on the web? There are lots of beautiful sites out there, both informative, and simply done to be pretty.

Re:zombo? (1)

squibix (602253) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807157)

>There are far, far more artistic sites then zombo.com

Indeed. Someone's alreday mentioned dextro.org [dextro.org] ; also check out turux.org [turux.org] which I think is by the same people.

But those are mostly Flash. There used to be a site at message.sk that had alot of actual html art, but there isn't now; but the person behind the message site also has a site at zden.localhost.sk [localhost.sk] that has some interesting stuff, such as this [localhost.sk] and this [localhost.sk] . And the of course there's always superbad.com [superbad.com] ... and I'm sure there are lots more besides; I hope I get to hear about some new ones from this story.

jodi v zombo (3, Informative)

friscolr (124774) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807093)

According to dns, zombo.com has only been around since 1999 but jodi.org has been there since 1995, and i remember first hearing about it in 1996. Also check out http://www.dextro.org/ [dextro.org]

As for html being used in art, that's what the second show at http://art.by.arena.ne.jp/ [arena.ne.jp] (1995) was all about. Plus some art shows have featured websites as part of their exhibitions for a while - nothing major that i can think of, but groups like http://entity.ummu.umich.edu/ [umich.edu] . Then there were (are? can't find link) the minimalist competitions - designing in under 5k pages - and the like. If you want pictures made from html then maybe my http://www.blackant.net/code/oth/img-html-src.html [blackant.net] will suffice.

I'm sure i'm missing plenty of other sites and competitions but it's only 7am in my TZ.

If we're talking art.... (2, Interesting)

gadders (73754) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807101)

I would suggest http://www.themanwhofellasleep.com [themanwhofellasleep.com]

Kind of abstract, but very good.

the question isn't "is it art?", it's "do I care?" (5, Insightful)

Vellmont (569020) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807106)

I honestly don't understand why people assign so much value to calling something art. It's as if calling something art assigns it to a higher plane where it can't be questioned.

I guess I wasn't all that impressed by the sites mentioned in the NYT article. IMO superbad.com is far more cool than the jodi sites. Futhermore superbad has been around for years, so I don't see how these people have created anything all that original or special. For those of you who don't know, superbad is a... surrealistic website where you don't really feel in control of the website since it's never really very apparent just how each page works. I'm sure there's many other people that've created strange websites like this as well.

As far as the "you're not in control of your computer" theme goes, there's lots of sites (mostly porn) that have all kinds of annoying javascript tricks to open up new windows when you try to kill the old window. Seems like that's the same idea as this. Sure, I guess the sites the NYT talks about are "art", but so is the tracing of my hand I did when I was 5. I think the NYT has missed the boat on this one, and perhaps should have done a bit more homework on what other people have done in this field.

oh, no, more artists... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807126)

"Everybody is an artist these days. Rock and roll singers are artists. So are movie directors, performance artists, make-up artists, tattoo artists, con artists, and rap artists. Movie stars are artists. Madonna is an artist, because she explores her own sexuality. Snoop Doggy Dogg is an artist because he explores other people's sexuality. Victims who express their pain are artists. So are guys in prison who express themselves on shirt cardboard. Even consumers are artists when they express themselves in their selections of commodities. The only people left in America who seem not to be artists are illustrators."
-Brad Holland, illustrator

I guess nobody has a real job anymore...

'Art' is a subjective term... (3, Insightful)

TrollBridge (550878) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807141)

Art cannot be defined for people, art (just like beauty) is in the eye of the beholder.

If someone can call the Virgin Mary covered in elephant shit 'art', I don't see any reason why HTML can't be.

Duh, of course it can be (4, Insightful)

Quila (201335) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807144)

Any method used by humans to express themselves can be a vehicle for art. How good that method is for conveying artistic talent is another matter entirely.

DeCSS as Haiku (-1, Offtopic)

Unominous Coward (651680) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807147)

Is this [cmu.edu] covered by the DMCA?

The art of salesmanship .... so yes ... (1)

adzoox (615327) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807151)

I beleive layout and understanding/exploiting simple html/javascript makes for a good page.

eBayMy about me page [slashdot.org] is a very good example. My eBay auction pages are simple with concise terms and instructions and ALWAYS a picture. I have nicely formatted paragraphs but not a fancy layout. I have my terms in diferent colors and not in some oversized font like I've been cheated a 1000 times. I accept common payment types and even uncoventional ones. It's my widespread "look and my "here for the long haul" look" that I think gets me biz.

I find places like Amazon very busy on their page, so I have a hard time buying from there, even if there's a good deal. Websites with a billion ads are a complete turnoff.

My home page ADZOOX [adzoox.com] while not perfect and being a work in progress is being layed out artiscally. I'm doing it all by hand (as I have my eBay ME page) - I think sites with a personal/photorealistic touch like also "get sales" just based on the professional look. [apple.com]

Anyone can program HTML and any good graphic artist can layout an illustration or magazine and a good writer can lay out a nice blog, it's the art of salesmanship (even if you're not selling product, but selling idea) that matters.

Define "art" (4, Insightful)

simong_oz (321118) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807154)

Something that has always fascinated me - can ayone provide a definition of "art". I mean the type of art that hangs in galleries and modern art museums and people argue endlessly about whether it really is art or is just plain stupid. The type of art that this is trying to classify HTML under?

The best one I've found is "the products of human creativity", but that still seems way too broad. Personally I feel that art should have no functional purpose, so something that has a purpose (a building say) can be beautiful, but I don't think it is art.

Infinite is possible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807159)

I hope they don't include an infinite number of concurrent HTTP connections in that statement!

ZOMBO.COM (1, Funny)

musicscene (453302) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807161)

I now think that ZOMBO.com sucked an IQ point or three from me sitting there waiting to see if he'd say anything different... sheesh.

Posted by CowboyNeal on Friday April 25, @05:01
from the cool-online-art-besides-superbad dept.
While we're on the subject of artsy sites, I submit Zombo.com for your perusal. I believe it to be the only web site that claims the infinite is possible.

this ownz zombo.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5807173)

http://www.tehgordon.org [tehgordon.org]


Yay, recognition! (1)

pbjones (315127) | more than 11 years ago | (#5807174)

Of course it's art, as is every other program and data set ever produced! I wanted to do an Art installation which started with a copy of the printed code and moving on to the running application on a computer.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?