I’ve always had a secret theory. Secret, because saying it out loud makes me sound like a philistine… And theory, because I’ll never be able to prove it. But here goes.
*Whisper*
Most people who say they love art galleries, don’t really love art galleries.
No, not you, you are a sophisticated culture vulture who fully appreciates the gallery experience… I’m talking about other people… obviously.
But there is something forced about the experience. Grand minimalistic spaces, eerily quiet and serious, adorned with art that demands you admire and appreciate it all right here, right now, immediately, before you leave and never see it again.
But for most people, for most of time, art galleries have been the way we get to see and interact with art. Can you see where I’m going with this?
*Rustles papers*
Art has now been plugged into the internet.
What was previously a flat relationship between creator and audience is now something multidimensional. Art has become social. Social in the sense of social media and social networks, not social in the sense of ‘Gm say it back’. Anyone who’s spent more than five minutes in an artist’s discord or hung out on spaces will appreciate the social nature of NFTs. But it goes beyond the literal sense of social and into the very heart of what web 3.0 allows an artist to do.
In the same way that media went from a flat model of producer -> consumer, social media became multi faceted, inviting consumers to become participants rather than mere observers. Social art is no different.
Do projects contain art, or are they art themselves?
Great question. Thanks for asking. It’s a mistake to view an NFT project as merely a wrapper that contains the ‘real NFT art’ within. There is a strong case to be made that some NFT projects do not just contain many pieces of art within, but are constantly evolving meta artworks themselves. Evolving in real time, a manifestation of artist and community symbiosis.
One example of how this plays out can be seen in Ghxsts. Early drops were plagued by gas wars which subsequently became a community meme (or community lore if you want to be fancy about it). Artist Gxng Yxng then commemorated this meme/ lore by working into a piece within the collection. Artists who engage with their communities can bring those interactions into their work in a way that is very difficult to do in more traditional mediums.
Or you could look at Unstable Kido’s ‘combo’ feature within his Unstable Youth project where holders can combine two items, for the Kido to create a third bespoke one. While the artist creates the final asset, it is the collector and their decisions that impact that final artwork which is minted permanently into the collection.
Collector decision making directly impacts the collection.
This symbiosis between creator and community is new and unique function of ‘social art’ and one that speaks to a new medium evolving in front of our eyes.
Even more fine art skewing projects such as Art Blocks contain some collector/ artist interaction - in this case through the collector interacting with a contract during the minting process with generates an artwork from the artist’s code. The collector’s interaction with the contract generatse a piece of work that the artist cannot fully foresee.
But the artist doesn’t even have to be involved with the community for social art to thrive. Damien Hirst’s ‘The Currency’ is a community game from which the artist is entirely absent. Releasing 10,000 dot painting NFTs into the world and forcing collectors to make a choice between keeping the NFT (and burning the physical) or vice-versa. Collectors are forced into an interesting and unpredictable game theory, do they base their decision on personal preference, or do they base their choice on supply mechanics to end up on the ‘scarcer’ side of the divide.
It’s a choice that will drive some… don’t say it, don’t say it, don’t say it… dotty.
Flat art is dead. Long live… whatever comes next.