Skip to content
1981
Volume 9, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 2052-6695
  • E-ISSN: 2052-6709

Abstract

The post-digital is a genre which, since the early 2000s, has gradually embedded itself within mainstream culture, saturating and influencing many faculties of knowledge, as a standardization of digital technologies: the aftermath of the Digital Revolution. The fine arts have borne witness to this cultural shift, readily accommodating post-digital thematics which have percolated into the field of painting and its continual expansion. The following article aims to define painting as a post-digital formalism by: chronologizing post-digital painting and its precursory technological and cultural developments to situate it within a wider historical canon; describing the translative capacity of contemporary painting (as an inherent feature of the ); and charting the shifting formal topography of painting resulting from the conflation of medium (the formal parameters of an artwork) and media (the networked, mass communicative status of an artwork). Finally, this enquiry synthesizes an expansion of characteristic post-digital formal traits termed herein as ‘Digital Factures’. Resultantly, an expanded that maps technology’s role within contemporary painting is situated, providing a new insight as to the definition of painting’s expanding processes and trends in an age after new media.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/jcp_00054_1
2024-06-04
2024-06-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bell, Julian (1999), What Is Painting?, London: Thames & Hudson.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Berger, John (1972), Ways of Seeing, London: BBC and Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bourriaud, Nicolas (2009), ‘Altermodern’, in N. Bourriaud (ed.), Altermodern: Tate Triennial 2009, London: Tate Publishing, pp. 1124.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bridle, James (2014), ‘The new aesthetic and its politics’, in O. Kholeif (ed.), You Are Here: Art After the Internet, Manchester: Cornerhouse, pp. 2027.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cascone, Kim (2000), ‘The aesthetics of failure: “Post-digital” tendencies’, Computer Music Journal, 24:4, pp. 1218.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Derrida, Jacques (1978), Writing and Difference (trans. A. Bass), London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Frew, James (2020), ‘Digital facture: Painting after new media art’, in C. Robinson (ed.), PhotographyDigitalPainting: Expanding Medium Interconnectivity in Contemporary Visual Arts Practice, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 5676.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Goldstein, Andrew M. (2016), ‘Curator Hans Ulrich Obrist on what makes painting an “urgent” medium today’, Artspace, 26 September, https://bit.ly/2MAW1La. Accessed 15 July 2023.
  9. Graw, Isabelle (2012), ‘The value of painting: Notes on unspecificity, indexicality and highly valuable quasi-persons’, in D. Birnbaum and I. Graw (eds), Thinking through Painting: Reflexivity and Agency Beyond the Canvas, Berlin: Sternberg Press, pp. 4558.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Graw, Isabelle (2016), ‘The value of liveliness: Painting as an index of agency in the new economy’, in I. Graw and E. Lajer-Burcharth (eds), Painting Beyond Itself: The Medium in the Post-medium Condition, Berlin: Sternberg Press, pp. 79102.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Greenberg, Clement ([1961] 2003), ‘Modernist painting’, in C. Harrison and P. Wood (eds), Art in Theory 1900–2000, Malden, MA and Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 77378.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Joselit, David (2009), ‘Painting beside itself’, October, 130:fall, pp. 12534.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kerr, Dylan (2017), ‘MoMA curator Laura Hoptman on how to tell a good painting from a “bogus” painting’, Artspace, 29 October, https://bit.ly/2N2YDzG. Accessed 15 July 2023.
  14. Kholeif, Omar (2018), Goodbye World! Looking at Art in the Digital Age, Berlin: Sternberg Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Krauss, Rosalind. (1977), ‘Notes on the index: Seventies art in America’, October, 3:spring, pp. 6881.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Krauss, Rosalind (1979), ‘Sculpture in the expanded field’, October, 8:spring, pp. 3044.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. McLuhan, Marshall ([1964] 2001), Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Rose, Arthur R. (pseud. Joseph Kosuth) (1969), ‘Four interviews’, Arts Magazine, 43:4, New York: Arts Magazine, pp. 2223.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Rottmann, André (2012), ‘Remarks on contemporary paintings perseverance’, in D. Birnbaum and I. Graw (eds), Thinking through Painting: Reflexivity and Agency beyond the Canvas, Berlin: Sternberg Press, pp. 914.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Volli, Ugo (2008), ‘The screen: “general equivalent” of contemporary art’, in G. Celant and G. Maraniello (eds), Vertigo: A Century of Multimedia Art, from Futurism to the Web, Milan: Skira, pp. 26368.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/jcp_00054_1
Loading
/content/journals/10.1386/jcp_00054_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): digital; expanded field; facture; gesture; medium; new media; technology; translation
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error