视频艺术的根本可及性(对听觉人而言)

IF 0.1 4区 艺术学 Q3 Arts and Humanities
Emily Watlington
{"title":"视频艺术的根本可及性(对听觉人而言)","authors":"Emily Watlington","doi":"10.5749/futuante.16.1.0111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The implementation of video as an artistic medium is often described as motivated by radical ambitions toward art’s accessibility. Yet when these works are displayed in museums, they seldom include closed captions necessary to make their content accessible to deaf/Deaf audiences. Historic works of video art are thus often not accessible, as it remains taboo to alter an “original” work of art by adding captions. This logic privileges the work’s original aesthetic experience over its accessibility in spite of the fact that (1) many works of historic video art were first, or additionally, shown on television, where closed captions are required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and (2) such works are almost never shown in their original format anyway. When spirits of radical access are claimed yet closed captions are not provided, a message is sent about who counts as “everyone” when art is meant for all. This article will examine the aversion to captions when displaying historic works of video arts in museums, consider the rights and responsibilities of video artists and curators, and, ultimately, ask that we rethink our aesthetic (and thereby ethical) paradigm which privileges faithfulness to an “original” over accessibility. Ultimately, I insist that captioning embodies the spirit of access that motivated so many artists to use video in the first place, and museums should preserve this spirit rather than faithfulness to an “original.”","PeriodicalId":53609,"journal":{"name":"Future Anterior","volume":"17 9 1","pages":"111 - 121"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Radical Accessibility of Video Art (for Hearing People)\",\"authors\":\"Emily Watlington\",\"doi\":\"10.5749/futuante.16.1.0111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:The implementation of video as an artistic medium is often described as motivated by radical ambitions toward art’s accessibility. Yet when these works are displayed in museums, they seldom include closed captions necessary to make their content accessible to deaf/Deaf audiences. Historic works of video art are thus often not accessible, as it remains taboo to alter an “original” work of art by adding captions. This logic privileges the work’s original aesthetic experience over its accessibility in spite of the fact that (1) many works of historic video art were first, or additionally, shown on television, where closed captions are required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and (2) such works are almost never shown in their original format anyway. When spirits of radical access are claimed yet closed captions are not provided, a message is sent about who counts as “everyone” when art is meant for all. This article will examine the aversion to captions when displaying historic works of video arts in museums, consider the rights and responsibilities of video artists and curators, and, ultimately, ask that we rethink our aesthetic (and thereby ethical) paradigm which privileges faithfulness to an “original” over accessibility. Ultimately, I insist that captioning embodies the spirit of access that motivated so many artists to use video in the first place, and museums should preserve this spirit rather than faithfulness to an “original.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":53609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Future Anterior\",\"volume\":\"17 9 1\",\"pages\":\"111 - 121\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Future Anterior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5749/futuante.16.1.0111\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future Anterior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5749/futuante.16.1.0111","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:视频作为一种艺术媒介的实施通常被描述为对艺术可及性的激进野心。然而,当这些作品在博物馆展出时,它们很少包括必要的封闭字幕,以使聋人/聋人观众能够看到它们的内容。因此,视频艺术的历史作品通常是不可接近的,因为通过添加字幕来改变“原创”艺术作品仍然是禁忌。这种逻辑将作品的原始审美体验置于其可访问性之上,尽管事实是:(1)许多历史录像艺术作品首先或另外是在电视上展示的,而美国残疾人法案(ADA)要求在电视上使用封闭字幕;(2)这些作品几乎从未以原始格式展示过。当主张激进的精神,但没有提供封闭的说明文字时,就传递了一个信息,即当艺术是为所有人服务时,谁算“每个人”。本文将研究在博物馆展示历史视频艺术作品时对标题的厌恶,考虑视频艺术家和策展人的权利和责任,并最终要求我们重新思考我们的美学(从而伦理)范式,即对“原创”的忠诚高于可及性。最后,我坚持认为文字说明体现了一种获取的精神,正是这种精神促使许多艺术家首先使用视频,博物馆应该保留这种精神,而不是忠实于“原创”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Radical Accessibility of Video Art (for Hearing People)
Abstract:The implementation of video as an artistic medium is often described as motivated by radical ambitions toward art’s accessibility. Yet when these works are displayed in museums, they seldom include closed captions necessary to make their content accessible to deaf/Deaf audiences. Historic works of video art are thus often not accessible, as it remains taboo to alter an “original” work of art by adding captions. This logic privileges the work’s original aesthetic experience over its accessibility in spite of the fact that (1) many works of historic video art were first, or additionally, shown on television, where closed captions are required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and (2) such works are almost never shown in their original format anyway. When spirits of radical access are claimed yet closed captions are not provided, a message is sent about who counts as “everyone” when art is meant for all. This article will examine the aversion to captions when displaying historic works of video arts in museums, consider the rights and responsibilities of video artists and curators, and, ultimately, ask that we rethink our aesthetic (and thereby ethical) paradigm which privileges faithfulness to an “original” over accessibility. Ultimately, I insist that captioning embodies the spirit of access that motivated so many artists to use video in the first place, and museums should preserve this spirit rather than faithfulness to an “original.”
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Future Anterior
Future Anterior Arts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信