the question of whether modern internet humor is dadaist is fascinating because sure on a surface level, it absolutely resembles dadaist art of the 1920′s but my question is…………..is it art?
the original dada movement emerged specifically to interact with that question, of whether an incoherent collage, or a gold-plated toilet seat, or poetry pulled out of a hat should be considered art
but internet humor? it exists solely for us to entertain one another. it doesn’t give a shit about what art is or isn’t, and comments like “this belongs in a museum” or “where’s her oscar” always come after the fact, and, more importantly, are made specifically to add entertainment value
so my take for today is that internet humor isn’t neo-dada, or post-dada, or even “e-dada” or “#dada”; as a mass movement concerned more with community participation than performance to an audience and wholly unconcerned with questions about higher meaning…………….this is folk dada
FOLK DADA
It’s kitsch dada – kitsch is a common derogatory term used to degrade the “art of the masses” aka what the everyday person enjoys and appreciates looking at (which I prefer to call proletariat art).
Dada, both in the WWI original Dada context and then post WWII neo-Dada context were/are considered “avant-garde” high art that exists as an intellectual stimulus moreso than it does as an aesthetic one. It also functioned as political and social commentary and was somewhat humorous due to its absurdity.
The truly defining factor is that today’s dada will not be embraced by the art community because there is no intent to be artistic behind it. And if it is accepted as art it will be sidelined because it is so popular and mass consumed, which runs counter to the very nature of dada, as it is an avant-garde art made for intellectuals to ponder over rather than something to be enjoyed by the masses.
tumblr backup 