Questions for Claudia Zapata, co-curator of Printing the Revolution at the Smithsonian American Art Museum

A few questions and discussion excerpts from your posts this week:

Fibiana Fuentes: Do Chicana artists feel that the internet has helped or hurt their ability to spread their art and or message? In the reading “The Rise and Impact of Chicano Graphics, 1965 to Now”,  the pros and cons of the internet for Chicana artists are shared. A con of the internet for Chicana artists is algorithmic oppression. Essentially, the internet can be biased when it comes to what shows up on someone’s screen. The algorithm may be more biased to a white male artist than a Chicana artist. Although the internet can reach thousands of people, the artwork made by Chicana artists may not be able to be seen by many because of algorithm oppression. A pro to the internet for Chicana artists is that they have the opportunity to showcase their art faster via the internet, spread their messages, and create more art...

Sofia Quintana: Is digital art/graphics harming activism? Throughout my reading of  “The Rise and Impact of Chicano Graphics, 1965 to Now” by Claudia Zapata I perceived there was a sense of dread regarding the rise of online tools/medium—daresay antagonism—beneath the surface of several of the featured comments. For example, on page 131 of the essay Carol Wells is quoted as saying, “You’re not going to walk into a protest with your computer monitor, or on your lawn. Even in this hi-tech age, posters need to be printed.” There is some truth to the statement, it is not ideal to take monitors or anything fragile and heavy to a protest, but it also ignores the activism that can happen online. The past year forced us to test the scope of online outreach and we were able to see various trends... 

Ashla Chavez Razzano: One might wonder if digitizing art devalues the work itself, as if the use of modern technology strips the essence (aesthetic, thematic, or practical skill) of a particular piece. Rupert García’s reluctance to use digital printmaking is an example of such a notion, as he is quoted on page 132, under the assumption that the exploration of digital media would “contaminate” the purity of his work as a fine artist. Though the question is subjective, one could answer that the utilization of online mediums is a powerful way of re-imagining modes of creative expression in a way that uplifts political movements by reaching a larger audience and is a new method of engaging with viewers.

Alberto Keossian: I wonder or question how graphic artworks have evolved or may be evolving from being artworks into a material or medium used physical and conceptually in a making newly developing forms of technological art? Is a graphic-poster-work still a graphic-poster-work if it is never printed and instead shared online, or does that graphic-poster-work transform into a material/medium in producing a new kind of advanced “digital-graphic-work”? This is not all to say that by any means this evolution of a work into a medium is a negative consequence of technological advancement. On the contrary, I feel it becomes a really positive and beneficial instance that gives more to the intended purpose of graphic works than it takes away from it. Digitally advanced works become much more accessible to a much larger audience as opportunities to digitally share imagery, video, experience, etc. become possible within the digital realm.

Nieves Winslow: How has a digital platform expanded the latinx art world? The digital format however i think brings on of the most essential part of any art and it is a community. It allows people to share images and ideas faster then before. Giving s push to activism / artivism where more voices are able to have a say about movements and protest images. And community needs and wants are more vastly discussed... Where i think a downfall is in the digital art world is that it can depersonalize a work, disconnecting them from their creators and intentions. Often people find it easier to take artworks as if they were a image which exists in a void instead of a meaningful, labor intensive work.

Jorge Cruz: My question is, how does digital art (or art through digital means) remain art? In order to answer this question we must first recognize that Chicanx art "continue[s] the advocacy objectives of protesting injustice, improving education, cultural self-reflection, and solidarity with oppressed populations..." (Zapata, 130) I asked myself the same question considering what digital art implies, which is simply a shift in tools. Zapata makes it really clear that it is not the tools which make art impactful, but the message conveyed. This is the "cultural layer" Lev Manovich writes on (Zapata, 130) that Chicanx artists stay true to.

Madison Quiroz: The internet and supporting technology is a fairly recent invention, and I would argue that those most well-versed in technological literacy are younger generations like myself, who grew up with schools that had mandatory computer classes. The recent influx of digital art and social media that helps disseminate art of all media leaves me to question, how effective are digital interfaces in making artwork more accessible to wider audiences? More importantly, is art that is created and shared exclusively via the internet exclude older generations who might not be as technologically savvy? How revolutionary are digital artworks if they are not accessible to those that either do not have access to computer and social media outlets, or are not well versed in using these resources?

Jessica Jimenez: After reading Claudia Zapata's essay a question I have formulated is "with all our technological advances happening everyday will all Chicanx artists once traditional modes of creations (political prints, public murals, etc) be completely left in the past?" While yes some new methods that have been created might make the process faster and more efficient it could lose the same nostalgic feeling when creating art.

Janelle McDonald: Do Chicanx artists face more boundaries with digital platforms or in traditional physical printmaking conditions ? Ultimately, based on what Zapata described in her article, I would say there are equal hardships and barriers that come with either creating and spreading your artwork in the online format or physical context. Perhaps even the internet boundaries could become even harsher because artists would be fighting against systems which they are not a part of. It would be difficult to fight and work against large corporations and businesses like Instagram, Twitter, and even Google.