Video Installation

Did this chapter "Video Installation Art" ever mention the internet? Because, I believe that's the best installation or context for this content i.e. video art. The chapter began talking about how the physical presentation and surroundings of art have become part of the art itself and how the object "frames" the gallery and it's laws, and, these notions force me to ask: why not just use the internet for video installation art instead of these old fashion art museums and institutions anyway? "Rooted in expanded notions of 'sculptural space' in Performance art and the trend toward greater viewer participation in art, Installation is another step toward the acceptance of any aspect or material of everyday life in the making of a work of art." I know this book was only published in 1999, but, if you want 'greater viewer participation' and 'acceptance of any aspect or material of everyday life,' then just post your artwork on the internet. Using this blog right now is much more efficient at greater viewer participation ;) and accepting any everyday materials-laptops for instance-in the making of art, when compared to any art museum. The internet also provides complete autonomy and therefore freedom of the context of your content; the viewer is in the comfort of their own context/installation/space of your artwork, I feel they are therefore bound to be more optimistic of your piece being exhibited. ...I honestly am not a fan of political art; it's definitely an integral part of our and video installation's history, but, I don't know I guess Communism and Nazism kind of ruined it for me. I found the section "Exploring the Lyrical" interesting because I'm currently taking Philosophy of Art and my professor has mentioned how philosophers believe true art is poetry. Poetry uses language which is essential in the depiction of reality and unfortunately I forgotten the rest but ya haha it was funny to see video be compared to poetry as well. I am not a fan of Bruce Nauman...to me he's no more than the less extreme grandfather of Jackass, and I'm pretty sure Steve-O and Johnny Knoxville haven't the slightest clue who he is. I am also not a fan of Adrian Piper's and Steve Mcqueen's mentioning/reference in this chapter. The section is titled "Exploring Identities" and Rush says video went on to search for the "ever-deepening examinations of the self," but, Adrian Piper's "With What It's Like, What I Is"s exhibit "spews forth retorts and racial slurs?" I thought we were talking about 'ever-deepening examinations?' Not skin color and stereotypical examinations I thought had been addressed 30 years prior to Piper's piece even being created. I didn't even go on to look at Steve Mcqueen's work, but please remind me why his work is being compared to "the nameless thug on the late night news" again? Sure he's boxing so I get the connection between the athlete in media and the role he's playing in his art but also, what the hell is a 'nowhere zone?' Is there a nowhere zone for white males? Hispanic females? etc.? I respectfully "keep my cool." Speaking of context and content for video art, I question the efficiency of the context of Rush's book for the content video art. I believe me posting a video on this blog is doing a much more successful version of what he's talking about this entire chapter.