Eqalitarianism and Video Art

Reading the article, I was particularly struck by the various social dimensions raised, particularly regarding the potential for a utopian type of egalitarianism with the advent of video art. In the early years, we see that the availability of affordable camera equipment and the lack of formal norms allowed the empowerment of outsider usually excluded from the more traditional forms of media. However, as it has evolved, I think it has lost much of its egalitarianism. Granted, it is easier than ever for anyone to make video art. However, as the platforms to distribute that art have become more and more corporatized (i.e. YouTube), it becomes harder to reach an audience outside of one’s niche. The search parameters on many video hosting sites favor the videos that are popular. The videos that are popular are more often than not those that are produced and consumed by the status quo. This is explained very well in this mini-course about social media. Relatedly, I was struck the statement: “the history of video art, unlike the history of painting or sculpture, cannot be rewritten with reference to ‘seminal’ or canonical works.” So often what comprises the canon in terms of art or literature is determined by a specific cultural majority. For example, the books that comprise the majority of the canon of American literature are those that espouse “American” ideals—individualism, perseverance, hard work. However, the origins of these values are strongly tied to categories of race, sex, class. Although the genre of video art claims to resist canonization, as seen in one it is popular, the values which add to popularity are oftentimes the same which determine the canon in other genres.