[iDC] death of the artist?

[Patrick Lichty]

This is fascinating, as I see the parallel here to the original viision of 
the Internet - challenging boundaries, elimnating difference, really 
flattening the social structure.  

The thing that I wonder about, as there have been some prestigious low-res 
(and I say that with all double entendre intended) programs like Caiia, is 
that a plethora od minimal residency progvrams will spring up.  This will 
create a brief era of possibilitty (<> 10 years?) at which time there may be 
a potential for the extant power structure to reassert itself.  

This could reveal itself as a refusal to recognize these programs, or a 
raising of the bar (once more).  For example, I'm hearing that many art 
programs in the UK want PhD's in their programs, and not MFA's.  

Could there be a requirement for 3 years of postdoc, or the requirement for 
2 or more PhD's?  It seems like an academic arms race that is centred around 
the  rejection of asymmetricl legitimation. This means the legitimation of 
the small, decentralized power structure that moves more quickly than the 
traditiional 'nation-state' of the university/institution.  The academic 
hegemony will wish to keep their power centre as more people are 'certified' 
in the emerging fields (and so 'threatening' the traditional structures) and 
seek to reinforce them.  This is pretty evident in global culture, as shifts 
in power relations create a panic state in those traditionally in privilege, 
and so seek to preserve it.

I am neither a determinist nor Luddite on this subject; the changes are 
here, and conversely, they should be seen as opportunities for progress by 
the institution.  Integration is probably the goal, but details in funding 
and certification would be a battleground as the implant of the 
decentralized, cellular network culture begins to knit with the bone and 
sinew of the extant institutional structure.