First off I liked this reading because it was quite interesting and was very short. Sometimes when I read a long article I tend to get the high points but lose focus mid-way. Anyway, in the first part of this article I agree with the first couple myths. However I do not agree with myth #3 because I do think that it takes time, money, and skills to create web based art. You can get buy with the basics but in order to produce a fantastic piece you must have the knowledge of various software programs and the expenses to purchase these programs. Jon Ippolito is right when he says people would rather spend time on the internet looking up works of art rather than visiting a museum. That's a very sad thought. Only a museum can show the true beauty of a work of art..web based work or not. The author states that internet art is not a form of web design but I disagree. Yes in some cases internet art is not web design but what about web design being a piece of internet art? For example I design a site for a company. It's beautiful, colorful, and informational. Is this not a piece of art in its own way? If not, why? Just because it was created digitally and for the web doesn't make it any less worthy or interesting.Ippolito states that "internet artists spend much of their time innovating: custom writing Java applets or experimenting with new plug-ins. But innovation in and of itself is not art." I think that Ippolito is completely wrong. You may not be able to physically see this form of art or at least it is not exactly what first comes to mind when you think of art but yet it is still art. It may no be all colorful and fun but it is still a creative process and isn't that what art is?
Over all Jon Ippolito has made some very good points but I do not agree with them all. I believe that his 10 myths may only be myths in his mind.
