Abstract:

The implementation of video as an artistic medium is often described as motivated by radical ambitions toward art’s accessibility. Yet when these works are displayed in museums, they seldom include closed captions necessary to make their content accessible to deaf/Deaf audiences. Historic works of video art are thus often not accessible, as it remains taboo to alter an “original” work of art by adding captions. This logic privileges the work’s original aesthetic experience over its accessibility in spite of the fact that (1) many works of historic video art were first, or additionally, shown on television, where closed captions are required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and (2) such works are almost never shown in their original format anyway. When spirits of radical access are claimed yet closed captions are not provided, a message is sent about who counts as “everyone” when art is meant for all. This article will examine the aversion to captions when displaying historic works of video arts in museums, consider the rights and responsibilities of video artists and curators, and, ultimately, ask that we rethink our aesthetic (and thereby ethical) paradigm which privileges faithfulness to an “original” over accessibility. Ultimately, I insist that captioning embodies the spirit of access that motivated so many artists to use video in the first place, and museums should preserve this spirit rather than faithfulness to an “original.”

摘要：

视频作为一种艺术媒介的实现通常被描述为对艺术可及性的激进野心所激发。然而，当这些作品在博物馆中展出时，它们很少包含使聋人/聋人听众能够欣赏其内容所必需的隐藏式字幕。视频艺术的历史作品通常是不可访问的，因为通过添加字幕来更改“原始”艺术作品仍然是禁忌。尽管（1）许多历史视频艺术作品首先或另外在电视上放映，而《美国残疾人法案》（ADA）要求使用隐藏式字幕，但这种逻辑使该作品的原始美学经验优先于其可及性。 ，以及（2）此类作品几乎从未以其原始格式显示。当声称具有激进性的精神却没有提供隐藏式字幕时，当艺术是为所有人服务时，会发送一条消息，告知谁算作“每个人”。本文将研究在博物馆展示视频艺术的历史作品时对字幕的厌恶，考虑视频艺术家和策展人的权利和责任，并最终要求我们重新考虑我们的美学（因而是道德的）范式，该范式将忠实于关于可访问性的“原始”。最终，我坚持认为字幕体现了访问精神，这种动机促使许多艺术家首先使用视频，并且博物馆应该保留这种精神，而不是忠于“原始作品”。考虑视频艺术家和策展人的权利和责任，并最终要求我们重新考虑我们的美学（进而是道德）范式，该范式将忠实性授予“原始”特权，而不是可访问性。最终，我坚持认为字幕体现了访问精神，这种动机促使许多艺术家首先使用视频，并且博物馆应该保留这种精神，而不是忠于“原始作品”。考虑视频艺术家和策展人的权利和责任，并最终要求我们重新考虑我们的美学（进而是道德）范式，该范式将忠实性授予“原始”特权，而不是可访问性。最终，我坚持认为字幕体现了访问精神，这种动机促使许多艺术家首先使用视频，并且博物馆应该保留这种精神，而不是忠于“原始作品”。