No matter in which way we approach net.art, the world of the net.art 'watcher' or audience is full of traps. A few examples: Never ask a net.artist what he means by a certain work. That is as stupid as wondering when seeing a painting 'what it is supposed to represent'. If the net.artwork would mean something else then what it shows, it would be another net.artwork. In addition to this a net.artwork can have different meanings and connotations to various viewers. Also a net.artwork can mean -this- now, but it can mean -that- after five years. One can never definitely 'grasp' a net.artwork. A net.artwork has a dynamic content...

... Do not wonder if a decentralized net.artwork uses its network well, as you should never ask yourself of a non decentralized net.artwork why it is not networked. That is totally futile matter. Every net.artwork is full of the network. Associations, alliances, codes, thefts, breaks, even the stand alones, it is all networking in disguise. Think with all figure of code, every note and technical trick: it is not just the scenery of the net.artwork, it is the net.artwork.

Start seriously doubting your right to live if you never spontaneously burst out crying after witnessing a net.artwork. But let it be existential crying, straight from the midriff.

Do not think you have seen enough net.artworks. At any given time or at any given moment a net.artwork can pop up that unsettles everything you have witnessed before...

... There is something in net.art, like in music and poetry, that can not be put into words, and as net.art is something made out of data this seems very alienating at first, which seems like we do not want to accept it. Like it is not giving us something it 'could' give to us. Until we discover that itÕs secret reserves are its power. ––––>>>

– Josephine Bosma
(a rewrite and loose translation of a text by the Dutch writer Gerrit Komrij on 'How to read poetry'.)