Reaction to Marisa S. Olson's Performing the Moment

In Marisa Olson's essay, she touches upon a number of interesting issues in regards to performance art. The most interesting of those is the evolution of performance art's relation to the camera and other archival tools. The growth of these tools into integral aspects of performance work has been so subtle and logical that it takes an astute observer to point out said trend. Unfortunately, I feel that the author has done little more than point out the trend and its examples where a reader expects some sort of higher realization. True, the materials of performance art have changed dramatically, thereby changing their relationship to art and the art itself, but what does it matter? Olson has created an interesting foundation on which she could form a higher level argument, but she comfortably ends her essay before  anything essay worthy has really been exploited. Is modern performance art more effective than early examples? Has the distance imparted by cameras and recordings taken away from the visceral quality of early performance or is it a powerful comment of modern society? Why has performance art changed in such a way? Has performance come full circle in that some are attempting to regain the original sensibilities of the work? Where will the trend go from here? Where should it go from here? Perhaps it was Olson's intention to inspire such inquisitions, but more likely there is more that could have/should have been written about the issue.