Pages
-
Categories
- Categories
-
Archives
in progress-
www.alliepohl.com
Reproduction is the core concept that Walter Benjamin discusses in his writing. Benjamin starts off his essay stating: “ In principle a work of art has always been reproducible.” Although this concept is an extremely important one, it is one that I have not concentrated on while creating and making art. For me, I have only wanted to reproduce those works which I have made in mediums that are already made for or designed for reproduction. Normally, if I know something has been done or produced before, I don’t want to reproduce it. But my philosophy heretofore has not taken into account the process of learning that is gained through reproduction.
Benjamin looks at the history of reproduction. The Greeks had two technical reproducing techniques: founding and stamping. With these two techniques one was able to produce mass quantities of bronzes, terra cottas, and coins. At this point in the history of the world, these were products and materials that were important to be able to make mass quantities of. Time moved forward and art and technology advanced; techniques such as woodcutting and printing progressed; then lithography was surpassed by photography. Photography is a medium that is exceptionally fast and easily reproducible. But then came the greatest advancement: sound and film. “Since the eye perceives more swiftly than the hand can draw, the process of pictorial reproduction was accelerated so enormously that it could keep pace with speech.” In the 1900’s technical reproduction had come to a standard that allowed reproduction to readily occur and by so doing art’s impact on the public greatly increased.
What makes something real as applied to art? Benjamin states: “That even the most perfect reproduction of work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be.” Benjamin believes that the historical reference and history of a piece of art helps determine its authenticity. Yet, often it is difficult to determine whether something is a reproduction or original. Reproduction has the possibility of not only tainting the original object, but also in isolating the object from its sense of tradition.
This brings up the important point of what reproduction does to the value of the art object. Benjamin sees the value of art on two different planes: the cult value and the exhibition value of the work. It is truly hard or impossible to put a monetary value on art; it comes down to what someone is willing to pay for the work itself. As part of his discussion of monetary value for art, Benjamin directs attention to the Dadaists who looked at art first for its usefulness and its thoughtfulness, and only then for its monetary value.
Benjamin also addresses the reproductive qualities of film. He assesses that a film’s uniqueness is often seen by how the actor and actress represents him or herself within the film. A film’s story can be duplicated over and over again, but the quality of the film is dependent upon the actors, the quality of the camera, film and fashion design. Benjamin admonishes that “The cult of a movie star, fostered by the money of the film industry, preserves not the unique aura of the person but the spell of the personality, the phony spell of commodity.” Benjamin distinguishes that films can be seen by many people and can take its viewer to new places whereas a painting might be only be seen by a small audience. Yet, Benjamin points out quantity does not mean quality and that each piece of art must be judged on its own merits.
“A man who concentrates before a work of art is absorbed by it.” This, I believe, is a true and singular meaning of art. Whether it is a painting, photograph, film, or print, the significant aspect is the message that is being given off by the piece of art and taken in by the viewer. It is not so much how it is or was made, but what it is saying or communicating to its audience. In conclusion, works of art, even in an age of easy reproduction, still depend upon the quality of the message contained within the work. Even if much learning can come from the reproductive process, the authenticity of and quality of the artwork still determines the message communicated to the audience. A work of art remains a work of art in any age at any time.
This book was arranged very differently then the other assigned readings. This book consists of different essays by different theorists.
The first section of reading talks about the history and progression of the computer. It is so interesting to be able to read about the background of technology that we use daily, having heretofore not thought “twice” about its history. Janet H. Murray meticulously describes the background and the development of the internet, search engines, games, and “anything else” that had to do with the development of the computer and its counterparts. I was extremely interested in Murray’s statement: “The critics of technology are an important part of the development of a new medium because they challenge us to identify more clearly what we find so compelling about it, why we are so drawn to shape this new clay objects that have not existed before (8).” Although I have not previously studied the theory or the history of the computer, I have grown up in the age and time of computers and have always used some type of advanced technological equipment.
It is particularly interesting to think about the theorists of the 1960’s and 1970’s molding the population’s views and opinions of the new and future technology entering the public’s soon-to-be-everyday-life. Whereas, I was born into an age where computers were already “second nature” and accepted by society.
Marshall McLuhan writes much about society and the process of technology entering and involving itself into the activities of society. “Cotton and oil, like radio and TV, become fixed charges on the entire psychic life of the community. And this pervasive fact created the unique cultural flavor of any society (209).” McLuhan believes that technology is “extensions” of us and that all technology has its predecessors. McLuhan follows the idea of predecessors: “The content of writing is speech, written word is the content of print, and print is the content of the telegraph (203).” It is important to see the time of and the entrance of these technological advancements into the public and to see the way society then reacts to these advancements. McLuhan believes that people are comfortable with the past and afraid of what is going to come in the future, which thereby creates fear: Fear of new technologies and the fear of what is to subsequently result from these technologies.
Experimentation with the technologies has a lot to do with the advancement of technology and its relationship to the art world. “In the same way as a scientific experiment can never fail, this experiment in art could never fail (213).” This quote really resonated with me as it confirms that experimentation in the development of science is never a failure and, likewise, the implications of experimentation with art should also not be considered a failure. I think it is extremely important to not only keep the concept of experimentation in mind while working in the field of art but also to adopt it to the creation of art. Sometimes, in my own work, I have been scared of constant experimentation while in the midst of the process of producing my art work. My fear becomes that I will ruin the piece of art that I am then working on. Instead, I should adopt the theory that experimentation helps both me and the process itself and therefore the end-result. I should not become obsessed with the potential outcome of the art work created by my self-imposed doubt while experimenting during the creating of the piece of art.
John Cage wrote, “the technical problems involved in any single project tend to reduce the impact of the original idea, but in being solved they produce a situation different than anyone could have pre-imagined (215).” This quote also helps me feel better about how I look at my own art and validates my own search for excellence through experimentation and the changes of direction occurring during the creative process.
Before I try to tackle any new art project, I try to conceive the concept and plan-out what I want to compose. I want to use technology and not have technology use me. Yet, since I am often dealing with new programs and advanced technology, there always exists an element of the “unknown.” An individual artist can choose either of two options: to totally disregard the “unknown” or allow the “unknown” to help develop his or her piece further. Previously, I used to try to disregard and not use the “unknown” as part of the creative process, but now that I am dealing with more technological programs in fields varying from audio to video to print, I try to release those “unknowns” into the piece so that whatever unknown journey is taken can help strengthen my final creation and take me and it down roads previously unexplored. In other words, although the search or evolution that takes place in creating the piece of art started out in a definitive manner, it becomes detouring and meandering as the work progresses. Both the process and the ultimate result itself evolves or develops during the journey of creating the piece of art. Creating becomes “experimentation” at its best.
This piece reflects the nostalgia of home, family, and memories that evoke comfort. Childhood memories are often playful ranging from jumping in piles of leaves, eating cake at birthday parties, and building forts in trees. As adults we think of these childhood memories with fondness and nostalgia for days of play. These colorful and cozy socks are reminiscent of childhood comforts and their bright colors are associated with fantasy worlds.
The Medium and the Message
Any reader will recognize that this book is more than just a book: it is a piece of art in and of itself. With the turn of every page, the book becomes increasingly more and more beautiful and more and more interesting in its content. The size of the book is small which provides the reader a sense of intimacy and easy handling. The reader gets a peaceful personal experience as he or she reads through each well-thought-out page. McLuhan uses metaphors and numerous examples to pursue and explain his strongly held beliefs. He is a truly original free thinker who approaches his subject matter with enthusiasm. Overall, McLuhan believes that the media is an “extension” of our human bodies and our minds.
McLuhan starts off by talking about the medium as the process. He states that, “electronic technology is reshaping and restructuring patterns of social interdependence and every aspect of our personal life (8).” I agree with this and am reminded of how far electronic technology has come and where our electronic technology is today: “Cyborg level ones” with our computers and cell phones permanently attached.
Although this book was published in 1967, McLuhan was able to anticipate and predict what a significant impact technology would have on our total society and culture; it is now part and parcel of our entire social interdependence.
McLuhan continually writes about how man has viewed the world and how these views were and are transformed by the adoption of new media. The wonderful aspect about McLuhan’s approach is that McLuhan does not talk about technology negatively but rather as a positive part of life: McLuhan is uplifting.
McLuhan talks about the medium as the process and how the medium itself really refers to art and how the artist works or creates. McLuhan is an advocate for the artist and for artists to offer explanations as to what is happening in and to our culture and how that culture affects us all. McLuhan believes that the artist is often not “well-adjusted” to culture which is caused by the artist not being able to accept and go along with the current trends. “A strange bond often exists among anti-social types in their power to see environments as they really are.” I agree with this completely; the artist is confronting situations and making statements regarding society, culture and its impact on individuals and vice versa. If one is involved in interpreting situations around them, it is difficult to confront it totally subjectively or objectively. It often takes someone, i.e., an artist who is removed or out of the “mainstream” to obtain sufficient distance from that which is being observed. This “distancing” allows for a different perspective and this in essence is the artistic process.
McLuhan often refers to past and present and how those two interact. He sees the past as comfortable and the present, which is new, causing problems and confusion. He perceives a huge difference between the pre-TV and the post-TV generations. He considers the post-television crowd as more earnest, “more dedicated.” McLuhan believes that “Television evolves the sense of active, exploratory, touch which involves all the senses simultaneously, rather than that of sight alone (123).” He views television as not working as a background, but rather it engaging you, in order to create a full experience. Even though people do use television as a background, that is clearly not its intent; it is meant to be watched. I love the cartoon on page 128; it has a couple watching television and the caption says, “When you consider television’s awesome power to educate, aren’t you thankful it doesn’t.” I believe this is a misconception about television, as we are definitely learning from it good or bad; although we often are not utilizing television as much as an educational learning device as we probably could. Television is a powerful educational tool.
McLuhan writes that the environment also has much to do with the actual message. “Environments are not passive wrappings, but are, rather, active processes which are invisible (69).” McLuhan believes that we build a preconceived notion from our surroundings and our surroundings effect how we feel and how we see things. Artists make counter-environments or anti-environments which help make things clearer from the artist’s perspective and therefore ultimately clearer to our culture and society.
I love McLuhan, not only for what he has provided as his message, but also because he looks at the artist as almost a “godlike” figure. He is the first theorist that we have read, thus far, that really puts the artist on a pedestal. This is evident in both his writings and also in the way he purposely presents his book as a piece of art: The font choice, the images, and how it reads. In an interview recited in the book, McLuhan says that he is “neither an artist nor a scientist”; but I suspect that he is just a “great thinker,” and what could be more “artistic” than that. McLuhan comes full circle: Let’s do the math: Thinking equals art equals medium equals message.
louise bourgeois
kyung jeon
lee ufan
http://www.marcjacobs.com/
This book was written by a collective of five artists of various specializations (computer graphics and web design, film/video, photography, text art, book art, and performance art) and is dedicated to exploring the intersections between art, technology, radical politics, and critical theory. I will explore several areas discussed in the book and give some personal reactions.
The book starts off talking about our culture’s obsession with management systems and its impacts ranging from production, urban-environments, leisure activities, expressions, and the public’s increased isolation and alienation. The book determines that we are a culture of both habit and how management impacts upon our society.
The collective of five artists termed the word: “pancapitalism” (production, consumption, and order) when talking about the public body being invaded by the consequences of technology. The book explains ISA (Ideological State Apparatus) and RSA (Repressive State Apparatus) are reliant on complex technology in order to stay in control and to remain effective. The RSA performs lots of mapping and surveying of territories and populations. However, once the RSA determines through its observations that a population is exposed, the RSA then does not want to be involved.
“Computers, the internet, and communication satellites are examples of communication technology that lost some of or all of their intrinsic value as RSA systems, and hence no longer had to be kept monopolized (19).” The book points out that RSA likes to keep their technology hidden or out-of-sight during peace time. I found this point very interesting and yet counter-intuitive to what one would expect. The book went on to talk about how during peace time there is no cause for RSA to celebrate as the RSA wants to keep the announcement of new developments and new weapons quiet and away from the public, because the RSA feels that it is not good for the public to know that these new weapons and developments even exist. Yet, the public has an increasing desire to be aware of new and complex technology. I personally agree that the public wants to be aware of all of the newest forms of technology including weapons and military developments.
The book informs the reader that companies, like NASA, use a robotic walker, Dante, to record events and collect scientific data (15). Dante also was used to help develop software for other robots. Robots, androids, and artificial intelligence machines all now exist and are currently being used in many adaptations. These machines are not made from human organics. Yet, Cyborgs and virtual consciousness are very much dependent on humans to create the commands and to develop the actual interfacing of the machines.
I was intrigued by much of the information regarding scientific adaptations contained within this book. An example of a very interesting use discussed was how in the 1930′s and 1940′s a shopper could X-ray their own feet to make sure that their shoes fit correctly. Although this proved hazardous because of the danger of radiation, I wish that there was something similarly used today.
I was also very interested in the section, “military and civilian cyborgs.” The military section explained that “soldiers are no longer soldiers; now they are weapons’ systems (27).” Later on in this section, it was explained that the military believes that these new developments have created a “happy moment” in time for them. I enjoyed reading about the discussion of cyborgs; the section refers to a first phased civilian cyborg as an individual who is normally equipped with a lap-top computer and cell phone. I believe that I qualify as one of the first phase civilian cyborgs as do many of my friends.
The section that I was most interested in was the one about drugs which are supposed to normalize behavior and affect behavior in social contexts. The book spoke of anti-depressants and ADD and ADHD anxiety and stress relievers. The drugs, more often then not, have side effects that are counter-productive. Also, it was pointed out that it is hard to make and use these chemical interventions because various symptoms can be so wide- spread and different. Yet, the pharmaceutical industry is more profitable today then ever-before, even though, it quite often is accused of over-prescribing these very same drugs.
The book also spoke of “smart” drugs which I had never heard of before. These are drugs that contain natural supplements that are supposed to enhance memory, stamina, immune systems, and general health. These smart drugs help bring the body back to supernormal. It was also pointed out that the drugs like steroids, cocaine, weight loss pills, and pain killers can be extremely counterproductive and hazardous to one’s health and even create addiction. The weight loss pills have become a huge industry that is closely related to the cosmetic and hygiene industries. Overall, all drugs are intended to “normalize” the individual.
I was not as interested in or captivated by the “conception” or the “eugenicists” sections. However, I was intrigued by one remark: “Domestic togetherness in the middle-class family has nearly ceased, and children spend more time with their socializing-education services and mass media then with significant others (123).” After reading this section, one concludes that we are placing children in all-day daycare and loosing the valuable and necessary interaction between parents and their child. I suspect muchof this has to do with how we set priorities and with the differences included in socioeconomic classes.
Clearly, the continuing intersecting of technology and society creates positives and negatives. However, when radical politics and critical theory is then superimposed upon that intersection, the interpretation of what is positive and what is negative becomes more complex and difficult to understand. Machines are complex; people are complex. We should not expect to find simplicity in an increasingly complex world.
