Virtual Reality, Collaboration, and Access - Shanken (45-54)

Through my DTC courses, I have explored and engaged in different types/styles of art. Just last semester I took a class where I got the opportunity to work with an Arduino board and implement some "engineering" processes to complete different art projects. As our access to information and materials become more available, we see artists become somewhat more independent and capable of moving back and forth between different fields to complete artistic projects.

This reading however, talks much about the important collaboration that artists, engineers, and scientist made to accomplish  and overcome the challenges that electronic media presented. Artists depended on the expertise of scientists and engineers in order to accomplish projects that required special knowledge and skill that many artists did not have access to. Shanken explains that "the aesthetic, technical and financial challenges of electronic media have demanded that artists perform non-traditional tasks and form unconventional partnerships [with scientists and engineers]" (47).


Newton Harrison's Glow Discharge Tube


The above is one example of an artistic project that was made possible through the collaboration or artists, scientists, and engineers.

Another topic the reading mentioned, was the financial obstacles many artists challenge, when creating a project. This is still something that I believe many artists face. I as a student and an artist, along with my classmates and fellow young artists, face this obstacle. Many of us may have many ideas of artistic projects to complete, but are constantly left with no support, or the task to struggle and gather all the finances needed to accomplish our projects.
However, the reading mentions how those artists working with projects within the topic of joining art and technology were able to find support. In part, I believe it was because engineers and scientists also began to appreciate the artists' contributions to development. As stated by Shanken, "scientists and engineers are recognizing that artists make valuable collaborators who contribute to research and invention not just by making pretty visualizations of data but by asking provocative questions, offering alternative perspectives and stimulating creativity and innovation" (47). Perhaps with the support and approval of scientists and engineers, it was easier for artists to find financial support  from different corporations.


Claes Oldenberg's Giant Ice Bag

Another Way to Do Things - Shanken (30 - 45)

"[L]et the listener speak as well as hear...bring him into a relationship instead of isolating him" (Shanken, 32).

I think the sentence above very well represents this section of the reading, which touched on the topics of Networks, Surveillance, Culture Jamming, Bodies, Surrogates and Emergent Systems, Simulations, and Simulacra.

As more and new technology became available to artists, they explored it and experimented with it to use it as medium to deliver and express their environment and their views on that environment. Some even went further to explore ways to do and achieve things that could not have been done before, and to interact or even change roles with others. Bruce Nauman's  Live Taped Video Corridor  is a great example of how to use the technology available to us to better understand, adapt, and change our environment. We live in a time where almost every move we make is being recorded one way or another, and many times it is exposed to anyone who wishes to observe it. Nauman utilized the idea and technology of surveillance to explore the other end of the phenomena. While most of us know and understand that we are constantly being watched, and watching others, either on our daily interactions with others or through tracking mechanisms such as surveillance cameras, GPS, and the Internet, we still have a difficult time or don't even get the chance to see ourselves from the point of view of others. On Nauman's Lived Taped Video Corridor, this is achieved. "One walks down a claustrophobically narrow corridor towards two stacked video monitors, the bottom of which displays one's video image captured in real-time from the rear...a person thus monitored suddenly slips into the role of someone monitoring their...own activities. [V]iewers cannot see themselves from the front - the angle from which one typically sees oneself. This perceptual prison restricts self-observation to the oblique angles from which one is typically seen only by others" (Shanken, 31).
This idea of surveillance, and especially of observing ourselves makes me think of the self image and the image view by others. We have discussed this many times in class, about society shaping the way we look, or the way we want to look because it is more appealing according to the "elite", movie stars, singers, professional athletes, etc. But when it comes down to it, it is our image versus the image they see, and we can never get it right. We will always see ourselves differently, especially when there are angles from which we hardly get to see ourselves.
Not just too long ago, Dove launch a campaign about "Real Beauty" which I think brings this up, the idea of different views, different perspectives of image.

I really enjoyed that art of the reading, and I know I wrote quite much on that topic, but there are also other interesting parts on this reading. For the following I will be brief.

Again, going back to the first sentence on this post, the artists of this era wanted to use technology to allow the observer to become more involved with the art world and build relationships with art, those who create art, and eventually have them make art and be art themselves through interaction. There are examples of how people from different countries, were able to interact with each other through new methods of  satellite connection, we saw people explore robotics and make a connection between the living and the machine. Eventually this created machines that can accomplish many of the task that were previously only possible by the human body. As technology advances, artists and professional in many other fields are using it as an extension of themselves, not sure how much of it is positive, but it is sure interesting to see how our world evolves, and how we adapt to it.

"A Machine that Makes the Art"

A reading from the Art and Electronic Media book...

I've been a bit tired and sleepy lately because I have been struggling trying to manage school and work, so I usually stay up late doing homework and then wake up early to either go to class or work. So before doing readings from this book, I usually drink a cup of coffee to make sure I don't fall asleep while reading...it has happened before!

Even though I am not a big coffee drinker, I have to admit that it does get the job done.

So for the reading I just finished, it was discussed of the changes the art world went through with the advent of the computer. Some artists saw the computer as a way to explore and go beyond the usual, while others were not too excited about the idea of computerized art. I think just like the introduction of anything that is new, people will always have different opinions about...positive and negative.
But eventually, new forms of art were (are) being created, forms of art that would be possible to make without computers. Another change was the interaction that was being implemented into the new forms of art, now the audiences not only needed to observe, but also participate, and sometimes even be part of the art piece itself. This part of the reading made me think of the way our society is now. If one really thinks about it, with the mobile devices and wireless connection to the internet, virtually everywhere, our society is very interactive within their own communities and in the whole world as well. People are interacting 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, whether it be by simply sharing a photo, making a post, presenting a video or commenting on topics that are trending.
While much of the art was becoming interactive, the process of creation was also an interactive one. Before, when the artist could complete its art by itself, now, the artist sometimes must collaborate with an engineer, perhaps an electrician, or a computer savvy individual to make "computerized" art happen.

Another interesting part of the reading that I enjoyed, was the concept of originality. Some artists, and even non-artists did not like the new medium for art because it lack the "aura of an individually handcrafted original" (Shanken, 23). This makes me think of the way many of us see the value of an original piece of art, and a copy of it. We don't give much value to the copies because they lack the originality of the one handcrafted by the artist. With the advent of computers, and "computerized art", many identical copies could be made, without giving that prestigious value to the "original".

MONEY IN ART...Lost in the Gallery-Industrial Complex

Holland Cotter touches base on many aspects and changes the art industry and the art world are going through. I think of art as a way of expressing one's feelings, thoughts, ideas, and beliefs, but Cotter presents a piece that makes me doubt part of that belief. I think as artists, it is clear that to support that activity, one needs some financial support in order to execute and complete a piece of art, whether it be a painting, a sculpture, a photograph, or any other type of art. If we as artists wish to take part in the art industry, I think we in part do fall under the current market system, as explained by Cotter, which influences and shapes the art that we produce.

When I visit museums, I like to think that I am expanding the boundaries of my social, cultural and artistic knowledge, but Cotter brings up a very interesting point, in which most of the art I usually observe, has been European. Even though I think of art as a way to be liberal and break away from the "standards" that bound me to follow a certain conduct, I am still being controlled if I am exposed ONLY to the art that it is "selling", which is determined by museums, auction houses, and collectors, but rarely the artists.

In one my classes, a classmate brought up the topic of the crayon-melting art trend going on. And after reading Cotter's article, it made me thin about how crayon-melting pieces like the ones we see on the internet, might never make it to any museums. With the direction that museums take art, many artists are beginning to start a movement of displaying their art online, unfortunately, in my opinion, art on the internet does not reach as much prestige, nor monetary value. Society many times relies on the elites to determine prestige and value. And at the end of all, like Cotter explains, money is the winner.