Eboman

Everyone in class seemed to find him a bit annoying, but I really liked “Eboman”. This guy was a nominee for the people’s voice division of the webby awards. 

I found a really cool bit of “sample madness” made by Eboman from and interview of Chris Cunningham (praised video artist/director). This is it:

 * People’s Voice winners will be announced tomorrow!

SL

Our class met in Second Life instead of Real Life towards the end of our time together. It is an exciting thought that this is possible, and I feel very fortunate to be able to be apart of such a revolutionary idea. I really enjoyed having class in Second Life. At first, I was intimidated by the idea, afraid that my computer skills would not be up to par compared to some of my classmates. Once I started exploring the world of SL, however I was facinated by what I was discovering. Second Life is really pushing the limits and already crossing boundaries that most people wouldn’t dream of. I don’t think I would be shocked to find out that in the not too distant future, what we did will become commonplace. I wish we would have held class in SL a few more times. I thought it was a really great experiece especially when we were able to talk to the artist whose gallery we were visiting.
The internet has always blurred geographical boundaries, but this was my first time to experience it visually. While I was still on orientation island, I met a girl from Jordan who spoke three languages. It was so unbelievable to me that we were able to have a conversation undelayed and “face to face” in a way, despite the miles. I suppose for all I know I could have been talking to a 14 year old boy in Michigan. SL can be used for so many positive things, I just hope the inevitable doesn’t happen: That it will greatly contribute to the lack of personal interaction that our generation has so comfortably adapted to. I think SL could be an outlet for people to live vicariously through and not give enough attention to RL. Nevertheless, it is an amazing place. I’ll just try to be optimistic and believe that it will only be used for the betterment of people and culture. Here is a snaphot of our class while in SL. (I’m “Lafawda Kornberg” with the leapord pants)

“Computing Machinery and Intelligence” by Alan Turing

“Computing Machinery and Intelligence” was written by an expert in the field of artificial intelligence. Alan Turing created the “Turing Test”, which I found exciting and interesting. This whole concept is over my head, and naturally so since I am not an expert in computer intelligence. I think that art and technology are seperate entirely, but can work together to create new and interesting concepts and mediums of art. They will always be different things with different goals and meanings. They will develop simultaneously as two parts of our growing and developing world, whether they work together or not. Can computers really become more intelligent than us? Some people believe they already are, and that could be seen as positive or negative. I think it could be very beneficial to the human race as a whole, but the impications are a little frightening…

“Art in the Information Age: technology and conceptual art” by Ed Shanken

“Art in the Information Age” was not particulary of interest to me when I first read it at the beginning of the semester. I feel like a understand it more now that I have been exposed to more conceptual art. It has always seemed to me that anything can be considered conceptual art.  The idea or person behind the piece is more important than the artwork itself. Essentially, I could display the wheel of a bicycle in an empty room and call it conceptual art because to me it represented a bikeathon I was in to raise money for a friend with cancer. No one would understand what the piece was conveying without previous knowledge of the story behind it. Maybe this is too simple for an example, but it is bare bones basic idea that conceptual art is. Shanken’s essay, however, was representative of the relationship between conceptual art and art-and-technology. Conceptual art does not have to involve technology. Art-and-technology, on the other hand, is the collaboration of its counterparts. There will always be new ways to express what is going on in the present day through art. Technology is a prominant growing field in our world and effects all walks of life. It should be represented through art as it is representative of our time. Another relationship is the use of technology by artists and designers now. I agree with a previous comment on the class blog about designers becoming more reliant on computers. This is true for other artists as well. Graphic designers, for example, would not exist sans technology. That is one birth-child of art and technology. Computer graphics are a facet of the world economy. This is an example of the relationship between conceptual art and art-and-technology. There are infinite combinations of technology and art. The blending of mediums and use of new ones in the art world will be constantly changing and altering social order bit by bit. That is the natural evolution of culture.

Steve Kurtz finally given some justice

I was really glad to hear that most of the charges against Steve Kurtz were dropped. I can’t imagine the relief that he feels after being treated with such injustice for so long. Not only is it terrible to falsely accuse someone of a crime, but for Steve Kurtz, he was mourning the death of his wife. The law enforcement officials over this case did not understand that what they found was for the purpose of art. So Kurtz was subjected to public humiliation and accusations of being involved in bioterrorism and being held resposible for the death of his own wife. In my opinion, the government was just using him as an example to show America that they were staying on top of things, so as to give some sort of security to the American citizen. Clearly, they were not able to string together any of the fragmentary evidence that they had against him towards any wrong-doing. I watched the trailer for “Strange Culture“, the movie about his case, and it was very moving. In particular, it was said that if artists are going to be silenced, who then will speak for us? It has always been the case that it is on the shoulders of artists to make statements through aesthetics and create art that is representational of ideas. If artists are going to be condemned for creating what someone perceives as art, then will anyone really have a voice at all?
Also, in addition to the ravishing Tilda Swinton, notice that the doctor from E.T. is in this film. I have a hard time not hating him for seperating Elliot and E.T., but I respect him for supporting Steve Kurtz.

“A Cyborg Manifesto” Donna Haraway

  Haraway presents the idea that we are all cyborgs and we have become this way through mutations in media, technology and social organizations.  Her definition of a cyborg is a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of a machine and organism; a creature of social reality and fiction. A quote that I found eerily interesting is: “The cyborg is resolutely committed to partiality, irony, intimacy, and perversity.”To claim that we are all cyborgs in a “post gender” world is scary and reminds me of science fiction movies, as it seems to be a popular theme. She says we are the illegitimate offspring of militarism and patriarchal capitalism. Again, I find this to be frightening if its at all true. What makes this “manifesto” feminist is that unlike the dualist socialist-feminism, a cyborg feminist is only interested in looking forward. Cyber-feminism is seen as more progressive than its predecessor who looked back to Marxism for answers.

  Haraway breaks down traditional boundaries into three divisions, the first being human and animal. Here she refers to the animal rights movements as a prime example for “a clear-sighted recognition of connection across the discredited breach of nature and culture.”Then she moves on to the human/animal and machine relationship. I agree with Haraway’s observation that the technologies of our time have given us a frame of mind that never existed before, a part of us that recognizes the difference between natural and artificial. The last distinction that she makes is between the physical and non physical. She suggests that because we cannot fully rid our minds of these differences and boundaries, feminists in particular should give up the utopian dream of some return to nature and purity. The answer to all of this is the cyborg. She says that if we are all cyborgs, then we can experience a whole new set of social and political practices and we can decide what is appropriate instead of relying on the rigid set of standards that have existed thus far.

  Technology and informatics have become so advanced that societal norms are becoming obsolete and the roles that people played are changing. We are attempting to find some common ground through a universal language and cybernetics is the system through which some sort of control is being attempted. We are now going beyond dualism to a point that is blurring the boundary between human and non human.

  In order for me to really absorb the point Haraway was trying to get across, I reread several sections of the manifesto. The ideas represented here are so foreign to me, which I suppose was to be the idea, but I find the whole thing to be terrifying. To think of society in the comfortable way I understand it to be and then to know that it is changing beneath our feet into something that is so unnatural and artificial-it is a little uncomfortable. I do feel challenged however, to pay attention to my surroundings and really observe the roles that I play. At first, I thought the writer was a little crazy and maybe had read too many science fiction novels, but the more I tried to wrap my brain around her ideas, the more they made sense to me. I wonder what she thinks about how far we have come since 1985…

I found this interesting video interpretation of the manifesto. Its a little cheesy, but worth watching.

looks like a science fiction movie…

Talk about human-machine-technology interaction. Be careful, you might actually catch a virus….Check it out.

breakdown of “As we may think” by Vannevar Bush

In his essay entitled “As we may think“, Vannevar Bush addresses the meaning of “new media”. He defines new media as computer based artistic activity. It is a placeholder until a more accurate term develops and something new takes on the identity of “new”. I agree with this definition. It seems that it is the best way to make sense of the term, because after all, “new” is never permanent description. Bush came up with eight propostions to answer the question: What is new media? They are as follows:

1. New media is cultural computing whereas cyberculture is social computing.

Bush says that the study of cultural objects is the domain of new media. Hasn’t that been the domain for art in general for centuries?

2. New media is computer technology used as a distribution platform

That is to say that according to popular press, new media is cultural objects which use computer technology for distribution and exhibition. This leaves out paper-based publications. Included in new media is the internet, websites, computer multimedia, computer games, CD Roms, DVDs, virtual reality, and special effects. Not included in this definition are television programs, films, magazines, books, and other paper-based publications. This seems contradictory because the latter group uses computing technologies for production and storage, but this definition is referring to final distribution, to which they do not conform.

3. New media is digital data controlled by software

An example of this is that it is easy to find a word in a text through a simple search, but it is difficult to find an object within an image.

4. New media is the mix between existing cultural conventions and the convenetions of software

An example of this is a clickable image map.

5. New media is the aesthetics that accompanies the early stage of every new modern media and communication technology

Everything is new media at first. Examples are photography, t.v., cinema, telephones, and the internet.

6. New media is faster executions of algorithms

Algorithms were previously executed manually, but thanks to technological advancement, it can be programmed and solved in a fraction of the time.

7. New media is the encoding of modernist avant garde/ metamedia

8. New media is the parallel articulation of similar ideas in post WWII art and modern technology

  The proposition of #5 is a redundant statement, but makes the most sense to me. Every new media is “new media” in the beginning. “Media” refers to the medium by which art is created. Digital art and art that is conceived through technology is the conception of our generation. The medium of technology in art is relatively new and constantly evolving, so that leads me to believe that it will be considered “new media” for some time. When compared with classical art of ancient times, the technology and digital art of the even the last 50 years still feels “new”.