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)

looks like a science fiction movie…

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

“Gemini Rising, Moon in Apollo” by Ed Shanken

  In his essay entitled “Gemini Rising, Moon in Apollo”, Ed Shanken presents the relationship of art and technology and what results from the collaboration of the two. He referred to John Cage and his platform of removing the seperation particularly between the artist and the engineer. If the artist became knowledgeable about technology and the engineer understood that the show must go on, then we can expect interesting art and even a change in social order. I agree with Shanken that Cage oversimplified what artists and engineers represent when he referred to the engineer as “an employee of economy”, while glorifying the artist as being a “repository of revolutionary thought”. Cage doesn’t mention the artist and his connection to economy in any way. Cage did understand that revolution was eminent during the 1960’s with the cold war, space race, and the Vietnam war. I just don’t believe that it is realistic at all to completely remove the seperation between an artist and an engineer. Maybe Cage knew it was unrealistic too. I think Shanken was probably correct in saying that Cage was a bit utopian in his thinking. Cage and artists like himself were trying to make up for the negative effects of technology by absorbing it into the art world and making it aesthetic. This would involved engineering collaborated with art, which he believed would transform the industry. I can see where Cage is coming from, but I think Dr. Kluver had a more realistic approach to his theories. He doesn’t believe in art and technology as a unified concept. He thinks that if it were, the world would be boring. I agree with Kluver that it is the fact that they are so different that makes their result of interaction worthwhile. I think he sums it up well by saying, “The idea of unifying them is a prescription for boredom.”. Dr. Kluver left his electrical engineering career to lead the EAT, which was all about eliminating the seperation of the individual from technological advancement. Part of the premace of the EAT was that it was unrealistic for art and technology to develop seperately. But as Shanken pointed out, that seems to contradict with Kluver’s importance in their distinctness??