The influence of technology in art is very well-known in this 21st century that we live in, this became as a new art form that is still developing. Over the course of the years we’ve seen different trends, styles and forms of art, which are still relevant in culture, as a way to put it, since each and every single one of these trends or forms were influenced by the previous ones. so when Bishop’s explains the irony that’s portrayed in Goldsmith’s commentary to the art that was mainstream in the 80’s, it stood out to me because this somewhat doesn’t apply to today’s art in a way, it all completely took a radical change the moment we began to incorporate this element of technology to art, referring to it as a “Digital Revolution.” “Goldsmith refers to contemporary art of the 1980s as one model for poetry when promoting his theory of “uncreative writing,” citing the history of twentieth century art as a chronicle of thieving and stealing, from Duchamp to Warhol to Levine.” As she explains it, this digital Revolution that’s occurring has greatly affected our perspectives and ideas on what we think art is, its hard to top something that amused the audiences almost 4 decades ago, this idea of seeing the 80’s art and the artists of the 80’s as rather poetic and intriguing to everyone because of the fact that nothing similar had been done before that which lead to this idea of intellectual property and how relevant this has become for future decades. We’ve established names with brands (which in this case is the work of certain artists), we’ve subconsciously associated these two elements with one another, here, Bishop elaborates how hard it would be anyone to recreate such work of art with another name and how this same work of art evolved into new material that fits with later generations/time periods.