A Blogs@Baruch site

Everything around us is based on this idea of systems. The way I see it, systems give people a purpose to live, you see it everywhere; religion, work, school, your past times, money, and all the way down to non tangible things like intellectual ideas. They are a driving force, they keep people going ( like I said purpose), without them society would crumble. Our brains are wired to live by these patterns, it gives us comfort. Does it make us weak, or are we blinded from the truth… is there even a truth? Now, that I have opened your mind a bit to this idea that you’ve hit the autopilot button on yourself, let’s take it a step further. Systems are boring, because it’s you preforming these same repetitive motions that you do that you think make you happy. You are in some ways a sheep, because you enjoy being a sheep. Since we are so immerse with what is in front of us, did I forget to say that we are sensationalist, well, we are, we tend not to seek the truth; let’s call it unlocking your mind. Now, that you have some wheels turning, lets take what I just introduced to you and dig a little further. When I am referring to digging I literally mean trying to going below the surface. If, our reality are these self-imposed systems then there has to be something that breaks this structure of the system, subsystems. I’m interested in challenging what our reality really is, and is there a way to get out of the systems we’ve created? Are we alive, or is this a fake reality? Is there a way to access these/a subsystem?

Images:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05/30/article-0-016E95D800000578-473_468x286.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Z8eKxVCFoUk/maxresdefault.jpg

The Matrix

Not exactly what I vision but close enough, they touch the same ideas.

http://openlab.ncl.ac.uk/hci-digitalcivics-2015/files/2015/11/glacier_iceberg_under_water.jpg

Straight Edge

Ceiling

Today, many exhibitions (by curators rather than artists) model this new illegibility as a spectatorial condition. Documenta 11 (2002) was significant in many respects, not least of which was its inauguration of a tendency to include more work than the viewer could possibly see—in this case, six hundred hours of film and video. We don’t ask how big a show is anymore, but how long: A tiny gallery can contain days of art. The result is that we filter and graze, skim and forward.

The author’s point is an example of information overload that we experience, which then, trickles down to other areas such as visual art. Before the digital age, researching or creating  a material takes an enormous amount of time. The process is gruesome and taxing. I believe that this process adds an artistic layer to the project. For example,collecting 300 postcards manually as opposed to buying them from Ebay are two different experiences. Buying the cards online creates a gap between the artist and their work. On the other hand, collecting the cards by traveling around the world gives the artist a deeper connection with the object itself. The cards are not just another commercialized item, but rather, a collection of stories and adventures.

Although the latter looks and feels more natural and authentic, this process is not always available to every artists due to budget or time constraints. It is true that the playing field for creating and researching has become a lot easier, the creative process is still different for everyone. I believe this is where ‘great’ artists separate themselves from the ‘good’ ones. Great artists will make use of what is available to them and at the same time develop an art different from others. For instance, almost everyone has access to a camera, yet not everyone is considered a photographer. What makes a photographer a photographer is that they are able to capture a beautiful scene by thinking outside the box.

Thinking outside the box is a very important skill in creating art in the digital age. The digital age provides tools which makes it easier for artist to create, which then,  reduces the workload and increases the time for artists to think and improve their art. With that being said, artists should not produce quantity, but rather, quality. Digital audiences have a short attention span and I believe that six hundred hours of film and video is unnecessary to get our points across.

For my final project I want to focus on the idea of people living two different lives openly. The purpose of my project would be to convey the power of personalities and duality. I’d start of with researching my subjects emotions through there daily lives and convey that through the use of my camera angles. Moreover, I’d emphasize the black and white of most personalities. For example, a person who is an accountant for the purpose of a living and but his true passion is a musician. Therefore an account through the week and musician through the weekend. But for the sake of video art, I intend to not be literal with my imagery through the idea of abstraction. Essentially, my intention is to to tell a story through three different people with extreme personality traits. In terms of technical aspects, I would either use a split screen or an overlay of videos through composting depending on the way my research goes.

For my final project, I would like to explore stop motion or further experiment with time lapse. If I explore stop motion, I would like to create a narrative, possibility a narrative that can be formed into an ad for a product. If I continue to further experiment with time lapse, I would like to experiment with gray scale and try to create “a haunting”. In stop motion, I would have to use photography instead of video, so I would have to ask for permission to use a different medium. I could draw for the stop motion video and therefore create something like an animation. In the time lapse video, I plan on visiting old houses and museums with interior similar to old houses. I also plan on using framed paintings and porcelain dolls. The biggest obstacle with the time lapse video is that I would have to capture a lot of footage. Alternatively, I could also experiment with time lapse to create a surreal world where time ran backwards.

https://il7.picdn.net/shutterstock/videos/1830302/thumb/1.jpg

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.