The purpose of reproduction is to spread influence. It announces the presence of what couldn’t be seen before shall be known far and wide. The problem is that it would pale in comparison towards the original. The original work has a set intention and set feelings to invoke but with probably specific setting in mind. Viewing the work and a different medium like a postcard for example would not invoke the same feelings a viewer would receive when seeing the work on its original canvas. There is sacrifice for replication. Physical presence will be lost all in the name to get the word out, a deal that goes towards both ends of the party, 50 50 split, a meet halfway as the reading stated.

Films were often mentioned and it got me thinking about their various viewing experiences. With technology allowing numerous accessible avenues to watch them no one could get the same experience. There are movies and shows recapped or even being segmented to shorts with viewers actively following the viewing. There are common reasons like not being able to commit towards the film in such a formal setting or something related towards attention span. Films aren’t fit for the present day eyes or the current consumers aren’t fit to watch films. They haven’t been meeting halfway for the connection, there isn’t much of the same sentiment to watch films in the current age and so filmmakers have to make the effort to change all in order to catch the consumers attention. It makes me feel unworthy to even view any films because of my few reservations to commit toward a film. It never feels like the right moment to watch a movie but the right time to watch a Youtube video or a short whose viewing sessions wind up longer than typical movie length. Funny.

First glance, I’m very suspicious. Reading the title I thought I was reading too quickly and assumed the last word was message, but no it is indeed massage and the word is spelled as such throughout the reading so it can’t be a typo at this point. The visuals are very unnerving, like this text would be a text a character would be forced to read through in an analog horror video. If the intention is indeed massage, is the author trying to massage our brain through our eyes with all this visual storytelling through the images and their words. When they wrote how the media is an extension of human faculty, is that not just expression or creativity? The effect of the media, the creators’ purpose for its creation, I don’t think is just “the medium is the massage” like they say. The medium is a portion of the meaning, a vessel to hold the message then it could massage our brains with the creator’s intention I suppose.

When it comes to printing, a ditto device, does ditto refer to how printing technology allows someone to publish multiple copies of the same text? Books compared to either newspaper or digital technology I feel provides a different experience towards reading. With news or a phone, there are numerous topics that could be discussed at once, numerous parties trying to grab the reader’s attention through advertisements or headlines, people want you to see this immediately. It could become overwhelming. With books the reader chose the experience to have one on one with the author almost, books usually stick toward one topic and go in depth towards the intricacies. It gives the reader time to process and digest since they are given the chance to marinate in the words as long as they please, the choice to pace themselves. Massaging themselves on their own time.

Zoetrope
I wonder how people figured out the way to properly trick the brain to view motion using physical strips or breaks in our vision. Why would we need brief gaps in our vision to see movement on physical 2-D objects to then evolve and be able to play lengths of film in quick succession without those breaks? Does it come down to the matter frames and the type of medium? Also, how come horses usually end up as the main example when showing off these types of products? When thinking back on old moving pictures, running horses is the main association. How have horses become the main correlation to advertise motion rather than other creatures, people, or other activities.

Logorama
The sheer scale of this logo world was impressive to see. It felt like a fully functioning society and incredibly thought out, how each logo interacts with each other, each logo having its own place in the world. With the amount of logos that were presented, what kind of beast of a computer was able to render so many objects, much less create the models of all those objects.

Don Hertzfeldt Rejected
Every time the logo of the family channel appears, the abrupt reminder it provides that these shorts were intended to be played in front of an audience of all ages. The fact that this guy had the audacity to work on these almost never ending amount of shorts and send them to a program that’s rated E for everyone. I hope that the artist was completely convinced that the content he made was suitable for the job he was given. Or handed his projects over with a completely straight face knowing very well this content won’t be approved, either scenario would be hilarious.

In Luigi Russolo’s words, I could tell he is really passionate about this artform, he created rules and broke down qualities with almost a sense of giddy. For instance, when he states that we get infinitely more pleasure from combining sounds, the “we” sounds like a friend trying to convince the other this totally cool thing they had and how it would totally benefit them. Luigi’s words also sound like he’s trying so hard to maintain his energy so he doesn’t scare away his new friend at first, then some of the energy just bursts out with the bolded onomatopoeia then the paragraph goes where it pleases. It really feels like Luigi is quite bored of the musical landscape of his time and really wants a friend to talk to him about the exciting future. If he was brought to this era through time travel, he would probably bounce off the walls in excitement. When he mentions pure sounds, what qualifies a sound for such a refined title? I assume he means sounds that were made to be musical but can instances such as birds be pure, would the sound of a river be considered a noise-sound?

I chose what I think is a dramatic reading by Kathy Acker under a tab called Sexing Sound: Aural Archives and Feminist Scores. I did not properly read the category the audio was posted on, so the content in the audio had provided me plentiful whiplash. I had first assumed it was going to be a monologue about being a woman in the city of New York but the audio continued then the dialogue taken me aback when a man character came into the picture. To randomly come across a man, privates at mast because of you, admitting he had been stalking you for the last couple months, and to continue having a conversation with such a person is a baffling situation to ever come across. I was so checked out by the end of the audio with hands in the air like the police had told me to turn around or something, I hadn’t even noticed that the main speaker had properly intimidated the troublemaker after the initial shock. What was New York like in the 1980s? A city that sleeps with so many characters slinking in the shadows waiting for an encounter? With my reaction I don’t think I would’ve survived well during those times.

Kathy Acker, I Was Walking Down the Street, 1980

How “authoritative” figures or companies desire to maintain order is funny to me.
The judgement for copyright infringement seemed so black and white back then, it’s like the company follows the assumption of, you use you abuse, if a person decides to use it just once they are the criminal and deserves to be fined. If they could, would they have fined the entire world, or just call it a tax? The urge or need for complete control, it will never be truly enough.

On another note, remixers or just people who create music feel like alchemists to me, creating something out of different entities, songs, sounds, notes, things when heard individually doesn’t really sound like much of anything when played linearly. How can you create a symphony out of tools that seem so different to each other? What constitutes a sound as the right fit? Do remixes already have a sound in mind and most of the time spent is to find the one that encapsulates the feeling, or could it be the opposite where the sound rings first and the rest of the project follows.
Creation is such a powerful action, to make something out of nothing. One person makes something and the person next to them creates another wonderful something, it’s wonderful that so many interesting projects could be brought to life and co-exist and build upon one another. I wonder what the next remix I hear will be.

Modularity
“These elements are assembled into larger-scale objects but continue to maintain their separate identities. These objects themselves can combined into even larger objects-again, without losing their independence”

Looking through all of the principles, the second rule of Modularity caught my interest. If objects are defined as independents then at what point could an object be defined as an object? When it comes to paints is every instance of a type of paint considered an object, or is every color a different object instead? I’ve always known paints as codependent partners. With watercolors you mix and blend to get the desired effect, you could even combine to create a layered effect that gives off the illusion of a whole new color. Are there some art pieces out there that intend to rid of individuality in its objects? Does the term for object only relate to digital mediums where everything can be easily defined as a separate item because of a computer program?

The notion that there are rules to the medium with the freedom to choose what the mediums are makes me wonder how a concept so laissez faire contains enough commonality that there are identifiable patterns to establish a rule set. To extract understanding out of an experience there are a few takeaways. This particular rule seems to impart the idea about finding harmony with the unique. When there could be so many possible proud pieces, competing for the viewer’s attention isn’t the general rule of thumb for traditional design. The choice of how to represent their media is up to the artist but how the media are respected is for the creator to keep in mind as well.

Lesson 8: Now, Redefine Skill
Artistic skill has nothing to do with technical proficiency, mimetic exactitude, or so-called good drawing. For every great artist, there is a different definition of skill. Take drawing classes, if you wish; learn to draw “like the masters.” You still have to do it in an original way. Pollock could not draw realistically, but he made flicking paint at a canvas from above, for a time, the most prized skill in the art world. You can do the same — your skill will be whatever it is you’re doing differently.

Lesson 12: Know What You Hate
It is probably you.

Lesson 19: All Art Was Once Contemporary Art
Never forget this, that all art was made by artists for and in reaction to their time. It will make you less cynical and closed off and more understanding and open to everything you ever see. Please do this! It applies to all of us.

These three lessons really resonate with each other under the discussion of judgement. After practicing for a while I developed tunnel vision over what is and isn’t good art. Recognizing the difference in skill level is a large hurdle that is very difficult to overcome and forget. Every human is different, it’s a saying that is said so often yet the greed for our aspirations will always be insatiable and the words will be taken for granted. Based on the themes of lesson 19, art is subjective. What catches the eye of somebody might not always catch somebody else. The same message can be interpreted in any which way, forcing a single message to be understood discourages new perspectives. Being closed minded doesn’t allow oneself to grow as an artist or as a consumer. I’m always so enamored witnessing teachers give sound advice and criticisms based on the key elements rather than skill level.  When it comes looking at the content and critiquing it, it’s difficult for me to discern what could be the defining points of contention as I just accept the work as is, I won’t properly try to understand it in the moment. That’s why I find their patience is admirable, waiting for students, waiting for growth, to even waiting for yourself to preserve. Our own pace feels too slow, everyone else is growing so fast, it’s easy to regret, pity ourselves, and lose sight of what the purpose of art really is. It’s for the artist.