For this weeks assignment we have an asked to give an example of a symbolic universe of today. So things like the world fairs that were held in America or television.
A symbolic universe of today, in my opinion, would be the computer. Developed not long after the television, the computer is a symbolic universe in almost the same way the TV is. Computers are our biggest resource of today. Whether that be information, worldly knowledge, socialising or even playing games.
As shown below a new 'computer' is coming out soon. Something that has been bounced around since the 1980's. Which is now becoming reality and a new symbolic universe for us of this generation. As seen in multiple movies of the 80's onwards we see their vision of what would be the technology of the future. This as said before is now our reality. Technology is expanding and evolving fast. Our idea of the future could possibly be the future of the next 20years. Then what? What will come next? Technology is evolving rapidly, soon the desktop will have the reputation of a typewriter, an antique.
Media and design will transform into more technological states, evolving the social universe. More so than that if today.
Thursday, 15 September 2011
Saturday, 10 September 2011
Blog Assignment 6
Walter Benjamin argues that "To an even greater degree the work of art produced becomes the work of art designed for reproducibility. From the photographic negative, for example, one can make any number of prints; to ask for the authentic print makes no sense."
I believe that under certain circumstances Benjamin is right. Like the example given of the photographic negatives. Art work is valuable and popular the more authentic and rarer it is. So what's the point if it can be reproduced many times to the extent where everyone is able to have one?
But then what about state proofs? When printmaking the artists make a print on a plate of some form, then making impressions before adding more to the plate, making copies. But what a state proof is, is when the artist makes that plate, does the impression but then burns the plate afterwards. So as to make it an original, therefore becoming more valuable due to its authenticity as you cannot make another like it again. This goes against what Benjamin argues.
It shows that you are able to choose between reproducible artwork and authentic art work. The artists can choose how authentic their artwork is.
Arguably in this day and age authentic art would be much harder to come by with the digital design and manufacture of today. Take photos for example. Once uploaded to the internet that photo becomes free for all. Anyone can have it due to screen shots, downloads as well as hackers being able to steal it for their own use. Bringing the authenticity down due to the availability of the art work. There are ways so as to stop this, for example watermarking the photos before putting on the web, so if others try to download it, the watermark will be there showing who the original artist was.
I believe that under certain circumstances Benjamin is right. Like the example given of the photographic negatives. Art work is valuable and popular the more authentic and rarer it is. So what's the point if it can be reproduced many times to the extent where everyone is able to have one?
But then what about state proofs? When printmaking the artists make a print on a plate of some form, then making impressions before adding more to the plate, making copies. But what a state proof is, is when the artist makes that plate, does the impression but then burns the plate afterwards. So as to make it an original, therefore becoming more valuable due to its authenticity as you cannot make another like it again. This goes against what Benjamin argues.
It shows that you are able to choose between reproducible artwork and authentic art work. The artists can choose how authentic their artwork is.
Arguably in this day and age authentic art would be much harder to come by with the digital design and manufacture of today. Take photos for example. Once uploaded to the internet that photo becomes free for all. Anyone can have it due to screen shots, downloads as well as hackers being able to steal it for their own use. Bringing the authenticity down due to the availability of the art work. There are ways so as to stop this, for example watermarking the photos before putting on the web, so if others try to download it, the watermark will be there showing who the original artist was.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)