Interesting post at NPIRL. I will provide a link to the article along with some of the key points for me. (I need to separate them from the text to facilitate my thinking due to ingrained self taught short attention span) (I was reading Bob Dylan’s bio last night and he talked about forcing himself to read long poems and memorize passages to offset or wean himself away from the tv, 45rpm, 3 min song lazy thought pattern.)
The Work of Art in the Age of Computational (Re)Production ***
Posted by Alpha Auer…
Key points (for my understanding)
a very vital component of artistic practice is no longer present with us today. Or at least not immediately and obviously so. Does artistic output still serve the intrinsic purposes of humanity? Or has art simply lost its cause?
For millenia art provided the visual narration of religious concepts.
With the advent of the Bourgeoisie in Europe after the 16th century yet another demand was charged upon artists: The newly individuated and wealthy Citizen no longer settled for just the glorification of religion, but sought personal glorification as well. The outcome was the genre of portrait painting, as well as interiors, landscapes and still lives, with which the European Burger adorned his estate.
the whole “business of art”, as it had been practiced for thousands of years found itself in a precarious position of re-evaluation. Of a need for creating personal agendas and purposes that would continue to provide an outlet for that intrinsically human attribute we call creativity.
Up until the early decades of the 20th century the research of the visual elements of art themselves – of light, of space and of object culminating in pure abstraction, served the bill. And it seems to me that the present day phenomenon of conceptual and indeed post-conceptual art is not faring much better.
Then came a brief dabble in an investigation of the human subconscious during the middle of the 20th century – but ultimately it was all self propelled, self instigated and could sustain its own momentum for only so long.
unless we provide an intrinsic purpose for it, and one which transcends that famed holy cow of “creative self expression” at that, our artistic goose is pretty much cooked! Overcooked, if anything, should you ask me… ;-).
Personally, I have created Syncretia entirely by the credo of “livability” as opposed to “viewability” and my future efforts in metaverse creativity will follow along these lines as well, since to me this seems to be a thoroughly viable means of providing context to artistic endeavor today: The provision of usable objects and spaces serving the ritual of behavioral change and consequent self discovery through play.
Well what do you think? It looks to me like I am still rooting about in the subconscious for myself and for the viewer I am providing the visual narration of my spiritual concepts. But then what was “Ghost Story”?