Re: [Frameworks] unsettling possibilities

From: Brook Hinton <>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 13:21:22 -0700

And before I get labeled as a luddite or film fetishist, which anyone
who knows me knows I am not at all - I love the things digital
technology has opened up for making and experiencing art. My work has
been completely digital for years (though I also love, and loved
working with, film for its own unique capabilities). And I can
certainly see "brain recordings" as great ingredients in a piece of
art made with constrained tools. But raw vision dump? I want to see
the amazing collision of the artist's vision with the tools and
materials - digital, analog, virtual, I don't care - not the one
unmasked ingredient.


On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Brook Hinton <> wrote:
> I am interested in tools because they can jolt my mind into finding /
> expressing / using things it couldn't otherwise envision. The
> "constraint" of tools is the key to aesthetic transformation, which
> then helps me see / live better the rest of the time.
>  I'm not interested in unfiltered manifestation of something direct
> from my, or anyone's, brain. I already live there. Same even with the
> "dream" of 3D 360degree cinema -  I already live in a 3D immersive
> world. I need things like cinema to enlighten, inform, enhance being
> alive, not duplicate it - goes for the life outside as well as inner
> life.
> Making art is a way to surpass the limitations of the brain. The
> constraints of the tools are catalysts in this process.
> Brook
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Aaron F. Ross
> <> wrote:
>> This is not unsettling to me, I've been waiting for it to happen
>> since I first read science fiction stories as a young boy.
>> With brain-machine interfaces, the opportunities for self-expression
>> will be blown wide open. At that point, I'm hoping that the most
>> imaginative visionaries should be able to rise to the forefront of
>> public awareness. No longer will we be constrained by tools.
>> Artisanal craftsmanship will no longer exist, to be replaced by pure
>> intellect. And that's a good thing.
>> I gave a talk this year that touched upon this topic, mainly in the
>> context of how 3D graphics has widened the scope of possibilities for
>> art and communication. I know that computer art is very unpopular
>> among this crowd, I've been attacked again and again for mentioning
>> it, so let the flames begin. I'm wearing my flame-retardant vest.
>> Aaron
>> At 10/28/2011, you wrote:
>>>Interesting article with complex social, biological, as well
>>>as  aesthetic implications into the future.  . . . Obviously,
>>>capturing  imagery is a far cry from understanding the complexities
>>>of 'thought,'  and it's still very futuristic, but as we conceivably
>>>'think' to each  other, or project our thought/images, there would
>>>have to be resultant  changes in consciousness, and the role of the
>>>artist would necessarily  be re-defined along with
>>>everything/everyone else.  "Direct" visual  art?  Ultimate loss of
>>>the artisanal? And/or a revitalizing of same?   I realize this has
>>>little or no immediate relevance to anyone here  (probably), but it
>>>showed up in my email and I just thought some  frameworkers would
>>>possibly find it interesting as well:
>>>Marilyn Brakhage _______________________________________________
>>>FrameWorks mailing list
>> -------------------------------------------
>> Aaron F. Ross
>> Digital Arts Guild
>> _______________________________________________
>> FrameWorks mailing list
> --
> ____________________________
> Brook Hinton
> Moving Image and Sound Maker
> Associate Professor / Assistant Chair
> Film Program at CCA
> California College of the Arts

Brook Hinton
Moving Image and Sound Maker
Associate Professor / Assistant Chair
Film Program at CCA
California College of the Arts
FrameWorks mailing list
Received on Sat Oct 29 2011 - 14:01:14 CDT