Yes -- and there will always be constraints of one kind or another.
New tools will still be tools. . . . My "unsettling" reference was in
regard to the inevitable misuse of the tools. But the various roles
of artists will likely include, as always, creating new and
alternative visions as informed by whatever technologies exist, as
well as ongoing social/cultural criticism and provocation.
But to Aaron's comment: while "the most imaginative visionaries" and
"pure intellect" (whatever that may be) seem somehow
contradictory . . . i,e. from where do these visions and intellect
arise? . . . it is certainly believable that the scope possibilities
will be widened. It's just that the notion of the end of artisanal
craftsmanship does sound a bit like "That Hideous Strength."
Marilyn
On 29-Oct-11, at 1:21 PM, Brook Hinton wrote:
> 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.
>
> Brook
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Brook Hinton <bhinton_at_gmail.com>
> 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
>> <aaron_at_digitalartsguild.com> 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.
>>>
>>> http://www.dr-yo.com/video_dorkbot_2011.html
>>>
>>> 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:
>>>> http://gizmodo.com/5843117/scientists-reconstruct-video-clips-from-brain-activity
>>>> Marilyn Brakhage _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Aaron F. Ross
>>> Digital Arts Guild
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>> FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ____________________________
>> Brook Hinton
>> Moving Image and Sound Maker
>> www.brookhinton.com
>>
>> Associate Professor / Assistant Chair
>> Film Program at CCA
>> California College of the Arts
>> www.cca.edu/film
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________________
> Brook Hinton
> Moving Image and Sound Maker
> www.brookhinton.com
>
> Associate Professor / Assistant Chair
> Film Program at CCA
> California College of the Arts
> www.cca.edu/film
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Received on Sun Oct 30 2011 - 14:25:43 CDT
