BOOK+MOVIEHYBRIDSIntegrating print withsound & motionpictures |
| moor | ||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
12-28-2004, Gene Weingarten of the Washington Post writes: "Hundreds of art experts decided in a recent poll that the single most influential work of the 20th century was... the urinal that French artist Marcel Duchamp submitted to an art exhibition in 1917. ... The curators of the show were so appalled they did not even exhibit Duchamp's entry. This touched off a furor in the art world. Like all furors in the art world... this was about the Meaning of Art. ... And, in 1917, Duchamp's urinal is said to have relieved... art of one of its biggest burdens: the need to produce art."
(But hardly the need to make money and/or become known, appreciated, loved, perhaps even famous. Even if it is true that all any thing needs today to be called art is to have an artist put his or her name on it, the artist in question still needs to gain recognition and make a name for himself... in the art world. After all, the urinal in question already had someone's name on it before Duchamp put his mark on it, even if only the manufacture's company name. So why was not the urinal already considered art? Only because the name attached to it was not considered to be that of someone called an artist, especially a well-known artist. In other words, the name attached the the urinal was not an "art name." Art names do not have to be proper names, such as the personal name of an artist. They can be the name of a type of art. But they do have to be properly recognized... or popularly recognized... as art names. Given a choice between being a popularly recognized art name or being an art name that is properly recognized by a small circle of art theorists/critics, which do you think is more valuable? ... Why choose, you say. The truly famous are known and appreciated by both.)
Weingarten continues, "Essentially, Duchamp's urinal, which he titled 'Fountain', signaled the birth of conceptual art. Art was no longer defined so much by the product but by the idea behind the product, even the mere audacity of declaring it to be art.... Now, you may think that this has been a bad development, art-wise. I don't. The reason I don't is that it theoretically opens up the entire field of art to people without actual skills -- some guy like me, for example, who fancies himself Creative." The reporter ended his newspaper article with this quote from the curator of contemporary art at the Corcoran Gallery of Art, Jonathan P. Binstock: "The interesting question is not what can be a work of art. The interesting question is why you want to do it." Why, for the money you say? There is no money in art except for the rare and supremely lucky few. If not for money, then for love you say? Perhaps. So in the spirit of free love... and in the spirit of love and giving this holiday season, I will give you this. —>
FROM THE POISON PEN OF AHA! (ART-HATERS ANONYMOUS) COMES "THE ART OF STAINLESS STEAL." Image Laundering in the Art World: Hiding & Exposing the Sources of Your Talent. Below is a perpetually reoccuring laundry list of sordid issues, deeds and desires that can vex an artist's conscience, sapping his energies. I will try to wipe them clean from his mind and memory. And I will fail. For these thorny points of contention persist no matter how much an artist debates, ignores or dismisses them... or feels safe from being accused, caught and exposed by them. All I can do here is reprocess the same recurrent doubts. Questions and concerns that others have already had and will continue to have. Furthermore, you should be warned that trying to come clean by airing supposedly dirty laundry is never appreciated by everyone, and seldom appreciated by most everyone, if anyone. So in the spirit of democratizing art and encouraging everyone in their search for greater degrees of fame and fortune than they perhaps thought were possible for them; in the much made of spirit of opening up art and the art world to those supposedly lacking art skills or talent... by making sincerity --- the sincere desire to be known... the sincere desire to be important... the sincere desire to be known as being important--- more important than any other kind of representation in art; more important than artifice and elitism; making the supposedly rarified world of being an artist even more accessible to the masses (if that were possible after Pop art's already triumphant and continuing sublimation and elevation of popular culture); I hope you take the offering below as a gift and not as some lengthy and tiresome assault of words that makes you feel worse than when you began. --- Painpang.com's 2005 New Year's Newsletter
tracing machines copying machines
origin of image = image of origin
["IMAGE LAUNDERING / MONEY LAUNDERING IN THE ART WORLD: MAKING QUICK & DIRTY ART & MONEY UNTRACEABLE." FILM, PHOTOGRAPHY AND VIDEO ARE FORMS OF TRACING OR COPYING THAT THE ARTISTS AT PAINPANG.COM OFTEN USE AS A STARTING POINT FOR MANY OF THEIR CREATIVE ACTIVITIES. BESIDES THESE MECHANICALLY TRACED IMAGES; THE ARTISTS AT PAINPANG.COM ALSO USE COPY MACHINES, SCANNERS, COMPUTER TRACED IMAGES, HAND TRACED IMAGES, HIRE CHILDREN TO TRACE IMAGES FOR THEM, TRACE/ RE-TRACE THE IMAGES CREATED BY CHILDREN, AND RE-TRACE THE PRE-TRACED IMAGES FOUND IN CHILDREN'S COLORING BOOKS. PLUS, WE AT PAINPANG.COM APPROPRIATE IMAGES TRACED FROM THE "READY MADES" OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, CLIP ART, STOCK PHOTOS, AND RANDOMLY OR PURPOSEFULLY FOUND IMAGES FROM MORE OR LESS DISCARDED SOURCES AND FROM MORE OR LESS FREE SOURCES. ("FOUND IT ON THE NET. MUST BE FREE.") IN ADDITION TO ALL OF THIS QUESTIONABLE TRACING OR COPYING OF IMAGES; WE ALSO START WITH IMAGES FROM SCRATCH; OR FROM LESS TRACEABLE SOURCES SUCH AS MEMORY, THE MIND'S EYE AND THE NAKED EYE; OR FROM THE SUPPOSEDLY UNTRACEABLE SOURCE OF PURE IMAGINATION AND THE INNER EYE; OR DONE COMPLETELY FREEHAND (I.E., DONE WITHOUT MECHANICAL AIDS OR DEVICES). PURISTS IN THE ART WORLD AND ELSEWHERE MAY BELIEVE AND PREFER THEIR IMAGES TO COME FROM SOMETHING MORE MYSTERIOUS AND MAGICAL CALLED PURE IMAGINATION. NEVERTHELESS, EACH ARTIST AT PAINPANG.COM ENDS UP WITH AN IMAGE THAT IS USUALLY UNTRACEABLE (BY OTHERS AND PERHAPS EVEN BY THE ARTIST HIMSELF) TO ANY OF THE IMAGES HE BEGAN WITH. PAINPANG.COM DOES NOT KNOW THE ULTIMATE VALUE OF THESE WORKS OF ART. NOR DOES ANYONE ELSE. BUT IT IS PROBABLY SAFE TO SAY THAT THEY ARE LEGAL.]
["DON'T COPY ME!" : TRACING ONE'S ORIGINS IS TRACING THE ORIGIN OF ONE'S OWN IMPORTANCE. FILM, PHOTOGRAPHY AND VIDEO ARE TECHNOLOGICALLY SOPHISTICATED FORMS OF TRACING THAT CAN BE BOTH SIMPLE TO USE AND DIFFICULT TO MASTER. BUT WHETHER THE MECHANICAL PROCESS INVOLVED IS HIGH TECH OR LOW TECH, IT IS STILL A FORM OF TRACING. ALL FORMS OF TRACING ARE MECHANICAL FORMS OF TRACING. AND BOTH THOSE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE ART WORLD DO NOT GENERALLY APPRECIATE ANY FORM OF TRACING... BECAUSE IT APPEARS TO BE SIMPLY A MECHANICAL PROCESS THAT ANYONE, ANY CHILD, CAN DO. LIKE PAINTING-BY-NUMBERS, CONNECTING-THE-DOTS, OR USING COLORING BOOKS; THERE IS NO MAGIC TO IT (FOR MOST ADULTS). AND THUS NO UNIQUE TALENT APPEARS TO BE INVOLVED IN IT. YOU ARE MERELY COPYING SOMETHING. TRACING IS COPYING. AND COPYING IS WORSE THAN CHEATING TO MANY. EVEN COPYING-BY-EYE ALONE OR FREEHAND COPYING (I.E., COPYING DONE WITHOUT MECHANICAL AIDS OR DEVICES) GETS LESS RESPECT THE MORE IT IS VIEWED ONLY AS A FORM OF COPYING. EVEN CHILDREN VIEW COPYING-SOMEONE-BY-EYE DISDAINFULLY AS THE SLAVISH IMITATIONS AND ANNOYING MISAPPROPRIATIONS OF COPYCATS. NO ONE RESPECTS COPYING. WHY? BECAUSE EVERY ARTIST, EVERY MAN, EVERY WOMAN, EVERY CHILD, KNOWS IN HIS BONES THAT HE IS TRYING TO TRACK DOWN THE MYSTERIOUS ORIGIN OF HIS OWN CONSCIOUS BEING... BY TRACING HIS OWN SENSE OF IMPORTANCE TO ITS ORIGINAL SOURCE, ITS EVER ELUSIVE SOURCE OF CREATION. "AM I IMPORTANT? IS MAN IMPORTANT? IS ANYONE? ANY THING? DOES IMPORTANCE REALLY EXIST? OR IS MINE, EVERYONE'S, SENSE OF IMPORTANCE AN ILLUSION?" ]
["THE TRUE STORY ABOUT COPYCAT CRIMES: THE ART OF CONCEALING AND REVEALING YOUR SOURCES." "ORIGINALITY IS THE ART OF CONCEALING YOUR SOURCE," SAID MR. JONES. BUT I SAY ORIGINALITY IS THE ART OF REVEALING YOUR SOURCE. IT IS THE ART OF REVEALING YOUR (LESS IMPORTANT) INTERMEDIARY SOURCES IN ORDER TO GET TO THE REAL SOURCE, THE MOST IMPORTANT SOURCE, THE SOURCE-OF-ALL-IMPORTANCE. IF YOU HAVE TO COPY ANYTHING, AT LEAST COPY SOMETHING IMPORTANT... IMPORTANT TO YOU. AND IF IT IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT TO YOU, MAKE AS LITTLE EFFORT AND TAKE AS LITTLE TIME AS POSSIBLE DOING IT. BUT NEVER, NEVER FOR A MOMENT EVER MAKE THE MISTAKE OF BELIEVING THAT YOU ARE COPYING SOMETHING, SOMEONE, MORE IMPORTANT THAN YOU. COPYS AND COPIERS GET NO RESPECT. NO ONE IN THE ART WORLD RESPECTS COPYING. THIS IS BECAUSE COPYING IS AN ADMISSION THAT SOMETHING, SOMEONE, IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN YOU. AND NOTHING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN BEING IMPORTANT; IN THE ART WORLD OR ANYWHERE. SO WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU WANT TO BEGIN... ANYTHING... BY HAMPERING YOUR ALREADY ARDUOUS CLIMB TO RECOGNIZED IMPORTANCE BY RECOGNIZING SOME OTHER AS MORE IMPORTANT THAN YOURSELF, GIVING SOMEONE ELSE ALL THE CREDIT THAT GOES WITH THE RECOGNITION OF IMPORTANCE, AND BASICALLY DECLARING DEFEAT FROM THE START?! IT ONLY MAKES YOU LOOK FOOLISH OR SUBSERVIENT.]
[MORE ABOUT COPYCAT CRIMES: "COPYS AND COPIERS CAN'T GET NO RESPECT." NO ONE IN THE ART WORLD (REALLY) RESPECTS COPYING. NOT EVEN FORMS OF COPYING DONE WITH GREAT SKILL AND PAINSTAKING EFFORT THAT NO ONE ELSE CAN DO GETS THAT MUCH RESPECT. HERE, WHAT LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING NO ONE ELSE CAN DO IS OFTEN REALLY ONLY SOMETHING NO ONE ELSE WANTS TO TAKE THE TROUBLE OF DOING JUST TO PRODUCE SOMETHING THAT STILL ONLY LOOKS LIKE A COPY OF SOMETHING IN THE END. AFTER THE INNITIAL SHOCK OF SEEING SOMEONE WITH THE SKILL, DETERMINATION, INDEPENDENCE AND INTELLECTUAL SAVY TO BE THE FIRST TO ACTUALLY TAKE THE TROUBLE TO MAKE SUCH PERFECT OR REALISTIC COPIES OF SOMETHING HAS WORN OFF; YOU ARE STILL LEFT WITH THE UNFORTUNATE REALITY THAT ANYTHING THAT APPEARS LIKE A COPY ON ANY LEVEL IS HARDLY A LASTING SHOCK-OF-THE-NEW NO MATTER HOW MUCH WE ADMIRE THE SUSPECTED COPIER'S INTELLECTUAL AND ARTISTIC ABILITY TO MAKE IT LOOK IMPORTANT AND NEW.]
["YOU DID THAT COMPLETELY FREEHAND? WOW. I COULD NEVER DO THAT. BUT SO WHAT?" AGAIN, EVEN REALISTIC OR ACCURATE FREEHAND COPYING THAT REQUIRES MYSTERIOUS SKILLS MOST PEOPLE DO NOT POSSESS DOES NOT GET THE FULL RESPECT IT MAY DESERVE WHEN THE IMAGE COPIED COMES FROM A PHOTOGRAPH OR EXISTING ARTWORK. (IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING THAT I AM SPEAKING OF GENUINE FREEHAND WORK AND NOT JUST SOMEONE WHO HIDES THE FACT THAT HE USES THE AID OF MECHANICAL OR OPTICAL DEVICES TO CREATE HIS WORKS.) YET FREEHAND COPYING DOES GET RESPECT STILL... WHEN THE IMAGE BEING COPIED IS AN IMAGE OF A LIVING HUMAN MODEL, REAL THREE-DIMENSIONAL STILL LIFE OBJECTS, OR A REAL LANDSCAPE... AND THEREFORE APPEARS TO BE MORE OF AN ORIGINAL IMAGE BECAUSE IT IS COMING FROM AN ORIGINAL SOURCE, WITHOUT ARTIFICIAL INTERMEDIARIES. NEVERTHELESS, FREEHAND ARTISTS GET THE MOST RESPECT WHEN THEY FULFILL EITHER OF TWO EXPECTATIONS OR BOTH: 1. WHEN THE WORKS THEY PRODUCE ADD SOMETHING UNIQUE AND IMPORTANT TO THE THING BEING COPIED THAT IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO ALREADY POSSESS, SOMETHING ESTHETICALLY MAGICAL. 2. WHEN THE WORKS THEY PRODUCE UNIQUELY REVEAL SOMETHING IMPORTANT ABOUT THE THING BEING COPIED THAT IT ALREADY POSSESSES, BUT THAT ESCAPED EVERYONE'S EYES UNTIL NOW. IN THE 1ST CASE, FREEHAND WORK IS RESPECTED FOR WHAT IT CREATES THAT DOES NOT ALREADY EXIST. NOT FOR WHAT IT COPYS. AND IN THE 2ND CASE, FREEHAND WORK IS RESPECTED FOR WHAT IT REVEALS THAT NO ONE ELSE HAS SEEN UNTIL NOW. AGAIN, NOT FOR COPYING SOMETHING EVERYONE HAS ALREADY SEEN OR CAN EASILY SEE FOR THEMSELVES.]
["BUT I HEAR (SUCH-AND-SUCH FAMOUS ARTIST) USES THE AID OF MECHANICAL OR OPTICAL DEVICES." TAKE THE ARTIST FRANCIS BACON FOR EXAMPLE. HE REFERENCES PHOTOGRAPHS IN HIS WORK. BUT HIS PAINTINGS OFTEN DEPART SO DRAMATICALLY FROM THESE PHOTOGRAPHIC REFERENCES THAT THEY OFTTIMES HARDLY RESEMBLE THEM. AND WHEN THE PHOTOGRAPHIC REFERENCE IS RECOGNIZABLE IN BACON'S WORK, IT IS STILL OBVIOUS THAT HE IS CLEARLY CREATING AND/OR REVEALING SOMETHING UNIQUE AND IMPORTANT IN HIS IMAGES THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHS ALONE DO NOT APPEAR TO GIVE US. (THE FACT THAT BACON HIMSELF STRESSED THE SINGULAR IMPORTANCE OF UNLOCKING FEELINGS IN HIMSELF THROUGH PAINTING REVEALS THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHS ALONE WERE NOT ENOUGH TO UNLOCK THESE FEELINGS. THUS THE NEED TO FEEL SOMETHING BY PAINTING. BUT CAN ONE UNLOCK AND FEEL... SOMETHING, ANYTHING, LET ALONE ANYTHING NEW, BY COPYING? PERHAPS. THOUGH SERIOUS DOUBTS WILL ALWAYS PLAGUE THOSE WHO SEE THEMSELVES AND ARE SEEN BY OTHERS ONLY AS COPIERS, SLAVISH IMITATORS.)]
["CONCEALING AND REVEALING THE SOURCE OF ONE'S PRIDE AND VANITY." LET US NOW DISMISS FAMOUS MEN. LET US NOT MAKE OR HEAP TOO MUCH IMPORTANCE ON WORDS SUCH AS ORIGINALITY OR CREATIVITY. LIKE THOSE WHO MERELY CLAIM CREATIVITY OR ORIGINALITY UNSUCCESSFULLY, TRUE CREATIVITY OR ORIGINALITY IS THE HIGHEST MARK OF VANITY... AN EUPHEMISM FOR REFINED BOASTING. "LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE DONE! I HAVE SUCCEEDED IN TRACING MY ORIGIN TO THE SUPREME SOURCE OF ALL-THAT-IS-IMPORTANT! I AM NO POOR COPY OF IMPORTANCE. I TRULY AM IMPORTANT! AND I CAN PROVE IT. JUST FOLLOW MY PAINSTAKING TRACE CAREFULLY TO THE SOURCE, AND YOU WILL DISCOVER THAT 'I AM THE SOURCE.' OR IF I HAVEN'T REACHED THE SOURCE, YOU WILL DISCOVER THAT I HAVE GOTTEN CLOSER TO IT THAN ANYONE ELSE!" ]
["COPYING / TRACING IS THE ARTLESS ART OF IDENTIFYING WITH POWER AND IMPORTANCE." ARTLESS: 1. LACKING ART OR SKILL 2. FREE FROM ARTIFICIALITY: NATURAL 3. FREE FROM GUILE: SINCERE. IF YOU HAVE TO STEAL (AND ONLY FEAR AND VANITY REFUSES TO, OR REFUSES TO MAKE ANY SUCH ADMISSION), STEAL SOMETHING WORTH STEALING. STEAL FROM THE SOURCE ---THE SOURCE OF ALL SOURCES--- THE SOURCE-OF-ALL-IMPORTANCE. IF YOU HAVE TO STEAL OR COPY, BY ALL MEANS STEAL AND COPY SOMETHING IMPORTANT, POWERFUL. IF YOU HAVE TO IMITATE SOMETHING OR IDENTIFY WITH SOMEONE, IMITATE AND IDENTIFY WITH SOMEONE, SOMETHING, IMPORTANT & POWERFUL. THE PLEASURE OF IMITATING AND IDENTIFYING WITH POWER & IMPORTANCE IS THE VICARIOUS EXPERIENCE OF POWER & IMPORTANCE. AND AS YOU INDULDGE IN THIS VICARIOUS EXPERIENCE OF POWER & IMPORTANCE, BE SURE OTHERS CANNOT TRACE YOUR AURA OF POWER & IMPORTANCE TO YOUR SUPPLIER, YOUR SOURCE. OTHERWISE THEY WILL COMPLETELY BYPASS YOU AS NOTHING MORE THAN AN OVERPAID,UNSCRUPULOUS MIDDLEMAN... BY DEALING DIRECTLY WITH YOUR SUPPLIER, YOUR JEALOUSLY GUARDED TRADE SECRET, YOUR SECRET STASH, THE ENVIABLE SOURCE OF YOUR UNDESERVED SUCCESS. THE USE OF MECHANICAL AIDS OR DEVICES AND THE USE OF PREFABRICATED IMAGES BY ARTISTS APPEARS TO TAKE AWAY FROM ANY UNIQUE CONTRIBUTION TO A SUPPOSED WORK OF ART. BUT IF YOU ARE SECURE IN YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE YOU HAVE TO OFFER OTHERS BY CREATING AND REVEALING SOMETHING MORE UNIQUE AND IMPORTANT THAN OTHERS CAN WITH THE SAME MECHANICAL DEVICES AND PREFABRICATED IMAGES THAT YOU USE, THAN HAVE NO FEAR. IF OTHERS BELIEVE..., IF YOU BELIEVE... WHAT YOU DO IS IMPORTANT AND VALUABLE, BY ALL MEANS... PRESS ON! ]
["MAKING ART IS NOT A LUXURY. IT IS A SURVIVAL TECHNIQUE." THE WHOLE ISSUE OF COPYING AND TRACING IS NOT AT ALL MERELY A LUXURIOUS MATTER OF ART OR THE GLORIFICATION OF UNIQUENESS. IT IS FIRST AND FOREMOST A RANK-AND-FILE MATTER OF ONE'S OWN SURVIVAL. THE ARTIST, EVERYONE, IS UNDER A NONSTOP (AND GROWING) BARRAGE OF SOUNDS AND IMAGES FROM AN INCREASINGLY HOSTILE AND ARTIFICIAL ENVIORNMENT THAT IS AGGRESSIVELY ENCROACHING UPON HIS LIMITED RESOURCES OF TIME, ATTENTION, ENERGY, MONEY, SPACE, AND PEACE OF MIND. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO LIVE IN TODAY'S MEDIA RICH / MEDIA INTENSIVE ENVIORNMENT WITHOUT REFERENCING ITS IMAGES. YOU CANNOT IGNORE THEM. YOU CAN ONLY CONFRONT THEM AS AGGRESSIVELY AS THEY CONFRONT YOU. AND YOU CAN BE SURE THAT THIS MAN-MADE ENVIORNMENT OF SOUNDS AND IMAGES IS ARMED TO THE TEETH WITH THE LATEST MECHANICAL AIDS AND DEVICES TO HELP ADVANCE ITS CAUSE (OR LACK OF CAUSE). BETTER TO VIOLENTLY APPROPRIATE THESE SOUNDS AND IMAGES FOR ONE'S OWN PURPOSES, ONE'S OWN CAUSE, THAN TO ALLOW THEM TO HYPNOTIZE YOU INTO DOING THEIR BIDDING. BETTER TO ACTIVELY DOMINATE THESE SOUNDS AND IMAGES THAN TO ALLOW THEM TO OVERWHELM YOU, DOMINATE YOU, SUBDUE YOU, DELIVERING YOU INTO THE MINDLESS SUB-CONSCIOUS HELL OF SOME CONSUMING PASSIVITY. BY ALL MEANS, SUBVERT THIS WORLD OF ARTIFICIAL SOUNDS AND IMAGES BEFORE IT SUBVERTS YOURS. DO IT BEFORE YOU HAVE NO STRENGTH OR MEANS TO DO IT. COPY AND TRACE. MAKE IT YOUR OWN. SEIZE POWER! BECOME IMPORTANT! BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE MAN-MADE WORLD BEING SOLD TO YOU ALL AROUND YOU! MAKE ART. CREATE YOUR OWN DAMN WORLD. THEN SELL IT BACK TO THEM.]
Lucky Luck's quest for God...
Accidental Magic goes shopping...
for Greatness, for Art
origin of man = origin of machine
[ THE ART OF LUCKY SHITS PRESENTS: DUMB LUCK VERSUS THE WORK ETHIC — "YOU LUCKY SHIT!" THE MAGICALLY HIGH-PRICED REALM OF SUPPOSEDLY UNREPRODUCIBLE & IRREPLACEABLE ONE-OF-A-KIND UNIQUENESS, THAT CREATES SCARCITY AND A SELLER'S MARKET, STILL DOMINATES THE THINKING AND ECONOMICS OF THE ART WORLD DESPITE THE ACCELERATED ABSORBTION OF MODERN TRACING AND COPYING TECHNIQUES INTO THE CREATIVE PROCESSES OF RESPECTED ARTISTS AND WORKS OF ART. BUT CRITICAL OPINIONS BASED SOLELY ON A WORK ETHIC HAVE NO REAL PLACE IN THE WORLD OF ART. THE CRITICAL EVALUATION OF A WORK OF ART BASED SOLELY ON HOW MUCH TIME AND EFFORT AN ARTIST PUTS INTO A WORK OF ART IS SIMILAR IN ITS BIASES, ENVY AND RESENTMENT AS THAT CRITICISM OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO LUCK INTO SO CALLED EASY MONEY (SUCH AS AN INHERITANCE OR GAMBLING WIN). IT IS LARGELY THE DISHONEST SPECTACLE OF THE UNLUCKY CRITICIZING THE SUPPOSEDLY UNDESERVING LUCKY IN THE NAME OF FAIRNESS AND JUSTICE. BUT THIS SPECTACLE'S TRUE NAME IS THE PAIN... THE PAIN... THE PAIN, THE INJUSTICE, OF BEING UNLUCKY... ESPECIALLY WHEN OTHERS ARE NOT AS UNLUCKY AS YOU... NOT IN AS MUCH PAIN AS YOU. HERE, SPECTACLES OF PURE VENGEANCE ARE MORE TRUTHFUL... BECAUSE THERE IS LITTLE NEED TO JUSTIFY THE TERRIBLE VIOLENCE OF ONE'S HATE AS ONE SINGLEMINDEDLY ACTS OUT ONE'S BLOODY PASSION FOR REVENGE AGAINST THE MORE FORTUNATE. AND WHO HASN'T FELT THE PAIN OF NOT BEING ONE OF THOSE LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE BORN WITH BEAUTY, WEALTH, TALENT, INTELLIGENCE, PHYSICAL STRENGTH, MORAL EXCELLENCE, SOCIAL GRACE, LOVE, AMBITION OR ANYTHING ELSE OF VALUE? OR WHO HASN'T FELT THE PAIN OF NOT BEING ONE OF THOSE LUCKY ENOUGH TO HAVE STUMBLED ONTO THESE GREAT GOOD THINGS LATER IN LIFE?]
["ARE SPECIAL EFFECTS GENERATED BY COMPUTER GRAPHICS SOFTWARE PROGRAMS ART?" "NO, NOT IN THEMSELVES," IS THE COMMON ANSWER. IF, LIKE A DETAILED COOKBOOK RECIPE, YOU CAN METHODICALLY WRITE DOWN THE STEP-BY-STEP COMPUTER PROCEEDURE FOR GENERATING A DIGITALLY CREATED ARTWORK SO THAT ANOTHER PERSON CAN FOLLOW IT LIKE A SCIENTIFIC FORMULA AND DUPLICATE YOUR ARTWORK FROM WHATEVER IMAGE YOU STARTED WITH, THAN THIS EXACT DUPLICATION OF THE SPECIAL EFFECTS YOU APPLIED TO THE IMAGE YOU STARTED WITH DOES NOT CREATE ORIGINAL ARTWORKS IN THE CUSTOMARY SENSE OF CREATING UNIQUELY DESIRABLE OBJECTS OR EVENTS THAT ARE UNEXPLAINABLE AND MAGICAL IN TERMS OF THEIR ORIGIN. THE TECHNOLOGICALLY EXACT, MECHANICALLY REPRODUCIBLE, STEP-BY-STEP REPLICATION OF AN IMAGE, WITHOUT ANY ROOM FOR FURTHER CHANGE OR DEVELOPEMENT, DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ART IN THIS SENSE. (NO MORE THAN SOMEONE PASSIVELY WATCHING THEIR TELEVISION'S AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED IMAGES COULD BE SAID TO BE CREATING ART.) BUT THE INITIAL CREATION OF THE FORMULA OR RECIPE THAT CREATED THE FIRST INSTANCE OF THE ARTWORK, TAKEN TOGETHER WITH THIS FIRST GENERATION OF THE ARTWORK, MAY BE ART IN THIS CUSTOMARY SENSE OF GENERATING SOMETHING WITH MYSTERIOUS, MAGICAL, UNEXPLAINABLE ORIGINS; REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT CAN BE DUPLICATED. ON THE OTHER HAND, IT CAN BE ARGUED THAT ALL ORIGINS ARE MAGICALLY MYSTERIOUS... ULTIMATELY... BECAUSE ALL ORIGINS ARE ULTIMATELY INDETERMINABLE IN FIXED, ABSOLUTE TERMS. THERE IS MUCH TO PONDER BEYOND THE MYSTERIOUS ORIGINS OF ALL HUMAN VALUES. BEYOND JUST SOME NARROW VIEW OF ESTHETIC VALUES. NO ONE KNOWS THE ABSOLUTE ORIGIN OF LIFE OR CONSCIOUSNESS. NO ONE KNOWS THE ABSOLUTE ORIGIN OF MATTER, ENERGY, SPACE, TIME, ETC. EVERY ORIGIN CAN BE TRACED TO EVEN DEEPER ORIGINS. ONE CANNOT SAY NO FURTHER ORIGIN EXISTS JUST BECAUSE ONE DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO MAKE SUCH A TRACE. AND FINALLY, THE POWER OF ULTIMATE DESTINATIONS IS EQUAL TO THE POWER OF ULTIMATE ORIGINS TO GENERATE THIS MAGICAL SENSE OF MYSTERY. FOR THE PERSON, PLACE, OR THING THAT APPEARS TO VANISH WITHOUT A TRACE, UNEXPLAINABLY, IS JUST AS COMPELLING AS THE PERSON, PLACE, OR THING THAT APPEARS UNEXPLAINABLY TO COME FROM OUT OF NOWHERE!]
[THE LARGER QUESTION OF UNKNOWN OR UNTRACEABLE ORIGINS: "SPECIAL EFFECTS AND THE CREATIVE ACCIDENT." THE SPECIAL EFFECTS GENERATED BY COMPUTER GRAPHICS PROGRAMS ARE AUTOMATED WILD CARD COMPUTER TRACES WHOSE PARTIAL ORIGIN ONLY APPEARS EMBEDDED IN SEEMINGLY DETERMINISTIC COMPUTER CODES. YET I DOUBT WHETHER EVEN THE PROGRAMMER WHO WROTE THE CODE COULD PRECISELY PREDICT (IN ANY VISUAL WAY THAT ACURATELY GIVES A PREVIEW OF THE FINAL IMAGE) HOW HIS PROGRAM WOULD INTERPRET THE SPECIFIC DATA THAT THE ARTIST IMPORTS INTO IT... WITHOUT ACTUALLY LETTING A MINI VERSION OF THE PROGRAM DO A MINI INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA TO GIVE HIM A MINI PREVIEW IMAGE. AND THE SAME CAN BE SAID OF THE ARTIST WHO USES THIS SOFTWARE. BUT MOST ARTISTS AND CRITICS TODAY ACKNOWLEDGE THE IMPORTANT AND EVEN LEADING ROLE THE ACCIDENTAL (I.E., WHAT APPEARS ACCIDENTAL BY MOST ACCOUNTS) PLAYS IN THE CREATIVE PROCESS. SO THE FACT THAT AN AUTOMATED WILD CARD COMPUTER TRACE OR MANIPULATION, THAT IS MUCH LIKE A SLOT MACHINE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT PAY OFF FOR THE ARTIST, HAS A MAJOR ROLE IN SOMEONE'S CREATIVE PROCESS DOES NOT NECESSARILY SHOCK OR DISTURB THESE ARTISTS OR CRITICS. THESE SPECIAL EFFECTS ARE CREATIVE ACCIDENTS WHEN THE ARTIST WINS. AND THEY ARE UNHAPPY ACCIDENTS WHEN THE ARTIST LOSES. STILL, THIS SEEMING LACK OF CONTROL IN THE CREATIVE PROCESS MIGHT DISTURB OTHERS. FOR JUST AS THERE ARE SCIENTISTS LIKE EINSTEIN WHO DO NOT APPROVE OF GAMBLING, THERE ARE ARTISTS AND ART CRITICS WHO DO NOT APPROVE OF GAMBLING. AND THERE IS MUCH TO SHOCK AND DISTURB ALL OF US ABOUT THE ACCIDENTAL AS LONG AS OUR SENSE OF THE ACCIDENTAL CAN BE TRACED BACK TO THE TERRIFYING MONSTER MOTHER/FATHER OF ALL ACCIDENTS: THE TRAGIC ACCIDENT. BUT IN THE SUPPOSEDLY SAFE AND INSULAR WORLD OF SPECIAL EFFECTS, THE ARTIST CAN FANCY HIMSELF SOME SORT OF BIG GAME HUNTER, TRACKING DOWN AND PREYING UPON THE ACCIDENTAL (BEFORE IT PREYS UPON HIM), SEARCHING HUNGRILY IN THE CHAOS AND UNDERGROWTH FOR DESIRABLE GAME... IN THE NAME OF CREATION, EXPERIMENTATION, EXPLORATION, DISCOVERY AND, MOST IMPORTANTLY, ADVENTURE. SOME CALL THE ACCIDENTAL SPECIAL EFFECT "MAGIC" WHEN THINGS ARE GOING WELL. SOME CALL IT "TRAGIC" WHEN THINGS GO BADLY. AND SOME ABSOLUTELY REFUSE TO SEE ANYTHING CALLED THE ACCIDENTAL IN ANYTHING THEY DO... OR IN ANYTHING OF WHO THEY ARE. AND THEY HAVE A PERFECT RIGHT TO DO SO. FOR "THE ACCIDENT" ITSELF REMAINS A MYSTERY, AN UNKNOWN, AN UNTRACEABLE ORIGIN, PROFOUNDLY UNNAMABLE. ]
["ART IS THE CREATVE ACCIDENT OF BEING FORTUNATE." WHETHER ONE IS BORN FORTUNATE, BECOMES FORTUNATE OR IS BORN TO BECOME FORTUNATE; THE FORTUNATE ARE DIFFERENT. THEY ARE LUCKIER. NOT SO, SAYS THE SELF-MADE MAN. I WASN'T BORN A SUCCESS. I EARNED MY SUCCESS. THERE IS FAR MORE AT STAKE THAN LUCK. YES, THERE IS ALSO THE BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS OF PRIDE. BUT THE HUMILITY OF TRUE INTEGRITY BELONGS TO THOSE WHO KNOW THAT THEY WOULD RATHER BE LUCKY THAN PROUD. RATHER BE LUCKY THAN DILIGENT. RATHER BE LUCKY THAN GOOD. RATHER BE LUCKY THAN TALENTED. RATHER BE LUCKY THAN INTELLIGENT. THE CREATVE ACCIDENT IS A SLOT MACHINE THAT PAYS OFF FOR DUMMIES WHO ARE SMART ENOUGH TO ENJOY THEIR GOOD FORTUNE. AND THE ART OF TRAGEDY IS OBSESSED WITH MAKING THE TRAGIC ACCIDENT, THE UNHAPPY ACCIDENT, THE UNWANTED ACCIDENT, PAY OFF. ... AND PAY OFF BIG. BUT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE ARTIST APPEARS TO BE HAPPY MAKING THE SEEMINGLY ACCIDENTAL PAY OFF IN A BIG OR LITTLE WAY, MAKING THE SEEMINGLY ACCIDENTAL APPEAR GENUINELY PURPOSEFUL IS STILL THE GOAL. MAKING THE SEEMINGLY ACCIDENTAL (AND OFTEN UNACCEPTABLY ACCIDENTAL) APPEAR PURPOSEFUL TO ONESELF AND OTHERS IS THE GOAL OF ALL ART, RELIGION AND LIFE. TO EXPERIENCE THE JOY OF THE CREATIVE ACCIDENT ON A REGULAR BASIS... ON A MAGICALLY CONSISTENT BASIS... MORE THAN ONE EXPERIENCES THE UNHAPPINESS OF THE DESTRUCTIVE ACCIDENT... IS TO EXPERIENCE DIVINE PURPOSE. FOR TO EXPERIENCE CONTINUING HAPPINESS... AND TO EXPERIENCE CONTINUOUS HAPPINESS... IS TO EXPERIENCE TRUE HAPPINESS... AND DISCOVER DIVINE PURPOSE. PERHAPS THERE IS NO REAL WAY FOR MODERN MAN TO CAPTURE, DESCRIBE AND EXPERIENCE A SENSE OF THE DIVINE TODAY EXCEPT THROUGH THE CREATIVE ACCIDENT. THAT IS TO SAY, THROUGH THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE UNWANTED ACCIDENT INTO THAT INEXPLICABLE SENSE OF PURPOSE THAT INFORMS ALL THAT WE FIND DESIRABLE.]
"THE ULTIMATE GAME BOY." IS THE SUCCESSFUL ARTIST TODAY GUIDED BY ANYTHING MORE THAN A MYSTERIOUS WINNING STREAK? IS THERE MORE TO THE IMAGE MANUFACTURING THAT GOES ON IN THE ART INDUSTRY THAN SOME UNNAMEABLE SENSE OF THE PURELY ACCIDENTAL BECOMING INEXPLICABLY MAGICAL? BEYOND SOME PAINFUL SENSE OF THE UNFORTUNATELY ACCIDENTAL GIVEN FALSE PURPOSE AND MEANING BY GOOD DUMB LUCK? BEYOND PAIN'S JOYFUL BUT HAPHAZARD TRANSFIGURATION BY MAGICAL GOOD FORTUNE? BEYOND THE UNFAIR LUCK OF BOTH THE LUCKY AND THE LUCKLESS? CALL IT ART. CALL IT MAGIC. CALL IT ANYTHING YOU WANT WHEN THINGS ARE GOING WELL. I JUST KNOW 'IT' IS HARD WORK WHEN THINGS ARE NOT GOING WELL. THE MIRACLE OF FINDING RICHLY REWARDING WORK ONE TRULY LOVES IS A RARE, REMARKABLE, HEAVENLY EXPERIENCE. YET IF THIS HEAVEN IS ULTIMATELY CREATED BY RANDOM EVENTS THAT ARE BEYOND ANYONE'S CONTROL, IT IS ALSO A PARADISE BEYOND ANYONE'S SENSE OF JUSTICE. IT IS A HEAVEN THAT SOME ENTER THROUGH NO ORIGINAL VIRTUE OF THEIR OWN. WHILE OTHERS ARE DENIED ENTRANCE THROUGH NO ORIGINAL FAULT OF THEIR OWN. FOR EVERYTHING, HERE, ORIGINATES ULTIMATELY IN THE WHOLLY ACCIDENTAL. EVERY PLAN, EVERY CHOICE, EVERY IDEA, EVERY INSPIRATION, EVERY DECISION, EVERY ACTION, CAN BE TRACED TO SOME RANDOM EVENT; SOME RANDOM ORIGIN; SOME WHOLLY UNNAMEABLE ORIGIN; BEYOND THE SACRED NAME(S) FOR THE SACRED ORIGIN(S) OF THE JUST AND RIGHTEOUS; BEYOND ALL THOSE WHO ARE OH SO DAMN SURE THEY ARE RIGHT IN A WORLD THAT APPEARS OH SO DAMN WRONG.]
DOES GOD, ART OR ORIGINALITY EXIST? 1. IS YOUR ART ABOUT GOD? OR IS ART ---YOUR ART--- YOUR GOD? 2. IS YOUR ART ABOUT GOD BECAUSE GOD IS MORE ORIGINAL THAN ART? OR IS ART ---YOUR ART--- YOUR GOD BECAUSE IT IS MORE ORIGINAL THAN MAN'S STUNTED CONCEPTS ABOUT GOD? 3. IS YOUR ART ORIGINAL BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE IN GOD OR BECAUSE YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD? 4. IS YOUR ART ORIGINAL BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE IN ART OR BECAUSE YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN ART? 5. IS YOUR GOD ORIGINAL BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE IN GOD OR BECAUSE YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD? 6. IS ORIGINALITY YOUR GOD BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE IN ART OR GOD... OR BECAUSE YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN ART OR GOD? 7. ARE YOU ORIGINAL BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE IN GOD, ART OR ORIGINALITY... OR BECAUSE YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD, ART OR ORIGINALITY? 8. ARE YOU ORIGINAL BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE... OR BECAUSE YOU DO NOT BELIEVE? 9. ARE YOU ORIGINAL? YES, NO, DON'T KNOW? 10. DO YOU HAVE AN ORIGIN? YES, NO, DON'T KNOW? 11. DO YOU KNOW YOUR ORIGIN? YES, NO, DON'T KNOW? 12. DO YOU CARE? YES, NO, DON'T KNOW? 13. SOME SAY WE COME FROM NOWHERE. AND SOME SAY WE ARE RETURNING THERE. 14. I SAY THE MOST ORIGINAL ART AND THE MOST AWFUL AWE-STRICKENING ACTS OF GOD COME FROM OUT OF NOWHERE. 15. I SAY THE MOST ORIGINAL ART COMES FROM THE MOST AWFUL AWE-STRICKENING ACTS OF ANNIHILATION THAT APPEAR FROM OUT OF NOWHERE. 16. I SAY THIS ART IS ONE MAN'S RESPONSE TO THIS ANNIHILATION. 17. I HAVE NO TRUSTED VOICE TO COUNSEL ME, SO WHAT SAY ALL YOU GOOD PEOPLE OUT THERE... IN THE DARK? ART-HATERS ANONYMOUS (AHA!) AND ATHEISTS ANONYMOUS (AA) RECOMMEND THIS SITE.]
["DIGITAL COMPOSTING AND MANIPULATING MY WAY TO ORIGINALITY." ALL IMAGES, ALL ARTIFACTS, ALL KNOWLEDGE, CREATED WITH PRE-EXISTING KNOWLEDGE CAN BE SAID TO LACK MARKS OF ORIGINALITY. SO THE QUESTION OF ORIGINALITY CAN COME UP WHENEVER ANYTHING IS CREATED LARGELY THROUGH THE USE OF PRE-EXISTING COMPUTER HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE. DIGITAL COMPOSITING & MANIPULATION IS ONLY ONE CASE OF THIS. BUT THE DIGITAL AGE USHERED IN BY COMPUTERS AND THEIR NETWORKS HAS SO INCREASED THE RATE AT WHICH MAN PRODUCES BOTH NEW AND OLD FORMS OF INFORMATION THAT THIS TECHNICAL REVOLUTION'S IMPACT ON ART SHOULD CAUSE THE ART WORLD TO CLOSELY RE-EXAMINE THE MEANING OF ORIGINALITY AS A MARK OF CREATIVITY OR AUTHORITY AND WHETHER SUCH WORDS STILL HAVE A ROLE IN ART. FOR EXAMPLE; IN THE DIGITAL AGE OF IMAGE COMPOSITING & MANIPULATION THROUGH COMPUTERS, THE SEEMINGLY LONG ACCEPTED AND LONG UNQUESTIONED ART PRACTICE OF MAKING SUPPOSEDLY NEW IMAGES BY MANIPULATING PRE-EXISTING IMAGES OR CREATING COLLAGES FROM PRE-EXISTING IMAGES HAS REACHED NEW HEIGHTS OF QUESTIONABLE ACCEPTIBILITY AS MARKS OF ORIGINALITY. ARE THESE MARKS --- WHICH OFTEN APPEAR FORMULAIC, EASILY REPLICATED, RANDOMLY GENERATED OR ACCIDENTAL --- VASTLY MORE THAN THE SUM OF THEIR PARTS?]
["THE FORMULA." FROM WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY. FORMULA: (A DIMINUTIVE OF "FORMA," THE LATIN WORD FOR "FORM.") 1. A FIXED FORM OF WORDS, ESPECIALLY ONE THAT HAS LOST ITS ORIGINAL MEANING OR FORCE AND IS NOW USED ONLY AS A CONVENTIONAL OR CEREMONIAL EXPRESSION ["VERY TRULY YOURS" IS A FORMULA USED IN LETTERS] 2. A RULE OR METHOD FOR DOING SOMETHING, ESPECIALLY WHEN CONVENTIONAL AND USED OR REPEATED WITHOUT THOUGHT [A FORMULA FOR MUSICAL COMEDIES] 3. AN EXACT STATEMENT OF RELIGIOUS FAITH OR DOCTRINE 4. a) A PRESCRIPTION FOR PREPARING A MEDICINE, A BABY'S FOOD, ETC. b) SOMETHING, ESPECIALLY FORTIFIED MILK FOR A BABY, PREPARED ACCORDING TO SUCH A PRESCRIPTION 5. A SET OF ALGEBRAIC SYMBOLS EXPRESSING A MATHEMATICAL FACT, PRINCIPLE, RULE, ETC. 6. CHEMISTRY: AN EXPRESSION OF THE COMPOSITION OF A COMPOUND (OR A RADICAL, ETC.) BY A COMBINATION OF SYMBOLS AND FIGURES TO SHOW THE CONSTITUENTS, USUALLY IN THEIR EXACT PROPORTIONS: SEE EMPIRICAL FORMULA, MOLECULAR FORMULA, STRUCTURAL FORMULA.]
["THE FORMULAIC." FROM WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY. FORMULAIC: CONSISTING OF, OR MADE OR EXPRESSED ACCORDING TO, A FORMULA OR FORMULAS. (SEE DEFINITION ABOVE.)]
[ARTIFICIAL CREATIVITY: "CAN MACHINES CREATE?" IF SO, IS THERE ANY REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THEY CREATE AND WHAT ARTISTS CREATE? WILL ANYONE STILL BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE FUTURE? THE VERY FACT THAT MACHINES (AND TECHNOLOGY IN GENERAL) ARE USED IN NEARLY EVERY MANUFACTURING PROCESS IMAGINABLE TODAY WOULD SATISFY SOME PEOPLE'S REQUIREMENT FOR BOTH THEY AND THEIR MACHINES BEING CONSIDERED CREATIVE OR PRODUCTIVE. MACHINES MAY NOT KNOW (OR NEED TO KNOW) THAT THEY ARE CREATING OR PRODUCING SOMETHING THAT DID NOT EXIST BEFORE. BUT THE PHYSICAL ACTIONS OF THESE MACHINES THAT LEAD TO THE PHYSICAL PRODUCTIONS BROUGHT ABOUT BY THESE MACHINES ARE ENOUGH EVIDENCE FOR THESE PEOPLE TO SAY THAT THESE MACHINES ACT AND CREATE. THE CONFLICTS THAT ARISE ABOUT ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS AND CREATIVITY IN THE MACHINE AGE --- THE DIGITAL MACHINE AGE --- ARE AS FAMILIAR TO US AS THE CONFLICTS THAT ARISE FROM MAN'S TALES OF MAN-VERSUS-MACHINE AND MAN'S ANCIENT DEBATES OF MIND-VERSUS-MATTER. THERE IS A WHOLE BRANCH OF PHILOSOPHY DEVOTED TO THE QUESTION "CAN MACHINES THINK?" AND MANY PAPER HAVE BEEN WRITTEN SPECULATING ABOUT THE QUESTION "COULD A ROBOT HAVE FEELINGS?" SO, DOES ARTIFICIAL CREATIVITY EXIST? AND IS ARTIFICIAL CREATIVITY THE FUTURE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE? WHAT ROLE DOES THE ARTIST PLAY IN THE MAN-MACHINE INTERFACE? WHAT ROLE WILL BE LEFT FOR HIM TO PLAY AS MACHINES BEGIN DOMINATING EVEN OUR SUPPOSEDLY MOST CREATIVE ENTERPRISES AND ACTIVITIES? IS HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS SO UNIQUE AND INDISPENSIBLE THAT IT WILL NOT ALTOGETHER DISAPPEAR --- SWALLOWED UP BY THE MIND-MACHINE INTERFACE THAT WAS ONLY SUPPOSED TO HELP US? WILL MACHINES AID US SO WELL THAT WE WILL NO LONGER HAVE TO THINK OR CREATE? WILL WE STILL WANT TO THINK AND CREATE WHEN WE NO LONGER HAVE TO? WILL WE ONLY BE FORCED TO THINK AND CREATE WHEN OUR MACHINES BREAK DOWN OR TURN AGAINST US? AND WITHOUT THE NEED FOR CONSCIOUSNESS, WILL WE BE ABLE TO KNOW THAT OUR MACHINES HAVE BROKEN DOWN OR HAVE TURNED AGAINST?]
["RISING TO POWER & IMPORTANCE IN THE DIGITAL MACHINE AGE WITHOUT ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS OR CREATIVITY." THE CONFLICTS THAT ARISE ABOUT ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS AND CREATIVITY IN THE DIGITAL MACHINE AGE ARE POWER STRUGGLES FOR A CONTOLLING SENSE OF IMPORTANCE. AT THE VERY HEART OF THIS CHALLENGE IS A FIGHT OVER IMPORTANCE, FOR IMPORTANCE. THESE CONFLICTS OVER ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS AND CREATIVITY ARE PRIMAL STRUGGLES FOR A SENSE OF POWER AND IMPORTANCE. AND THESE CONFLICTS WILL CHALLENGE THE PRIMAL AUTHORITY AND INFLUENCE THAT EMANATES FROM WHOMEVER (OR WHATEVER) HAS ALREADY SUCCESSFULLY LAID CLAIM TO THE POWER AND IMPORTANCE THAT COMES FROM BEING RECOGNIZED AS ORIGINAL, UNIQUE AND CREATIVE. THERE IS A WAR FOR THIS RECOGNITION TAKING PLACE IN THE DIGITAL AGE OF MACHINES. AND THOUGH WARS FOR RECOGNITION OF POWER AND IMPORTANCE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN WITH MAN, THE RECOGNITION WARS NOW TAKING PLACE ARE MORE UBIQUITOUS BUT LESS VIOLENT. ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS AND CREATIVITY ARE THE FIRST RECOGNIZED TITLES OF POWER, PRIVALEDGE AND IMPORTANCE CHALLENGED IN THE ARENA OF MAN-VERSUS-MAN AND MAN-VERSUS-MACHINE BECAUSE THEY ARE ALSO THE EASIEST TO CHALLENGE IN THIS INFORMATION AGE USHERED IN BY COMPUTERS. FOR TODAY, IT IS AS EASY TO CREATE INFORMATION AS IT IS EASY TO SHARE OR STEAL IT. IN FACT, IT IS SO EASY TO CREATE INFORMATION WHEN MACHINES ARE DOING ALL THE HEAVY LIFTING AND 'THINKING'... AND IT IS SO DESIRABLE TO CREATE INFORMATION WHEN SOCIETIES ARE BEING TRANSFORMED EVERYWHERE INTO INFORMATION ECONOMIES... THAT EVERYONE WILL BE TAKING GREATER PART IN SOME FORM OF INFORMATION CREATION. AND THE POWER OF BEING RECOGNIZED AS BEING IMPORTANT WILL INCREASINGLY BECOME THE MOST DESIRABLE FORM OF CURRENCY IN THIS INFORMATION ECONOMY. BUT WITH DIGITAL MACHINES STEADILY AUTOMATING NEARLY EVERY ASPECT OF INFORMATION CREATION, THE ONLY TYPE OF INFORMATION LEFT FOR US TO CREATE WILL BE THE MOST PRIMAL AND HUMAN TYPE: THE RECOGNITION OF HUMAN WORTH. FOR IF WE FAIL HERE, WE CANNOT EXPECT OUR MACHINES TO SUCCEED. MACHINES MAY BE ABLE TO IMITATE AND REPRODUCE OUR MOST GUTTERAL FORMS OF PAIN AND PASSION, BUT THEY MAY NEVER HAVE THE SAME PERSONAL STAKE IN CREATING VALUE FOR THEM THAT WE DO. AND WITHOUT THIS PERSONAL STAKE IN ONES OWN PAIN AND PASSION, IT IS ALWAYS EASIER TO FAIL IN ANY EFFORT TO MAKE THEM MORE VALUABLE.]
["THE POWER OF BEING RECOGNIZED AS BEING IMPORTANT IS THE CURRENCY OF THE INFORMATION ECONOMY." THE RECOGNITION OF IMPORTANCE IS NOT JUST ONE FORM OF CURRENCY. IT IS THE ONLY REAL FORM OF CURRENCY. THE ONLY INFORMATION THAT WILL REALLY MATTERS IN THE FUTURE WILL BE THAT INFORMATION WHICH CONTRIBUTES TO OUR OWN PRIMAL SENSE OF IMPORTANCE. AND IN THIS FUTURE ECONOMY, EVERYONE WILL BE TRANSFORMED INTO INFORMATION POWER BROKERS WHO TRADE IN EVERY HUMAN BEING'S VERY OWN MYSTERIOUS PRIMAL SENSE OF IMPORTANCE. "BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE FUTURE TO BECOME IMPORTANT," YOU SAY? "EVERYONE IS IMPORTANT," YOU SAY? "EVERYONE ALREADY IS IMPORTANT," YOU SAY? "YOU DON'T NEED OTHERS TO TELL YOU THAT YOU'RE IMPORTANT," YOU SAY? "YOU DON'T NEED NO STINKING PERMISSION OR SALE TO BE IMPORTANT," YOU SAY? "SOLD!" I SAY. "I'LL GIVE YOU THAT," I SAY. "I'LL BUY THAT," I SAY. "I'M SOLD," I SAY. BUT THAT IS BECAUSE... THE FUTURE IS ALREADY HERE!]
[ MAN VS. MACHINE: "THE HARMLESS JOY OF STEALING CREDIT PURELY FROM MACHINES." THIS IS THE AGE OF THE STAINLESS STEAL. THIS NEW AGE OF DIGITAL MACHINES HAS USHERED IN THE AGE OF THE DIGITAL PIRATE WHO STEALS FROM MACHINES. STEALING FROM HUMAN BEINGS HAS ALWAYS BEEN WITH MAN. IT IS AS OLD AS THE MAN-VERSUS-MAN ARENA ITSELF. BUT STEALING FROM MACHINES IS NEW. IT IS AS NEW AS THE MACHINES THEMSELVES. AND IN THE ARENA OF MAN-VERSUS-MACHINE, STEALING FROM MACHINES IS JUST GOOD CLEAN FUN. IN HIS THINKING, HE DOES NOT STEAL FROM HUMAN BEINGS. HE STEALS FROM MACHINES. THIS TYPE OF THINKING MAY MERELY BE THE OUTGROWTH OF MAKING STEALING INFORMATION SO EASY (ESPECIALLY INFORMATION THAT DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE ANY TREMENDOUS VALUE) THAT IT DOES NOT SEEM TO BE STEALING. BUT IT IS EQUALLY THE OUTGROWTH OF MAN TAKING PLEASURE IN WATCHING MACHINES STEAL FROM MACHINES... AS HE FURTHER TAKES PLEASURE IN STEALING CREDIT FROM THE VERY MACHINES THAT ARE STEALING HIS JOBS AND TITLES OF IMPORTANCE AWAY FROM HIM IN THE AUTOMATED WORKPLACE. THIS AUTOMATED WORKFORCE IS NOT ONLY STEALING HIS JOB BUT ALSO HIS SENSE OF IMPORTANCE. AND HE HAS A PERFECT RIGHT TO FIGHT BACK BY STEALING CREDIT FROM MACHINES THAT DO NOT NEED THE CREDIT ANYWAY. THE ACT OF STEALING CREDIT FROM MACHINES IS SOMETIMES HOW I VIEW MY OWN WORK IN THE DIGITAL ARTS, THE COMPUTER ARTS, AND EVEN IN THE ANALOGUE WORLD OF PHOTOGRAPHY, FILM, VIDEO, SOUND RECORDING OR WHATEVER ELSE I DO IN THE ARTS THAT INVOLVES MACHINES. BUT EVERYTHING INVOLVES MACHINES TODAY. AND THERE IS A WAR BEING WAGED BY HUMAN BEINGS TO TAKE CREDIT FOR WHAT IS LARGELY BEING DONE BY MACHINES. AND THIS STRUGGLE TO TAKE CREDIT FOR WHAT MACHINES DO HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. BUT THE DIGITAL REVOLUTION THAT HAS BEEN TAKING PLACE IN THE INFORMATION AGE HAS SPED UP AND INTENSIFIED THIS CHALLENGE TO MAN'S STEADILY ERODING SENSE OF IMPORTANCE IN THE AUTOMATED WORKPLACE OR ART STUDIO. MAN'S INHUMANITY TO MAN IS AS OLD AS MAN'S INSTINCT FOR SURVIVAL. BUT DIGITAL MACHINES ARE NEW. AND WHAT COULD BE MORE INHUMAN THAN A MACHINE?]
["THE MOST IMPORTANT POWER IS THE POWER TO BE THE MOST IMPORTANT." PIRACY IS AS OLD AS MAN. PIRACY IS AS NOBLE AS MAN'S ANCIENT MYTHS OF HEROIC MAN STEALING FIRE AND POWER FROM LESS-THAN-BENEVOLENT GODS TO HELP MANKIND. AND PIRACY IS AS UNDESERVING OF MENTION AS ALL THE MUNDANE ACTS OF TRESPASS THAT CAUSE EVERYDAY CONFLICTS OR GO UNNOTICED. BUT TODAY, THESE LESS-THAN-BENEVOLENT GODS OR DAILY ANNOYANCES ARE MACHINES. SO NOW MAN CHALLENGES AND STEALS FROM MACHINES. THESE CHALLENGES TO THE MACHINE FIRST BECAME NOTICABLY MORE FIERCE IN THE INDUSTRIAL AGE OF MASS PRODUCTION. AND THOUGH THESE CHALLENGES CAUSE FAR LESS ACTUAL BLOODSHED TODAY, THEY ARE STILL BURNING INTENSELY IN CD AND DVD BURNERS EVERYWHERE. THUS THE INDUSTRIAL AGE HAD ITS MACHINE SMASHING REVOLUTIONARIES AND MACHINE-MEANS-OF-PRODUCTION STEALING COMMUNISTS. AND THE DIGITAL AGE HAS ITS FREEDOM FIGHTERS AND FREELOADERS. BUT THE DIGITAL REVOLUTION AND BLOODLESS COUPS OF THE INFORMATION AGE HAVE SPED UP AND INTENSIFIED THIS CHALLENGE TO ESTABLISHED CLAIMS ON ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS, CREATIVITY, POWER AND IMPORTANCE THAT LIES AT THE HEART OF OUR SENSE OF OWNERSHIP. THESE CHALLENGES DO NOT STOP AT THE ORDINARY CLAIMS OF PROPERTY RIGHTS. BUT ALL PROPERTY RIGHTS, ALL SENSE OF OWNERSHIP, STEM FROM SOME SENSE OF ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS AND CREATIVITY. THE ORIGINAL SETTLER OF A VIRGIN PIECE OF LAND OFTEN HAS A MORE POWERFUL SENSE OF ATTACHMENT TO IT THAN SOMEONE WHO COMES LATER. YOUR UNIQUE IDENTITY GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO BE THE SOLE OWNER OF SOMETHING. YOUR ABILITY TO CREATE THINGS GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO OWN THINGS. AND THIS INCLUDES YOUR ABILITY TO CREATE LINES OF DEFENSE AROUND YOUR PROPERTY AND RULES CONDUCT REGARDING YOUR PROPERTY. BUT PIRATES THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE ALWAYS KNOWN THAT BRUTE STRENGTH OF NAKED POWER IS FAR MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANY MORTAL SIGN OF ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS OR CREATIVITY. NEVERTHELESS, ORIGINALITY, UNIQUENESS AND CREATIVITY ARE INSEPARABLE FROM POWER, PRIVALEDGE AND IMPORTANCE. 1. THE MOST IMPORTANT POWER IS "THE POWER TO CREATE POWER AND IMPORTANCE." 2. THE MOST IMPORTANT POWER IS THE ONLY POWER: THE POWER TO BE THE ONLY POWER: "THE POWER TO BE UNIQUELY POWERFUL AND IMPORTANT." 3. THE MOST IMPORTANT POWER IS "THE POWER TO BE THE ORIGINAL POWER." THE MOST POWERFUL POWER IS TO BE THE SOURCE OF ALL POWER AND IMPORTANCE AND THUS THE ONLY REAL POWER & SENSE OF IMPORTANCE.]
[COLLECTORS, "IS YOUR CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICITY WORTH THE PAPER ITS PRINTED ON?" "ALERT: FAKE SIGNATURES ON PRINTS." THESE ARE A FEW HEADLINING DISTRESS CALLS ON ARTBUSINESS.COM'S WEBSITE. BUT I HAVE A SOLUTION. DEAL ONLY WITH COMPLETE UNKNOWNS. DO NOT TRUST BRAND NAMES. DO NOT BUY EXPENSIVE ART WITH FAMOUS NAMES ATTACHED TO THEM. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE FAMOUS NAME ATTACHED TO IT IS THAT OF AN ARTIST, ART AUTHORITY, ART INSTITUTION, ART HOUSE, ART GALLERY, ART DEALER OR ART COLLECTOR. NO ONE CAN TELL YOU WHAT ART IS, LET ALONE ITS TRUE VALUE. NONETHELESS, "ART FORGERY MAKES ART EVEN MORE CONFUSING..." DECLARES ART-TAG, A COMPANY THAT SELLS AUTHENTICATION TOOLS TO PREVENT ART FORGERY. "ART FORGERY IS AT THE ORIGIN OF COUNTERFEITING. ARTISTS HAVE BEEN COPYING THE IMAGE AND STYLE OF OTHER ARTISTS SINCE THE EGYPTIAN TIMES. THIS WAS A MEANS OF LEARNING ART AND COMMUNICATING A CONSTANT RELIGIOUS MESSAGE TO GENERATIONS. SINCE THE RENAISSANCE AND THE APPEARANCE OF PERSONAL STYLES, MOTIVATIONS BEHIND COPYING ARE RATHER DIFFERENT. WITH THE HUGE NUMBER OF TALENTED ARTISTS WHO DO NOT HAVE ANY OFFICIAL PRICE LEVEL, THE 20TH CENTURY BROUGHT FORTH A LITERAL EPIDEMIC OF ART FORGERY." ART-TAG BELIEVES THEY HAVE A FOOL-PROOF SYSTEM FOR "THE PROBLEMS OF IDENTIFICATION, AUTHENTICATION, AND GENERAL RECOGNITION OF REAL VERSUS FAKE." CHECK OUT THEIR WEBSITE (WWW.ART-TAG.COM). IT IS CONCISE AND REVEALING IF YOU KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR. THIS IS PERHAPS MY FAVORITE QUOTE OF THEIRS: "ONE CANNOT CREATE THIS IDENTITY; IT IS THE INTERPRETATION OF THIS CHAOTIC PHENOMENON WHICH CREATES AN IDENTITY" (WWW.ART-TAG.COM/ ENGLISH/ TECHNOLOGY/ WORKINGPRINCIPLE.HTM). THIS QUOTE COMES FROM THE COMPANY'S EXPLANATION OF ONE OF THE WORKING PRINCIPLES BEHIND THE UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION & AUTHENTICATION "BUBBLE TAGS" THEY MAKE AND SELL. BUT THIS QUOTE COULD ALSO BE QUITE A REVELATION ABOUT ALL ASPECTS OF IDENTITY CREATION, NOT JUST THEIRS. IN ANY CASE, THEIR CURIOUS PATENT-PENDING TECHNOLOGY ONLY BEGINS TO RAISE THE MANY PROFOUND, LARGER QUESTIONS REGARDING THESE PROBLEMS. LOOK FOR PAINPANG.COM TO GIVE AN ART SHOW BASED ON THESE THEMES.]
["JOKES IN POOR TASTE." "WHAT DO YOU CALL SOMEONE WHO HAS NOT MADE IT AS AN ARTIST? A DESIGNER. WHAT DO YOU CALL SOMEONE WHO HAS NOT MADE IT AS A DESIGNER? A DECORATOR. WHAT DO YOU CALL SOMEONE WHO HAS NOT MADE IT BY ANY NAME? NO ONE CALLS HIM." CALL.]
["UGLY-ART-FOR-UGLY-PEOPLE-STRUGGLING-TO-SURVIVE-IN-AN-EVEN-UGLIER-WORLD," PART 1. SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE EVERYWHERE LOVE TO TAKE THE CREDIT AND RUN. "I MADE THAT!" YEAH? SO WHAT. "I DID THAT!" DID YOU? ARE YOU SURE? OR ARE YOU JUST TAKING THE CREDIT BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE TOO STUPID AND POWERLESS NOT TO LET YOU? UNFAIR CREDIT-TAKING IS AT LEAST AS RAMPANT AS THE ENVY THAT SURROUNDS PEOPLE WHO DESERVE ALL THE CREDIT THEY GET --- ENVIOUS PEOPLE EVERYWHERE AGREE. ARTISTS EVERYWHERE WANT TO TAKE CREDIT FOR THEIR REPRESENTATIONS OF DEATH AND SUFFERING IN ART AND ENTERTAINMENT. BUT YOU WILL NEVER HEAR THIS KIND OF ARGUMENT TAKING PLACE IN THE ARTS WHEN IT COMES TO CAUSING REAL DEATH AND SUFFERING TO HUMAN BEINGS. (THAT IS, UNLESS YOU ARE A CRIMINAL OR MADMAN WHO HAPPENS TO THINK HE IS AN ARTIST.) FOR ART IS LIKE RELIGION WHEN IT COMES TO TRYING TO FIND A PRESENTABLE WAY TO PRESENT THE UNPRESENTABLE: DEATH AND SUFFERING. THIS SIMILARITY HOLDS TRUE EVEN WHEN ART SEEMS TO BE INTENT ON VIOLATING ALL ACEPTABLE STANDARDS OF WHAT IS PRESENTABLE. FOR THE ARTIST IS ALWAY SEARCHING FOR A WAY TO PRESENT THE UNPRESENTABLE TO HIMSELF THAT IS ACCEPTABLE AND DESIRABLE TO HIMSELF... IF NOT NECESSARILY TO OTHERS. THE ARTIST IS ALWAYS TRYING TO GET CLOSER TO DEATH AND SUFFERING. THE ARTIST IS ALWAYS TRYING TO GET CLOSER TO THE UNPRESENTABLE, THE UNREPRESENTABLE, THE UNNAMEABLE. AND AS LONG AS THE ARTIST IS NOT A CRIMINAL OR MADMAN, HE WILL NOT CAUSE OR CREATE REAL DEATH AND SUFFERING. HIS ART WILL CLEARLY REMAIN REPRESENTATIONS OF DEATH AND SUFFERING AND NEVER THE REAL THING. THE REAL THING IS JUST TOO UGLY TO BE ART. AND ANYONE WHO DARES CALL IT ART SHOULD BE LOCKED UP! UGLY PEOPLE EVERYWHERE AGREE. AND WE AT PAINPANG.COM ARE UGLIER THAN MOST.]
["UGLY-ART-FOR-UGLY-PEOPLE-STRUGGLING-TO-SURVIVE-IN-AN-EVEN-UGLIER-WORLD," PART 2. RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS AND RELIGIOUS WORKS... ART CONCEPTS AND ARTWORKS... ARE ALL GUIDE BOOKS FOR "HOW TO REACT WHEN LIFE PRESENTS DEATH AND SUFFERING." AT THEIR WEAKEST; ART CONCEPTS AND ART WORKS ARE HANDBOOKS FOR HOW TO PASSIVELY ACCEPT THE UNACCEPTABLE DEATH AND SUFFERING OF LOVED ONES AND ONESELF, USUALLY BY DISMISSING ITS IMPORTANCE OR IGNORING IT. AT THEIR MOST TRIVIAL; THEY ARE MERELY MANUALS FOR HOW TO TOLERATE THE INTOLERABLE, AGAIN USUALLY BY IGNORING IT. BUT AT THEIR STRONGEST, MOST SIGNIFICANT; BOTH ART AND RELIGION ARE TOTAL ACTS OF DEFIANCE THAT AGRESSIVELY TAKE DELUSION, DENIAL, AND HALLUCINATION BEYOND THE LIMITATIONS OF THE MENTALLY CHALLENGED OR MENTAL ILLNESS INTO THE EXPLOSIVE REALM OF MYSTERY AND ASTONISHMENT. ART IS AN UGLY CONCEPT. BEAUTY EVEN UGLIER. GLAMOUR NAUSEATING. SURVIVAL THE UGLIEST. UGLY PEOPLE EVERYWHERE AGREE. AND WE AT PAINPANG.COM ARE UGLIER THAN MOST. SO YOU MUST CHECK OUT DR. MUHAMMAD (MORE-HAM-MEDS FOR MORE-HAM-ID) STRANGELOVE'S SHOW. THE "HOW-I-STOPPED-WORRYING-AND-LEARNED-TO-LOVE-DEATH-AND-SUFFERING" TRAVELING ROAD SHOW IS HERE! IT'S AWFUL. IT'S AWE-FILLED. IT'S SHOCKINGLY UGLY! YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO TURN AWAY. WE GUARANTEE IT. OR YOUR MONEY BACK.]
[THE TACKINESS OF MONEY-BACK GUARANTEES IN THE ART WORLD. TACKY: 1. SHABBY, SEEDY 2. MARKED BY LACK OF STYLE OR GOOD TASTE 3. CHEAPLY SHOWY. LIKE RELIGION, ART IS RULED BY ITS CONCEPTS AND WORKS. AND THESE RULES, RULERS OR RULINGS INCLUDE THE ECONOMIC CONCEPTS AND MATERIAL POSSESSIONS OF ART AND RELIGION. AND WHILE RELIGIOUS PROFESSIONALS HAVE MUCH IN COMMON WITH ART PROFESSIONALS BECAUSE NEITHER OFFER MONEY-BACK GUARANTEES, WE DO.]
[THE ART OF LUCKY LUCKLESS SHITS PRESENTS: "MORE LUCKY SHITS." BE SURE TO LOOK FOR OUR ANNUAL STRESSED & DISTRESSED ART SALE. GREAT BUYS. OUR DISTRESS IS YOUR GAIN. BETTER THAN UNSTRESSED AND HAPPY ART. (STRESSED ART IS AN EUPHEMISM FOR SO-CALLED DAMAGED OR SLIGHTLY DAMAGED ART. IT ALSO GOES BY THE NAME OF DISTRESSED ART.) ALL ARTISTS AT PAINPANG.COM ARE STRESSED... AND OFTEN DISTRESSED, THOUGH NOT NECESSARILY DAMAGED. SO WE HAVE A SPECIAL PLACE IN OUR HEART FOR ALL THE MISHAPS OF GOOD-INTESIONS-GONE-WRONG. ALL STRESSED, DISTRESSED, DAMAGED, UNDELIVERED, UNDELIVERABLE, UNAPPROVED, DISAPPROVED, MISTREATED, MISHANDLED, MISAPPROPRIATED, MISCOMMUNICATED, MISCONCEIVED, MISUNDERSTOOD, MISJUDGED, MISGUIDED, MISLEADING, MISINFORMED, MISTAKEN, MISBEGOTTEN, UNWANTED AND RETURNED ART FIND THEIR WAY EVENTUALLY TO THE GREAT STRESSED & DISTRESSED ART SALE.]
What Is a Serigraph or Silkscreen?
by Art.com, 1995-2004
Silkscreening, which was introduced around 1907, presses ink through a fine screen onto paper. A stencil of an image is placed on a taut screen with paper underneath. Ink is then spread on top and forced through the screen onto the paper with a squeegee. Unlike photo-offset, silkscreens (also called serigraphs) allow the artist to vary the colors and patterns while printing.
What Is a Limited Edition?
by Art.com, 1995-2004
A limited edition is a series of identical prints, which are limited to a one-time printing of a certain number of pieces. The artist determines the size of the edition, and usually signs and numbers each individual piece.
Will the Value of a Limited Edition Increase Like Other Collector's Items?
by Art.com, 1995-2004
By their nature of being limited in number, demand for certain limited edition prints can be greater than the number of reproductions produced for the edition. Once an edition is sold out from the publisher, which means that the print is no longer available from the publisher but may still be available from an authorized dealer, the prints are considered to be on the Secondary Market. This means that the print can be bought and sold by any dealer or individual, often above issue price, depending on supply and demand.
Screenprint Reproductions
by Bamber Gascoigne, 2004
(How to Identify Prints: A Complete Guide to Manual and Mechanical Processes from Woodcut to Inkjet)
"Sophisticated modern screenprinting is an ideal process for reproducing paintings, with the ink often seeming to lie on the surface like paint. Such images will fail to reveal any of the ink patterns described in this book as characteristic of manual prints. They are not artist's prints (since the artist has not been physically involved in the printmaking process), but they are often nowadays signed by artists --- as also are four-colour offset lithographs printed on art paper. Such prints raise an important question: what is the basic distinction between an artist's print and a reproduction? Another question will provide the answer. Did an identical image (identical in colour and design, but not necessarily size) pre-exist the print? If so the result, however beautiful, is a mechanical reproduction."
"The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction"
by Walter Benjamin, 1935
"In principle a work of art has always been reproducible. Man-made artifacts could always be imitated by men. Replicas were made by pupils in practice of their craft, by masters for diffusing their works, and, finally, by third parties in the pursuit of gain. Mechanical reproduction of a work of art, however, represents something new. Historically, it advanced intermittently and in leaps at long intervals, but with accelerated intensity.
"... With the woodcut graphic art became mechanically reproducible for the first time, long before script became reproducible by print. The enormous changes which printing, the mechanical reproduction of writing, has brought about in literature are a familiar story. However, within the phenomenon which we are here examining from the perspective of world history, print is merely a special, though particularly important, case. During the Middle Ages engraving and etching were added to the woodcut; at the beginning of the nineteenth century lithography made its appearance.
"But only a few decades after its invention, lithograsphy was surpassed by photography. For the first time in the process of pictorial reproduction, photography freed the hand of the most important artistic functions which henceforth devolved only upon the eye looking into a lens. Since the eye perceives more swiftly than the hand can draw, the process of pictorial reproduction was accelerated so enormously that it could keep pace with speech. A film operator shooting a scene in the studio captures the images at the speed of an actor's speech. ... photography foreshadow the sound film. The technical reproduction of sound was tackled at the end of the (nineteenth) century.
"Around 1900 technical reproduction had reached a standard that not only permitted it to reproduce all transmitted works of art and thus to cause the most profound change in their impact upon the public; it also had captured a place of its own among the artistic processes. For the study of this standard nothing is more revealing than the nature of the repercussions that these two different manifestations---the reproduction of works of art and the art of the film---have had on art in its traditional form."
The Reproduction of Representations of Sex and Violence In Film and Art
"Sex & Violence" Show #1
"Sex & Violence" Show #2
"There is no security against the ultimate development of mechanical consciousness,
in the fact of machines possessing little consciousness now....
Even a potato in a dark cellar has a certain low cunning about him
which serves him in excellent stead."
- Samuel Butler, Erewhon
(requoted, reprinted and reproduced here
from A.R. Anderson's book Minds and Machines,
"Contemporary Perspectives in Philosophy Series.")
© 2004 by Painpang.com | privacy policy | jobs | contact us | order forms
