In his blog Caleb asked the question: Could we ever define the strive for efficiency in our technological devices art?
This was a response to my question of what we had over animals that made us superior in relation to viewing art and appreciating art. I think we could define this constant drive for more efficient and proficient ways of getting things done as art. Our world lives and thrives on technology. Without it, the world would fall apart. The very thought of losing power so that our technological devices would not work is absolutely terrifying. We would lose our food, our heat, our water, our lifelines to the outside world. Everything, and I mean everything is run on technology. The art of making it better and more efficient to use is something we also depend on. If there was not this constant strive for these advances, our world would be failing. I guess this is the symbolic meaning at least Goodman looked for in art. The meaning of dependency. We can all relate to this, at least in industrial countries. We all know what it means to have technology, to depend on your phone and your computer, that these things are lifelines of sorts. If we did not have them, we would not know how to contact people, have people contact us, connect with people. We have completely lost the sense of just being together and getting together. We must text someone or Facebook them and then eventually, after much arranging through your phone and computer, they might get together and spend time together. But this is the connection and would you not say theses technologies are beautiful? Are they not pleasing, to see a big screen television project a moving picture or seeing someone in another country through your computer screen. I guess you could say that they are somewhat of a crutch or a portal for art to come through.
Without them, what art would we lose?
No comments:
Post a Comment