ART IN THE AGE OF DIGITAL DISSEMINATION
\nCLASS ESSAYS from a Fine Arts Course
\ntaught at the University of Victoria, B.C., Canada
\nby Brad Brace, 1993<\/p>\n
Contact: lgammon@nero.uvic.ca
\nor, Brad Brace, 503-230-1197
\n—————————————————————–
\n———–<\/p>\n
This Fine Arts course was the first “art & technology” course
\ntaught at the University of Victoria. The students involved were
\nfrom a variety of disciplines (although, primarily visual arts
\nstudents) and had for the most part, little or no previous
\nexposure to computers. The Computer Lab at the University has, an
\narray of imperious nerds intent on empire-building, 10 networked
\nSun workstations, a few slow Macintoshes, two flatbed scanners,
\none PC and some basic pagelayout and photo manipulation software
\nprimarily for the Macintoshes, basic sound\/midi equipment, and a
\ngrumpy creative-writing professor who regularly shuffles down the
\nhall to the faculty-lounge to wash out his teapot. This was
\nenough equipment to provide glimpses of creative possibilities; I
\nsuspect that enough enthusiasm has been generated to warrant the
\npurchase of additional equipment and software, and to have this
\ncourse offered on a regular basis. A printing press would also be
\na nice adjunct to the existing traditional visual art
\ndepartments. I have also offered to design and build a virtual
\ntext-based reality (MOO) for the Fine Arts Department.<\/p>\n
Although characterized as a “studio course” I felt it more
\nappropriate to discuss the larger issues involving technology and
\ncontemporary culture and minimize the importance of a through
\n“knowledge” of specific software. This was accomplished with
\nhandouts and discussions of pertinent articles, screenings of
\nappropriate films, and contemporary music. Particular attention
\nwas given to networks and interconnectivity in general and of
\ncourse, the Internet. Although this was an introductory course,
\nthe exposure to the various resources available through the
\nInternet encouraged a phenomenally rapid grasp of both digital
\ndissemination and the (Unix) operating system.<\/p>\n
———–<\/p>\n
Course Description: “A flirtatious romp lightly over the
\nglittering periphery of digital technology. Has art and the avant
\ngarde disappeared from view, gradually leaking into an
\nall-pervasive generalized aestheticism? Could it be that
\nsomething that might have once been called art is alive and
\nflourishing between connected networkers… unbeknownst to
\nimplausible and incestuous art institutions? Are there really
\nstill artists around who think they’re making art? Are computer
\nsystems virtually enacting the penultimate hierarchy, enforcing
\noppressive political privilege; or are they the new democratic,
\nmeans of representation? Has the critical art press stood still
\nunder a deluge of new cultural publications? Have we *all* become
\nartist? These questions and more…!<\/p>\n
“An introduction and collaborative overview and analysis of
\nfairly recent, mid-range, cultural tools and their implied
\nfunctions.<\/p>\n
“Students are encouraged to attend all classes and optimize
\ntheir uses of the equipment while exploring various venues
\nthroughout the reserved studio time following the class each
\nmorning. Other facilities on and off-campus will also be
\nutilized.<\/p>\n
“A reminder that an informal essay of three to four thousand
\nwords is required for this course. It should be “brimming with
\noriginal insight and speculation on contemporary culture and
\ntechnology.” It may be informal in that it employs creative
\nwriting techniques (contemporary structures, verse, quotations,
\ndialogue, illustrations, etc.). It may make reference to
\ncontemporary media, including the materials\/sources shown in
\nclass.<\/p>\n
“Also required, is an electronic-portfolio of visual and
\naudio art projects. This should demonstrate some degree of
\nfamiliarity of software and resources covered in the lab. It need
\nnot be an extensive or necessarily cohesive body of work. It
\nshould be strongly suggestive of a developing approach to
\ntechnological media.”<\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
ESSAYS:<\/p>\n
The Dematerialization of Art, Life, and Real Estate.<\/p>\n
“The highest problem of any art is to cause by appearance the
\nillusion of a higher reality.” – Goethe Although Goethe’s exact
\nmeaning is open to interpretation the computer appears to be a
\ntool ready to meet the spirit of his objectives. At least in the
\nminds of many electronic artists. The computer, particularly
\ndraws the attention of artists today because it epitomizes
\ncurrent technological development and offers the greatest
\npotential for exploring new creative places. If we somehow feel
\nlimited by our imagination, the demands of the marketplace, or
\ncurrent art theory, the computer is one element that somehow
\nsuggests unlimited potential. For those who consider themselves
\nto be Renaissance men and women the computer is a godsend.
\n In addition to being a production tool the computer is a window
\non and an interface to the rest of the electronically connected
\nworld. The computer as production tool switches modes and
\nbecomes a link to countless other artists and resource people
\nthroughout the world. It only takes a little thought to consider
\nthe possibilities of combining these activities. <\/p>\n
Analyzing the computer as a creative tool is similar to
\nconsidering fire as a system to cook one’s dinner. It can
\ncertainly do that but it has some other dimensions and
\npossibilities. Understanding the realm of the computer and its
\ncompanion data highways is pertinent to its effective use. What
\ncontext does art occupy when it uses electronic space? What new
\ncreative possibilities does it present, what are its
\nlimitations.. audience.. temporal qualities.. style..
\ncontrol… access.. money.. appropriation.. credibility..? Is
\nthere a new underlying language used to create and read
\nart-cyberart. Can traditional art fit into the cyberworld? Can
\nVenus de Milo be digitized and stored on to a hard drive and
\nstill be a credible work of art? <\/p>\n
The computer as creative tool dematerializes the process of
\nproduction. A painter might personally mix gallons of paint,
\nspend hours making canvases, wait for paint to dry, spill paint
\non his clothes or make a small rip in his canvas. None of this
\nis a factor or even a possibility when the image maker uses Adobe
\nIllustrator. Is any of this an influencing factor in creating
\nculturally significant images. Can these qualities be duplicated
\nand available in another set of pull-down menus?
\nThe materiality of art has always been a significant dimension,
\nnot only of its final form but in influencing the creative
\nprocess. Subtleties expressed by Russian sable and bamboo from
\nthe Mediterranean will present a challenge to future programmers.
\nCan computers replicate the interaction between traditional
\ntools, natural materials, and chance occurrence? The future of
\nmedia such as metal-plate etching and lithography may be
\nperpetuated because of their distinctiveness or they may simply
\nbecome an archaic mode to be mimicked by a graphics program.
\nHowever, computers can give us some interesting interpretations
\nof materials. Swiftly moving granite-bodied humanoids,
\nleopard-skinned fish, and chromed-metal mountains may constitute
\nkitsch imagery but they prove that the computer does genuinely
\nextend the dynamic range of expression. <\/p>\n
The lack of materiality in creating art is perhaps secondary to
\nthe non-existence of the completed art work. Although the
\nfinished piece may reside in digital form as a description in
\ncomputer code it can only take physical form by another process
\nof creation, usually mechanical. This re-creation requires an
\ninterpretation of the original and removes the artist from the
\nfinal completed piece. Psychologically it places him\/her in the
\ncategory of being a symbolic language worker and analogous to
\nbeing a data entry clerk. This method of production mirrors other
\nmass produced consumer products and merchandise from the music
\nand entertainment industry. Questions of authenticity,
\nprovenance, place and uniqueness all affect the value and purpose
\nof computer generated art work. So.. can computers be used to
\ncreate high art? <\/p>\n
Conversely, artists can now extend their domain greatly. Most
\nsignificantly, they can jump the fences of the traditional
\ncultural gate keepers. Since most establishment galleries have a
\nfocused audience, limited budgets, and aesthetic agendas the
\nopportunities for new or alternative works are limited. Informal
\nelectronic galleries can post computer files with minimal cost
\nand provide many more times the exposure of individual galleries.
\nAlthough some electronic galleries will probably develop their
\nown gate-keeping qualities the diversity and the large number of
\ncomputer installations will probably always provide unique
\nopportunities for new and non-mainstream art to find an audience. <\/p>\n
Artists that create work for the realm of computers and networks
\nwill find interesting discussions regarding copyright, access,
\nfile standards, reproduction rights, appropriation, modification,
\nand methods of electronic payment.<\/p>\n
New display systems will continue to be developed for outputting
\ncomputer files. Since more and more programs are incorporating
\n3D functions the interest in VVDs (volume visualization displays)
\nis growing. Since the promises of holography and Star Trek to
\nbring live, full motion, 3D images into our living room has not
\nmaterialized, computer controlled optical-mechanical systems are
\nbeing developed. “Holographic displays show some long-term
\npotential but they can not be generated in real time. Their
\nfield of view is fundamentally limited, and these displays
\ntypically change their characteristics with the angle from which
\nthey are viewed.” As an alternative, Texas Instruments has
\nproduced its Omniview device that allows the display of volumes
\nin volumetric space.
\nUntil recently, 3D images have only been displayed on two
\ndimensional CRTs and have required the inclusion of standard
\nperspective cues such as shadows, texture gradients, and relative
\nsize comparisons. Stereo 3D systems have relied on the use of
\nspecial glasses to simulate surface depth but could not allow
\nmovement around a three dimensional object. VVD displays use a
\nrotating disk that fills the display volume, creating a surface
\npoint at any location in a half-round ball space. Then by using
\nlaser beams directed by X, Y, & Z computer controllers, images
\ncan be projected to any point in the volume. The concept is
\nsimilar to the pictures drawn at laser shows but here 3 beams are
\nused.
\nA 36 inch diameter version has been built but a 10 foot diameter
\nmodel is feasible. A viewer can circle the display sphere and
\nsee a three dimensional object from all directions while it moves
\nin real time. The display’s resolution can be changed to any
\ndesired value by redirecting the scanning system to overlap
\npoints. VVD resolution is expressed in voxels (vo lume pi
\nxels). Early prototypes had 12,000 voxels, while current models
\ndisplay 70,000. Three lasers of different colours can provide a
\nthree-colour image or they can be mixed to provide a full colour
\npalette. Presently, VVD systems require powerful computers to
\ncalculate 3D display data. Originally developed for the U.S.
\nDepartment of Defense this technology’s future will probably be
\nmore applicable to non military purposes.
\nProposed applications include air traffic control visualization.
\nAir traffic controllers could look into the sphere and see the
\nexact location, continuous movement and distance relationship
\nbetween circling airplanes. Pointing to a plane with a laser
\nbeam would bring up its information on the computer screen.
\nOther uses include medical diagnosis, weather pattern analysis,
\nand remote control of space station docking. Visual artists
\ncould use this system to pre visualize sculpture projects, for
\nchoreography and to output 3D animation sequences. <\/p>\n
The use of more conventional output devices will increase to
\nmaterialize images and objects designed in the abstract world of
\nthe computer. CNC (Computer Numerical Control) equipment
\ndesigned for the metal production industry and XY plotters can be
\nused to cut out images in wood, vinyl, metal, or fabric. Three
\ndimensional milling machines can materialize objects for
\nsculpture and 3D animation.
\nExisting 3D works and artifacts can be digitized, stored, and
\nrecreated in many different locations. Unlimited serial editions
\nof 3D work could become more popular.
\nThe production of two dimensional works, including print
\npublishing have created a need for the service bureau that
\nspecializes in outputting files for the artist and publisher.
\nFuture service bureaus will expand their systems to cover video,
\n3D media, and large-scale 2D imaging. Since specialized
\nequipment is required to materialize creative ideas, the artist
\nwill more often be forced to conceive and work on his ideas in
\nthe realm of the abstract. In many cases the artist will only
\nsee the final completion of his work after sending the files to
\nthe “Service Bureau”. <\/p>\n
The total extent of cyberspace integration is still to be
\ndetermined. Presently thousands of computers are connected
\nthrough various networks such as the Internet, private commercial
\nsystems, open commercial systems, and hacker systems like
\nFidoNet. Although most are platform independent there are still
\nfairly narrow constraints on the type of data exchanged. There
\nare parallel communications systems like land telemetry networks
\nthat monitor geological conditions, traffic movement, electrical
\npower transmission, radar information and satellites that handle
\ntelecommunications and video signals.
\nAs more and more communications move away from the analog to the
\ndigital world as high definition television is soon expected to
\ndo the more integration of signals will occur. It is interesting
\nto consider that a computer could order extra oxygen supplies
\nfrom Missouri when its sensors determine a high level of air
\npollution in Los Angeles. Or that stock market futures price of
\ngrain would change after a computer analyzed infrared images of
\nworld crops.
\nArtists might consider interactive works that are affected by
\nnatural forces, commercial activity, or combinations of
\nconditions sensed by cyberlinks. <\/p>\n
The networks will become a great source of ideas, feedback, and
\nwill present opportunities for collaboration. Art created for a
\nworld culture will need more than an North American perspective.
\nA description of a Russian created program El-Fish states that
\n“Russian programmers couldn’t write successful accounting
\nprograms because they don’t know about western business
\nculture…but their culture developed sensibilities that combined
\nbeauty and non-utility”. Artistic teams from different parts of
\nthe world can co-operate to create the best cultural products for
\na world audience. <\/p>\n
As the digital bit becomes the standard building block for all
\ninformation we will have greater interchangablity and
\ninterconnectivity. Nicholas Negroponte states that “all
\ninformation providers will be in a common business – the bit
\nradiation business – not radio, TV, magazines or newspapers”.
\nAdvantages include being able to quickly construct many specific
\nversions of a production and the non-material storage of
\nproducts. Large numbers of books no longer have to auditioned
\nbecause of the advent of print-on-demand printing systems. Many
\nconstructed realities will possibly only exist in digital form. <\/p>\n
Unfortunately we may also develop creative techniques in one
\ndigital medium and simply apply them to others, maybe
\ninappropriately. A music sequencer program allows you to
\nQuantize while a photo manipulation program allows you to
\nEqualize. They both use a common root technique of normalizing
\nbut specific digital manipulation concepts might not have
\nuniversal application. However, is there expanded creativity in
\ndoing musical things to pictures and visa versa? <\/p>\n
The enthusiasm for the digital domain does have some detractors.
\nAnalog constructions do have specific qualities that are
\naesthetically pleasing. They might not be able to be justified
\ntechnically but certain nuances inherent in analog
\ninterpretations are artistically valid. Chemical imaging systems
\nstill create movies that are more pleasing to the eye. Tube
\namplifiers create a unique sound that can’t really be duplicated
\nby digital sound. As in other transitions we will loose some
\nimportant characteristics and abilities when we adopt new
\ntechnologies. <\/p>\n
The cyberworld and computer created information obviously have
\ntheir own language. Marshal McLuhan was convinced that the
\nmedium is really the message. Although content is significant
\nwhen evaluating a short term experience, the inherent qualities
\nof a medium are really what constitutes the overall message. TV
\nreally communicates passivity and mass conformity. The message
\nof cyberspace is still being considered. The technical language
\nof the cyberspace system is still in a tyrannical realm of linear
\ntext. Totally unforgiving of errors in letters & case it exerts
\na blind totalitarian control over the mechanics or structure of
\nthe system. However, the highly defined structure of the system
\nopens an anarchic realm of interrelationships and interactions of
\npossibilities.
\nPerhaps the key distinguishing characteristic of the cyberworld
\nis interactively. Users of the Internet are able to make more
\nconscious choices about the information they receive, they can
\ngather data into their own local electronic spheres, and they can
\ninteract with other users & information providers. We can assume
\nthat one message from cyberspace is activity rather than
\npassivity. Coach potato mode will not work with a cyberspace
\nscreen. <\/p>\n
Art has generally catered to the passive viewer. Although modern
\nart has incorporated participatory elements and some interactive
\nschemes most of the ideas are expressed in a one-way
\ncommunications mode. Art galleries create interaction or choice
\nby having patrons physically move from one location or art work
\nto another. In most cases the cyberart will be presented to the
\nviewer at his\/her location. Instead of a nail on a wall, the
\ncomputer will be a much more sophisticated display system. The
\ndigital nature of art will allow the viewer, if he so desires, to
\nalter the artist s work, to appropriate it or to simply reject it
\nby destroying the electronic file. <\/p>\n
The visual style of cyberart often follows the myriad of choices
\nthe system provides. A complex system creates complex imagery.
\nInteractive CD s offer menu screens with dozens of preview
\nimages. Text is supported by images. Images are augmented with
\ntext. Sound is added to business communications and moving image
\nsegments like QuickTime files are attached to technical reports.
\nIdeas are expressed through layering several modes of expression.
\nPedagogical theory has always supported multi-modal
\ncommunications and now we have the technology to accomplish it.
\nIn addition to painting, photography or sculpture, media such as
\nMacroMind Director, Hypercard, electronic games, CD-I, 3D0 and
\nvirtual reality systems may be relevant choices for artists. The
\nfuture expression of ideas will require a layered, multi-modal
\nstrategy that elaborates and gives the user choices and the
\nopportunity to participate. Simple two-dimensional images may
\nhave difficulty finding a place in cyberspace. <\/p>\n
The plastic arts have referred to traditional sources for their
\ntheory and inspiration. Modernism embraced Marxism while Post
\nModernism welcomes Neitzche back. The cyberpunks have created
\ntheir own set of philosophers, all of which are found in the
\nScience Fiction section of the library. Asimov, Pohl, Arthur C.
\nClark and Robert Heinlein are some. “If Marvin Minsky had his
\nway, there would always be a visiting science fiction writer in
\nresidence at the Media Lab.” Will the artist who chooses to work
\nin the Cybersphere have to pay closer attention to science
\nfiction to better understand its roots? Can Marx and Azimov
\nco-exist?<\/p>\n
How involved should artists become in the technology of the
\ncyberspace? In the past many artists have been content to have a
\ntechnician organize the technical processes of art production.
\nAlthough the artist may not have had the technical skill to
\ncomplete the task he usually understood the process as it related
\nto his artistic needs. However, to participate in the cyberspace
\ncommunity it may demand a greater level of technical commitment.
\nAlan Kay pointed out that the computer is not a medium but rather
\na meta-medium. In other words, with a computer you can create
\nmedia.
\nArtists have previously been in the habit of simply adopting the
\nmaterials and tools created by engineers and the industrial
\nproduction system. MIT’s MediaMoo is a good example of a
\ncyberspace reality that is being created through technical
\nknowledge, interest from a wide range of “characters”, social
\ninteraction, and some artistry. Future virtual realities will
\nrequire equal amounts artistic and technical input. It will be
\nmost effective if artists can express their artistry through a
\nstrong understanding of technology. In fact, artists will be
\nexcluded from many potential interesting environments if they do
\nnot develop the technical skills to communicate in the new
\nelectronic world.<\/p>\n
Jaron Lanier says that we can use “post-symbolic” communication
\nto create shared realities. A virtual reality system will
\ncreate a beach when we say: “Let’s go for a swim”. Instead of
\nusing symbols to describe the beach, we create an electronic
\nversion of a real beach.
\nSymbolism, which is the key to semiotic interpretations of our
\nculture may find new roles in visual communication. Whenever we
\nuse a system that constructs new realities, then the established
\ncultural symbols or icons, which are short cuts to perception,
\nmay become pass or boring. Any reference to past cultural
\nsymbols would immediately signify fantasy. Artists will have to
\nlook past much of our visual and semiotic heritage to construct
\ncredible virtual worlds.<\/p>\n
Computers, networks, and the machines that they exchange
\ninformation with are multiplying at an incredible rate. They are
\nconstructing a new set of possibilities and destroying others.
\nThe traditional artist who is interested in entering the
\ncyberworld will have to make many changes. The creative
\nenvironment is abstract and dematerialized. Your ideas will be
\nneatly reconstructed into uniform bits ready to be radiated
\nthroughout the system.
\nAlthough you will have many opportunities to distribute your work
\naround the world it will not receive the hallowed treatment
\nreserved for gallery exhibitions. It will compete freely with
\ncountless images, interactive programs, video, digitized audio,
\ngames, and people. <\/p>\n
You will start to read science fiction. You will try to find the
\nbest service bureau to make hard copies your photos, graphics,
\nand sculpture projects. You will find creative partners in
\nEthiopia.<\/p>\n
You will take up computer programming so that you can create new
\nreal estate in a Florida MOO. You will drop sculpting and take
\nup MacroMind Director. You will forget about cultural symbols
\nand icons. You will save hard for a VVD display system. You
\nwill not need expensive real estate because you can watch your
\nvirtual reality beach. <\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
Chapter One – Media and Advertising<\/p>\n
What is the role of technology in the media? The media has
\ntraditionally been a way of conveying events ( political,
\nentertainment, human interest ) to the public at large. The
\nmedia is in the information business and relies heavily on
\ntechnology to transmit information from one place to another.
\nToday, we tend to think of technology with a sort of high – tech
\nthis is so modern day attitude. That technology is the wave of
\nthe future is evident but it is important to recognize that
\ntechnology is also a part of our past, and understand the
\nrelationships between past technology with that of today.
\nTechnology was the wave of the future thousands of years ago,
\ntechnology is like another word for progress, synonymous with
\nadvancement or moving forward in time, technology is the newest
\nand the latest and is a habitual quest of mankind to increase
\nhis\/her capabilities in his\/her environment. Domestication of
\ncrops was technology, what about fire – the greatest invention of
\nall? Technology has always been a driving force in the history of
\nthe human race and with technology a desire for communication is
\nalso deeply rooted in our collective heritage. People have made
\nillustrations and created writing systems to communicate and
\ndocument their histories. Language was also created for smoother
\ncommunication and has become increasingly complex. As the world
\nhas increased so has it s level of communication. The media as we
\nknow it largely developed in the wake of modern technology.
\nBefore radio, telegraphs, planes and trains, the world relayed
\nevents to other parts of the world through human travellers and
\nby letter which would have gone by carriage or boat. With the
\nradio, events of significance (for whatever reason) could be
\nbroadcast worldwide within a few short hours. With the invention
\nof planes came aerial warfare and the real possibility that a
\ncountry thousands of miles away had the practical means of
\ninvasion and conquest of your own homeland. Enter: the media.
\nPeople then and now relied on the media, the radio, the telegraph
\nand later their television to receive information they now
\nconsidered critical to their existence. Out of newspaper
\nadvertising developed radio and later T.V. commercials – the
\npoint at which media and advertising became inexplicably and
\nforever linked in popular culture. So where does that leave the
\nmedia in the modern world? Should the media have to maintain a
\nmoral responsibility to the public? What are the attitudes of the
\npublic to the media? How many people are unaware of the biases
\nand often self – serving motives that are prevalent in media or
\nnewsgroups today? The resources that the media have been able to
\nutilize in the twentieth century have changed the face of
\nadvertising indefinitely, and unfortunately deception is
\nunavoidable.At this point in time many people are still unaware
\nof the resources available to the media and because of this
\nwidespread ignorance are oblivious to the manipulation of their
\nminds and psyche by powerful mega-bucks-money-hungry
\nmanufacturers and corporations. An excellent example of this
\nmindless manipulation in advertising where technology has been
\nutilized would be photo – manipulation or perhaps plastic
\nsurgery. Combined, the use of these two areas in conjunction with
\nadvertising are one the leading contributors in the continuing
\nlack of self – esteem of women in North America. The widespread
\nimage of the idealized woman is often created through technology
\n: elaborate and painstaking make -up, photo manipulation through
\nlighting, airbrushing, touch ups, varied films and high contrast
\nfilters; these can all be used to create a false image – one
\nwhich is unfortunately high sought after and is in most cases
\nunattainable. The cause of this disastrous situation cannot be
\nblamed on the high – tech features that are available in present
\nday, aerial warfare cannot be blamed on the invention of planes.
\nPeople so often place the blame of an unfortunate situation on
\ntechnology because it is crucial to the existence of the
\nsituation – the situation is dependant on the invention; it is
\nhuman nature that develops and determines the course an
\nadvancement in technology will take. <\/p>\n
Chapter Two – Interconnectedness<\/p>\n
As technology increases, communication also increases and with
\nthese increases follows a sense of interconnection. Connectedness
\nshould be the opposite of isolation, but they are, in some ways
\nvery closely related. I will show this relationship as it exists
\nin a narrative; a day in the life of a fictitious character – Mr.
\nTypaLot. <\/p>\n
A Day in the Life of Mr. Typalot
\n by b. bigelow<\/p>\n
Mr. Typalot lives in the suburbs of Vancouver, in Delta, B.C.
\nHe lives in nice home in a prestigious area with his wife and 2.2
\nchildren. He works in the city, and has to commute each today. He
\nleaves his house at 7:40 every morning to make the commute to
\nVancouver. He takes his briefcase (laptop computer inside), his
\ncellular phone, and a mug of fresh, automatic-machine-made
\ncoffee. His commute though lengthy, goes quickly because he
\nspends much of his time talking on the phone (usually to other
\ncolleagues also on their way to work).Mr. Typalot is perhaps a
\nresearcher, an advertising executive, or maybe a systems analyst.
\nHe types a lot, mostly into his Unix at work, his laptop, or at
\nhis Macintosh in his den at home. When he isn t typing, he is
\ntalking, sometimes on a telephone, sometimes not. Mr. Typalot
\ncommunicates with people all over the world everyday via. e –
\nmail, fax, phone and answering machines, and through virtual
\nreality set-ups such as MediaMOO. He develops all kinds of
\nrelationships with people in the course of his day, but he is
\nalso everyday increasing his relationship with inaminate devices.
\nIt can not be avoided, in his relationship building with other
\npeople it is necessary for him to interact with machines – it is
\na necessity of his success in the workplace. Mr. Typalot is
\nisolated in a indirect way everyday. Each day for several hours
\nhe is deprived of any sensory stimulation that is not available
\nto him through his terminal or workstation. Mr, Typalot is
\nexperiencing sensory isolation.
\n The narrative of Mr. Typalot is a generic example of what many
\npeople in the workplace experience. Mr. Typalot is perhaps more
\nextreme than the norm but as communications in technology
\nadvance, more and more people will have workdays that fit this
\ndescription. This type of connectedness or advanced communication
\nhas ups as well as downs – the downside involves a lack of
\ndirect, or face-to-face contact, and a loss of the more human
\nside or traditional interaction between people. On the up side,
\nis the opportunity to engage in a virtual reality experience; to
\nparticipate in a highly imaginative and creative realm which I
\ncould only previously describe as becoming deeply involved with a
\nvery intensely written novel. These text based virtual realities,
\nsuch as MediaMoo are highly creative and intellectually
\nstimulating – as well as fun. They can be a good alternative to
\ntraditional reading because the player can actually participate
\nand contribute to the story . Virtual Realities might ce
\nbeneficial in educating children and adults – making learning
\nenjoyable and interesting. They might also contribute to a higher
\nself esteem in children\/teenagers as they maintain some type of
\ncontrol, responsibility, and exercise their ability to produce.
\nOn the other hand, V.R.s could be less than beneficial to some
\nindividuals as they might become more drawn into the V.R. than
\nmight be perceived as healthy. I sometimes envision a situation
\nsimilar to the Dungeon and Dragon scenario where in several cases
\nthe individuals involved with the game had a difficult time
\ndistinguishing between real life and fantasy . The bottom line
\nis that each individual is different and will react to virtual
\nrealities in their own way; that a few select cases cannot
\ndetermine the outcome of thousands of others. <\/p>\n
Chapter Two – Interconnectiveness<\/p>\n
Part Two – The Role of Technology in the Lives of Special Needs
\nPeople.<\/p>\n
Technology can go along way in contributing to the quality of
\nlifestyle in the lives of those with special needs. For the
\ndeaf, the computer can be a fabulous way of communicating and
\nreaching out to others. Autistic people who at times may have
\ndifficulty interacting with other people often are very skilled,
\nand enjoy working at a computer workstation. People confined to
\na wheelchair have many more career opportunities than ever
\nbefore thanks to the computer and a continuing growth of more
\nsophisticated software. In the instance of a brother of a friend
\nmine ( we ll call him Jim), the computer has literally been his
\nsalvation. After a severe car accident, Jim lost the movement of
\nboth legs – he will be confined to a wheelchair for the rest of
\nhis life. Jim comes from a family of artists and before his
\naccident he was a working artist painting in a traditional
\nsense. Now Jim works with computer graphics – doing freelance and
\ncontract work. New software has made it easier, and more
\nconvenient for people like Jim to continue working. There are
\nmany fields to work in , ie. research, data entry, etc. In the
\ncase of special needs children – those with learning disabilities
\nor the developmentally delayed; a constant stimulus is one of the
\nmost important factors in the mental ( and physical) development.
\nTraditionally, this constant stimulus has been provided by
\nsupport workers, but lack of funding ( gov t and private) often
\nleads to special needs children not receiving the one on one
\nstimulus they need and deserve. While the computer might not be
\nconsidered an adequate substitute for human stimulus, it would
\nstill be better than nothing and would probably make a positive
\ncontribution to the development of the child. Children are drawn
\nto computers – to the bright colors, movement and sound emote
\nfrom them. Unlike television, computers can be more interactive
\nand will encourage and prompt a child to participate. I don t
\nknow where computer stimulus will lead, but certainly it is
\nbetter for the intellectual growth – and even motor skills than
\nmost of the programs children watch on T.V. The same can be
\napplied to special needs adults, for while these individuals are
\nin the body of an adult, often their intellectual development
\nhasn t caught up – has been delayed in some way and stimulus and
\nprompts are still essential to their intellectual growth. <\/p>\n
Chapter Three – Technology and Tradition<\/p>\n
Part One: Technology and Tradition<\/p>\n
The increases in technology have made communicating in the
\ntwentieth century easier and more convenient than ever before.
\nElectronic mail, faxes, cellular phones and virtual realities
\ndrastically reduce the amount of time it takes to get a
\nmessage\/or important documents to an individual. Electronic mail
\ntakes away the envelope, the stamp and the whole structure of the
\ntraditional mail system. There is no pick, transporting the
\nletter to a sortation plant and sorting of the letter before the
\neventual delivery ( of which won,t be in the recipient s hands
\nuntil he\/she gets home from work,etc. E -mail is practical, but
\nwill eventually eliminate a characteristic of the weekday as many
\npeople experience it. Coming home to an unexpected card or letter
\nis a pleasant surprise which would be virtually eliminated in an
\nelectronic mail system. Letters or cards would probably be
\nreceived at work in the course of the day, and would be on a
\nscreen – not paper. Paper cards,invitations etc. might still be
\nsent out (perhaps by private,entrepreunial companies) as a sort
\nof novelty or maybe on a special occasion. What about wedding
\ninvitations and gold embossed papers? How could one put a wedding
\ninvitation into a photo album if the invitation was on the
\nscreen? ( I guess you could always print out a copy). These small
\ncharacteristics of everyday life will probably in the future be
\naltered to fit into a world where modern technology has spread
\ninto every aspect of our existence. Are there areas that the
\nnotions of convenience and practicality should not enter into?
\nAreas of our lives that are considered sacred and should be
\nprotected and preserved from the invasion of the driving force
\ncalled technology?<\/p>\n
Chapter Three – Technology and Tradition<\/p>\n
Part Two: Technology in the Home.<\/p>\n
Technology has always affected the home. The Refrigator,
\nelectronic oven, and electrical lighting are a far cry from a gas
\nlamp illuminated kitchen and a wood burning stove.
\n The washer and dryer, disposable diapers and running water have
\nfreed up plenty of time for more enjoyable pursuits like going
\nfor walks or visiting friends but in many instances just
\nlistening to the radio or watching television. We are surrounded
\nby technology always – modern techno conveniences such as the
\ntelephone (portable,cellular, or other) the microwave, toasters,
\ncoffee makers, VCRS and camcorders. The computer will have more
\nimpact in the home than any other techno convenience since the
\ntelevision.( or Nintendo). The computer will contribute both to
\nthe organization and the entertainment\/leisure activities in the
\nhome -catapulting into a nucleic role which the household could
\nquite possibly revolve around in the future. Through the computer
\na family, individual, etc. could have access to more information
\nthan they could ever hope to tread upon – never mind absorption.
\nMiscellaneous tasks and activities such as going out to get a
\nnewspaper, borrow a book from the library,get a video or play
\narcade games could be fulfilled by simply sitting in front of
\nkeyboard and screen. It is hard to predict what the outcome of
\ndiscontinuing traditional activity might be – or if it will
\nhappen at all. The potential is real and the outcome might be
\ndisastrous. Even a general recognmition by society to admit and
\nunderstand this;that the computer in the home and workplace is
\npotentially harmful to our continued existence, might go a long
\nway in preserving whatever integrity we have left.<\/p>\n
Chapter Four – Art and Architecture: The Role of Technology<\/p>\n
There is a big difference between computer generated art and
\nart that exists solely in the computer. Computer generated art
\ncan still be accessed in the traditional way, it can hang on your
\nwalls at home – it can be displayed in a gallery or reproduced
\nin a book.In this way the art is not dependant on the computer
\nfor it’s existence – it can retain an identity seperate from the
\ncomputer. In these instances the computer is like a tool the
\nartist has used to create his\/her work, just like a camera, or a
\ntablesaw. With art that exists solely within the computer, the
\nimages can only be viewed via the computer and nowhere else. It
\nis a permanent attachment to the piece and it is therefore an
\nintegral element of the work itself. This type of art is
\ndifferent from traditional art or even independant computer
\ngenerated art because it’s focus or motives are related to
\ncommunications in a different way – an area of communications
\nwhich is void of the physical and tangible.This difficult concept
\nof relaying ideas and information can be thought of as a large
\nbase of information, compiled of the thoughts and interests of
\nthousands of people.<\/p>\n
What is the role of the artist within this base of information,
\nand how will the role of the artist change as a result of
\ntechnology? Who is the artist? The artist is foremost a designer;
\na person who conceives ideas and then attempts to communicate
\nthose ideas (sometimes to themselves and sometimes to others)by
\nrepresenting the ideas in a physical expression. What the
\nexpression will be depends on the the designer. If the designer
\nis a musician the expression might be a musical score, if the
\ndesigner is an architect than probably a building plan. There
\nare several advantages to working within a large information base
\nthat over a 100 000 000 million people have access to ( ie. the
\nInternet).The exposure is tremendous and the opportunity to make
\ncontacts and to to relay ideas is anyone’s speculation. The
\nelectronic art gallery is to the artist today what television
\nwould have been to the actor who was previously only viewed in
\nlive theater. In presenting to the masses through an electronic
\nnetwork an expression of an idea the artist is able to convey and
\ncommunicate thoughts on a widespread level – but to what level of
\nefficiency? Is something lost in the philosophy if the artist is
\nable to communicate the the idea to a broad audience but only in
\ngeneral terms? Is it better to communicate a fuller understanding
\nof a concept to a limited people instead of a general idea to
\nthousands? This question can only be answered by the individual –
\neach artist having their personal agenda which dictates their
\nactions and motivates their work.<\/p>\n
It is up to us, the designers and artists to determine and
\nshape our changing role along with the advancement of technology.
\nWhat else can we do? We are forced to go with the flow and
\nutilize technology to prevent our obsolescence. Technology and
\njob displacement go hand in hand and the artist and designer are
\nnot an exception. With more and more sophisticated software many
\nkinds of work in the design industry could easily be sifted out
\nin the future. Graphic artists, architects, industrial designers
\ncould in all like likelihood be eliminated in future society.
\nThink of past tradesmen (tradesperson) who no longer have a place
\nin the world due to technological advancement and new invention?
\nHow many shoemakers have you met recently? The shoemaker was a
\ntradesman – a designer of a kind and is a scarcity in modern day.
\nOf course the machine made\/pre-fab shoes can never match the
\nquality of a leather shoe cut and measured specifically to the
\nindividual’s foot. One of a kind shoes- each with their own
\nidentity; a product and design from start to finish of the
\nindividual designer and his\/her original vision. The fact is if
\nit is good enough, if it will get the job done (at least
\nsatisfactorally) then it will be accepted by the masses;leaving
\nlittle room for the creativity and ingenuity of the individual
\ndesigner. A balance needs to be struck between designer and
\ncomputer – a blance where the computer is a tool for the designer
\nand not the designer itself. Architects and draftspeople now have
\nthe unique advantage of being able to conjure up their changing
\nvisions quicker than they could possible recreate an intricate
\ndrawing by hand.These quickly redrawn views however, only remain
\nan advantage to the architect etc. if the designer is still the
\nmotivating factor behind the design and is the major contributor
\nto the end result.<\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
Preinventing the Wheel<\/p>\n
Have you had enough of magazine articles and other essays
\nwhose titles play on the word “virtual?” Articles with names like
\n“Virtual Virtuoso” or ” Virtually now” or “Virtigo.” I thought as
\nmuch. Virtual reality is getting very tired, and it doesn’t even
\nexist yet. It has been able to avoid fading out of public view
\nfor this long because of its’ name, which sounds sufficiently
\nofficial, and at the same time vague enough to allow its’ use in
\ncontext with anything one thinks is neat-o. In the forties, there
\nwas a similar craze for things whose existence was in question,
\nand it also had a misleading name that made people sound clever.
\nThat name is Existentialism, and before it became popular, it
\nactually meant something. But it was only taken seriously after a
\ncouple hundred people who hadn’t bothered to find out its’
\nmeaning were put in situations where they had to pretend that
\nthey had- hey, presto- 200 false definitions! This confusion is
\nhappening to virtual reality, only not so romantically as it did
\nin post-war France. A few months ago I had dinner with a good
\nfriend. As we ate he asked me to explain to him what the whole
\ndeal on virtual reality is and I told him, more or less, that it
\nis the idea of general purpose simulation, and went on to explain
\nthat simulators of this sort need detectors to sense body motions
\nor speech, devices to stimulate our senses of sight, hearing,
\ntouch, etc., and a computer to connect everything and vary the
\ninteraction according to programs. Then I felt obliged to rehash
\nthe monologue about the many possibilities of the potential
\nmedium, and did, but my friend, who is an Economics major, just
\nlaughed, “Is that all it is, a glorified video-game?! You
\nactually study that kind of stuff at school? I heard all this
\ntalk on how important it is!” He had been impressed by the
\nvirtual Paul Reveres, the virtual exaggerators, the virtual
\nnewspaper columns with titles like this. It is truly a pity that
\nthe term ‘virtual reality’ isn’t used sparingly, and that ‘the
\nstudy of simulation’ or some like phrase doesn’t get all the
\nattention. Simulators already exist. Because of all this hype,
\nvirtual reality is being made to sound a lot more important than
\nit is. Virtual reality is being treated like some radical new
\nscience. Ad agencies are cashing in on its’ commerciality and
\nconfusing the general population with the meaning of the term.
\nFans of virtual reality are trying to convince people that its’
\ndawn is ridiculously near and thus that its’ study is pertinent.
\nOther virtual reality enthusiasts are preaching that virtual
\nreality is “the way” and will end racial inequality and give the
\nrepressed a voice. Just as preposterously, academics are solemnly
\nwarning that virtual reality will create a nation of violent
\nthugs. Others warn of “virtual-reality addictions,” seriously;
\n“virtual-reality addictions.” It is sad that a promising
\ntechnology has been taken over before it has even reached a
\nconcrete stage, by a bunch of clowns.
\n The driving forces behind virtual reality have been around
\nfor all of human history so why is it considered such a radical
\nconcept? When flight simulation programs started appearing a few
\nyears ago for home computers, a lot of folks bought them (after
\nall, they were pretty neat) but few sat around yakking about how
\nthose programs were “interactive” as though the word were a drop
\nfrom the fountain of profundity. Hell, even a pinball machine is
\ninteractive. What about “Choose Your Own Adventure” books, the
\nbooks that let kids make a decision by picking one of two pages
\nevery so often? What kind of novelty is there in trying to fake
\nthe world around us: We started with cave paintings, then
\nsophisticated paints until we had realistic oils, then the still
\nphotographic camera, the record player, motion pictures, talkies
\nand what could be more virtual than telephones; the technology
\nwhich Bell invented to allow an entire nation of people to
\nconsider talking to banana-shaped objects on street corners a
\nnormal part of life. Theatre is a form of virtual reality as
\nwell. Some like to think that the V.R. will “enlarge our minds”
\nby making us more imaginative. As though we haven’t now any
\nactivities requiring imagination. V.R. is not the first; it is an
\nelement of many games, from Chess through to Scruples. Of all the
\nthings V.R. could be compared to, it is strange that one hears of
\nthe similarities of V.R. and the telephone less often than V.R.
\nand narcotics. This is the kind of talk that makes V.R. out to be
\nlarger than life. There is a difference between drug-use and
\nany-old-thing that happens to be bizarre and illogical. That is
\nwhy we as a species have been spared an addiction to the writings
\nof Marshall Macluan. V.R. is not a new concept.
\n Virtual reality is also kept well in the public eye by
\nadvertising firms. These firms are resourceful enough to have
\nfound a word associated with V.R. to advertise services or
\nproducts in a manner that will make them sound as though they are
\non the cutting edge of technology, regardless of the truth. I
\nhave already mentioned the word they use. The word is
\n“interactive” and it is plastered on everything from phone-sex,
\nto standard phone-in talk shows, to magazines and automobiles and
\nchildren’s toys. It is generally assumed that inter-active is
\nentertaining but who of us really wants to leave our couch to
\nphone a television station half way through a program. People
\nwatch television to relax. The same goes for reading, listening
\nto music and looking at pictures. Being interactive isn’t all
\nthat thrilling. One spends all one’s life in an interactive
\nworld. A lot of it even bores one. Being inter-active is not
\nnecessarily being virtual. It would be kind if advertising
\nagencies would not try to convince us otherwise. No, we will have
\nto wait a few years for real reality-simulators.
\n How many years? “In the near future,” is the standard
\nphrase. How near? The people who vigilantly claim that V.R. will
\nbe perfected in the next ten years are generally the same people
\nwho talk a lot about terra-forming Mars and making it habitable.
\nHowever true it may be that all geniuses are dreamers, it is not
\ntrue that all dreamers are geniuses. Some are only poor,
\nmisguided Dr. Who fans. Let’s just say it takes thirty years to
\ndevelop a graphics system that can display at 24 fps, with
\nphotographic resolution, a stereoscopic alterable landscape-
\nwhich would take an insane amount of memory. We’ll also say that
\nby that time we’ll have the capability to transmit at real time
\nthe colossal amount of data needed to hook a V.R. machine up to a
\nnetwork. Then we’ll assume (this is more reasonable) that we’ll
\nhave a perfectly light-weight, comfortable bodysuit that won’t
\nmake one look like a scuba-diver wearing a bicycle helmet. Hey,
\nthey won’t be available to everyone. They won’t come cheap. It
\nwill take a long while for virtual reality systems to made
\ncompatible. It will be a while for a decent net to cover the
\nglobe. But let’s say that it will take around 50 years for V.R.
\nmachines to become common household items. As loose as any figure
\nbased on unprovable guesses must be, 50 years seems like a
\nreasonable number. What is all the excitement about then? No
\ncurrent virtual reality- type products, from war games to
\nvideo-games, come near to giving a convincingly real feeling.
\nJust because virtual reality may be right around the corner
\ndoesn’t mean we’ll see it next year. It’s quite possible that
\nhalf of us will be dead by the time virtual reality amounts to
\nsomething.
\n Some people in these times hold the opinion that V.R. will
\nbe a great social instrument. Sure, after Nintendo rolls a few
\ntens of thousands of Virtualboys off the assembly line everything
\nwill be jolly. No more wars, no more intolerance. Neo-Nazi
\nSkinheads will plug in and suddenly turn into nice, decent
\nfellows and fall to their knees to beg forgiveness from the
\nminority groups they have been terrorizing an hour before. The
\nidea is that since people would have the ability to conceal their
\nidentity while using a net we would all be tolerant and
\nunderstanding. This would be a compelling argument were it not
\nfor the telephone which already allows us this service.If V.R.
\nevolves in a similar manner, it will end up with individuals
\nchoosing only to contact close friends. And I know that’s not
\nwhat the V.R. enthusiasts want. And I know they want it to be a
\nwild and crazy medium. But there are a lot of folks in the world.
\nBusiness people, for example, would get use out of V.R. by using
\nit for long-distance conferences or perhaps for models of
\nproducts, or real estate. They would not find it useful to
\npretend to be a Virtual-prawn on the Cyberspace-Oceanfloor
\nNetwork. People could do a lot of things on V.R. networks, not
\nall of them brotherly. Thanks to V.R. it would be a lot easier
\nfor racist people to form world-wide organizations.. they could
\ncongregate daily if they chose. It is just about as likely that
\nV.R. will correct the world’s problems as it is that a crumpet
\nwill corrupt a swinging mallet. On the other hand V.R. will not
\nspell a return to the dark ages.
\n The idea is that someday children will be weaned on V. R.
\nsets. They will get used to regularly lopping off virtual heads
\nand so, when they grow older, they’ll be conditioned, see, and
\nthey’ll go nuts and they’ll lop off real peoples heads. No matter
\nhow much you show people that there is no evidence to support the
\nclaim that there is a correlation between violence in the media
\nand violence in real life they just don’t learn. For once and for
\nall, violence in the media is a good thing because it teaches
\nchildren to distinguish between fact and fiction. And so long as
\nit remains possible to tell when you are “virtual” and when you
\nare real there is no problem. We will never create V.R. so
\neffective that it is exactly the same as real life, we will
\nalways be able to notice something unrealistic about it, perhaps
\nthe way things sound, maybe the quality of light, it would
\ncertainly be virtually impossible to convincingly eat virtual
\nfood or have a perfect sense of touch.
\n The most ridiculous overestimation of V.R. is that the whole
\nworld will become obsessed with V.R. and abandon the outside
\nworld forever. This is very poetic but unfortunately there are a
\ncouple little problems with this theory. Like, for example,
\neating. Or will V.R. be so amazing that people just won’t get
\nhungry. Oh, there is also some difficulty in respect to paying
\nthe hydro bill when you spend all of your time in V.R. and
\ntherefore have no time to work. Most people for V.R. or against
\nV.R. tend to wildly exaggerate the importance of V.R. Remember
\nthe stories there used to be about computers? The only people who
\nwill ever be addicted to Virtual Reality already are, those are
\nthe people like Commander Rick on Prisoners of Gravity, the kind
\nof fools who write poetry about “cyberspace.”
\n Virtual reality does have a lot of potential; to take up
\nwhere the telephone leaves off, to amuse and entertain, to
\ndesign, and a whole lot more. What is annoying is to see history
\nendlessly rehashing itself. People have always exaggerated with
\nnew inventions from film to space travel. It is ludicrous that
\nvirtual reality is treated as such a unique, modern concept. It
\nhas roots in the trend in Western culture since the Dark ages of
\nmore and more realistic art and it has roots in the production of
\nvarious modern simulators. It is ridiculous the way ad agencies
\nthrough around the term “interactive,” in order to confuse people
\ninto associating it with virtual reality. It is ridiculous that
\nvirtual reality is being talked about this much when it probably
\nwon’t take off until another half century. It is ridiculous to
\nattribute spectacular moral consequences to virtual reality,
\neither good or terrible. It is particularly silly to predict
\nslaves to entertainment when no such preposterous phenomena has
\never existed before. It is a field too easy to romanticize. It is
\neasy to think of all the possibilities, and easier to forget that
\nmost of them will never be realized. Virtual reality is already a
\nfashion statement, an advertising ploy, a moral issue, and a
\nconstant subject in magazines. With all the attention one would
\nthink we were reinventing the wheel. <\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
Notes on the use of the computer in art.
\n by D. Venables<\/p>\n
The computer is a tool, a fancy tool, but just a tool. In
\nthe hands of a person who makes art, it can be used to make
\nart…the REAL kind of art. The pencil is a tool, a simple tool,
\nbut just a tool. In the hands of a person who makes art, it can
\nbe used to make art…the REAL kind of art. Perhaps if the
\nmajority of the computer art we see is pretty dismal, it is
\nbecause the tool has not yet found the right hands.<\/p>\n
Contemporary culture and the place technology has in it.
\nA loaded statement. Contemporary culture “is” technology. At
\nleast in our privileged neck of the woods. Taking this course
\nhas been akin to the experience of buying a Volkswagen and then
\nnoticing them wherever you go. I now see the use of computer
\nsystems where I was once blind to them, in every facet of our
\nlives. A technology this pervasive must surely be adopted by the
\nartists among us. The avant-garde will never die. The
\navant-garde will continually rear its unusual head where it’s
\nleast expected. It is the evidence of evolution, the flower on
\nthe plant of science.<\/p>\n
(Even as late as dadaism, Marcel Duchamp noticed the relation of
\nthe avant-garde to the practice of the consumer-that the product
\nof the avant-garde was to have the same characteristics of
\nplanned obsolescence\/mass production as the products of mass
\nconsumption while simultaneously allowing the producer\/artist to
\nregister shock at being reduced to a machine.) Discussed in
\nManfredo Tafuri, Architecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist
\nDevelopment (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1976).<\/p>\n
Maybe notes on what art is (I guess we have to have some kind
\nof a definition before we can tell if computers can be a part of
\nit) would be in order. A discretionary and biased viewpoint
\nfollows.<\/p>\n
After spending the last couple of years focusing entirely on
\nphotography, I came into this course, wide-open, and ready for
\nnew ideas, primed by a lecture by photographer Jeff Wall, who
\nshowed a selection of his older work and also a couple of his
\nnew pieces, done via computer graphics. This fired my
\nimagination. Little did I know at the time that Jeff was in the
\nhabit of traveling to Los Angeles and renting the computer lab
\nthere in Hollywood which has all the heavy artillery used in huge
\nspecial effects productions. The pieces he produced were of
\nhigh quality due to the level of the technology he was using,
\nalthough the work he had done could have been accomplished
\nthrough traditional photographic technique. <\/p>\n
Using “mind bicycles” for photography is advantageous in
\nthat the cost to the environment is considerably less, ie. the
\nchemicals poured down the sink (and forgotten in a frenzy of
\nphotographic creativity) make their way into the rivers,
\noceans, air, animals and eventually back to us in some form or
\nanother (perhaps while walking on the shore at midnight the
\nphosphorescence will suddenly, strangely, have you thinking of
\nCalvin Kline models). The immediate health of the artist is
\nthreatened less during computer use than during the photographic
\nprocess as well. It is cleaner to use than almost any other art
\nmaterial or tool.<\/p>\n
Thinking that a two month course was plenty of time in which
\nto master the art of photo-manipulation, I gaily traipsed into
\nclass to make some art. <\/p>\n
DEBBIES DEFINITION OF ART <\/p>\n
One of my definitions of art is, art as a verb… the act
\nof doing it. After the doing part is done, what s left is a
\nfossil, a mere artifact of the real thing which is art. The
\nart-things sitting in galleries, on walls, piled up in basements
\nare records and interesting as records of the metamorphosis and
\nworking out of a thought or feeling. <\/p>\n
Art is sometimes thought of as a didactic, instructive sort
\nof exercise; or, conversely purely decorative. These types of
\nart to me are dead, they leave no-where for the viewer to
\nexercise his or her own thought processes. <\/p>\n
The viewer is assumed to be in one of two states, with it
\nor not with it. In it or out of it. Hip or square. If privy to
\nthe current presumed cutting edge theme being presented by this
\ninstructive art, the viewer can nod sagely and agree; if not
\nconnected to the same stream of thought, there is room for
\ninstruction. This is claustrophobic and limiting, it stagnates
\nand is retentive. <\/p>\n
At this point I have a sneaking suspicion that much of the
\nart making using computer technology is of this sort, a parading
\nof technique, a bragging and telling how the look of reality can
\nbe changed. This has a tendency to dazzle and dictate a certain
\nlook , this kind of rigid template is an open invitation to the
\navant-garde, the art pirates, the art-hacker.<\/p>\n
“The stimuli of the modern world, sounds and sights are
\nreproduced and distributed through endless systems of linear
\ntechnology. (The more intimate senses were long ago excluded
\nfrom this order.) Stereo and video are recorded onto tape, that
\nopaque blackish substance that symbolizes the intransigent,
\nincomprehensible linear time of this universe. Computers and
\nrecord players use flat disks whose spiral roadways reflect the
\ncircularity of their contents. All visual and aural
\ninformation\u00a5speech over the telephone, the television picture,
\ncomputer data\u00a5is encoded into lines of electronic information.
\nThe linear becomes language. The arcane discipline of electronic
\ncirculation now guards the gates of the senses.
\n The proliferation of the computer is the development that
\nmost insures the closure of this system.. In the computer, we see
\nphysically affirmed, as if by an independent source, all the
\nassumptions of linear thought. Conversely, the computer ignores
\nall utterances not made according to the rules of its own linear
\ncode. With the advent of private computer use, the computer
\nbecomes an oracle of instruction in the structures of the linear.
\nIt gives instruction in how t write and how to conduct
\nbusiness\u00a5but according to its own linear rules. It is even
\ndeployed to indoctrinate children into the ways of the linear.
\nFurther, as greater and greater amounts of society s information
\n(both financial and intellectual) are stored in computers, even
\nthe reluctant are coerced into dealing with the computer and its
\npattern of thought.” <\/p>\n
Peter Halley, On Line New Observations, no. 35 (1985).
\nBlasted Allegories; 1987. The New Museum of Contemporary Art and
\nMassachusetts Institute of Technology.<\/p>\n
Virtual reality moves art and art making into a realm of
\nendless possibility. Freed from the confines of a small screen,
\nthis new dimension, for me is so broad it is almost impossible to
\nspeak of. Sculpture you can crawl into, ride, even travel through
\nfor what seems like miles, interactive installations. Perhaps
\nthis is the new direction in art we were waiting for. This will
\ninfluence, and enrich the traditional art practices as well as
\nconsumerism in society–art and consumerism–a well known couple
\nabout town.<\/p>\n
The credibility of that which is seen on a screen (which,
\nto most people is accepted as the truth) can be used to
\nmanipulate and fool the viewer. This is not a bad thing, a
\ntouch of healthy suspicion would be a welcome attribute in the
\ngeneral public. <\/p>\n
PIMPING THE REALITY PRINCIPLE -MONDO MAG (1993)
\n Angry, disillusioned and media-savvy, the newly discovered
\ntwenty-something generation is shaping up to a very hard sell.
\n\u00a5Debra Goldman, ADWEEK
\n Belief in advertising is not like breathing. It doesn t come
\nnaturally; it must be taught.
\n\u00a5Edwin L. Artzt, Proctor & Gamble CEO
\n It s got to be real.
\n\u00a5Levi s 501 jeans, advertisement<\/p>\n
And then there is the ephemeral, the part of art that comes when
\nyou least expect it. <\/p>\n
Some things we plan.
\n We sit and we invent
\n and we plot and cook up
\n Others are works of inspiration
\n Of poetry<\/p>\n
And it was this genius hand
\n That pushed me up the hotel stairs
\n To say my last good-bye. <\/p>\n
((DEBBIES ASIDE: (private thoughts on the act of communal
\nart on three screens at a time)<\/p>\n
Although its hard for me to communicate verbally vocally,
\neasier if writing<\/p>\n
taking turns– quick repartee isn t my bag.<\/p>\n
interesting to communicate well, more efficient felt like we
\nwere in touch-))
\n ….huh?…..<\/p>\n
On a more practical note, the strongest impression I’ m left
\nwith from taking this course is the feeling of entry into the
\nrest of the world.<\/p>\n
Especially here in Victoria, I’ve felt isolated, and
\nincreasingly so the longer I m here and the more time I spend at
\nschool. In the past I ve always been able to take off for jaunts
\ninto the states, around Canada or Mexico, but in the last few
\nyears I have lead an increasingly parochial life. It was a thing
\nI feared right from the first when I moved here, and then it came
\ntrue.
\nI’ m sure this sense of isolation is not my very own domain,
\nisolation is a major theme of our society at this point and it is
\nmy belief that technology in all its myriad forms has contributed
\nto this. The ability to lead a completely vicarious life,
\ncontaining excitement beyond the potential of most people, is
\navailable to anyone with a television, VCR, six-pack and a couple
\nof joints.
\n(oh ya, a video..fantasy of choice) <\/p>\n
This isolation is endemic. The T.V. screen which lives in
\nalmost every home is a constant friend, requiring no effort,
\nseemingly giving companionship and in reality taking away the
\nability to enjoy real personal contact. As well, a study has
\nshown persons who watch a “normal” amount of television suffer
\nfrom lack of REM sleep time, in other words, they don’t dream.
\nDreaming is a necessary part of a healthy life and the loss of
\nthis ability must have a severe, though perhaps subtle effect on
\nthe person. <\/p>\n
In contrast with my first thoughts of the virtual meeting
\nplaces as making yet another barrier between people, (much like
\ntelevision, probably because they re both boxes that plug into
\nthe wall), I see them now as a link, a possible tool for fusion,
\nalthough far from perfect, especially in that it precludes a vast
\namount of people from becoming part of this new community for
\neconomic reasons. I would like to think that with the growing
\navailability of the Internet, email and other network
\ncommunication systems, the unity that is created by the exchange
\nof thoughts and feelings will provide a humanitarian spring-board
\nand with the growing communication between people all over the
\nworld (I can hear music surging in the background…I d like to
\nbuy the world a coke…lalala) perhaps a true global
\nconsciousness will arise. Or the consciousness already in place
\nwill become more compassionate through increased knowledge and
\nfamiliarity. Art will fit in there (does already), a picture is
\nworth a thousand words…and takes up a lot more space…<\/p>\n
The ability to have free, almost immediate communication
\nwith people who are far away is extremely satisfying. <\/p>\n
The level playing field of electronic communication on
\nInternet is seductive. I, and most people, don’t reveal
\ngender, age, race, social standing while having these exchanges
\nand it is not necessary. This has got to be a good thing. <\/p>\n
The downside of this connection is the potentially
\nintrusive nature of the electronic net, a net we could all be
\ncaught in like little smelts with credit cards, Until the end of
\nthe World explored both these aspects fully, the connection kept
\npeople in close contact if they so desired and made it very hard
\nto hide.<\/p>\n
Back to my personal story. A testimonial. Dredged in
\nisolation (and I mean dredging in the culinary sense, the way
\nyour mother used to dredge chicken pieces in flour and spices
\nbefore frying) I of course turned to the television and began one
\nof those marathon, epic debaucheries of avoidance. Well, I was
\ndragged from my reverie of watching the passive screen to the
\nmore engaging activity of watching the computer screen, ah….a
\nscreen that talks back. I m not exaggerating when I say I miss
\nthe computer room during the weekends. <\/p>\n
For me, with my limited resources, the computer works best
\nfor communication purposes, text, at this point is the medium of
\nchoice.<\/p>\n
Computer art is verbal art right now. Making traditional art
\nis, to me, usually a pretty solitary activity. It is also a
\nphysical one, I enjoy the feel of the materials, the smell, being
\nable to hold the art, move it around. Because I use my senses,
\nit is sensual. Because it is sensual, there is also a realm of
\nsexuality. The move from three dimensional art to trying to make
\nsomething that I could call art, on a screen, that I couldn t
\ntouch or change the shape of unless I kept within the limited
\ndimensions, was frustrating to say the least. Perhaps, now that
\nthe form is not so foreign to me and I have a real desire to see
\nwhat I can do with this thing, and more time; I ll be able to
\nexplore the visual aspects more fully. This is only the
\nbeginning.<\/p>\n
There is no conclusion. My world has been made larger. I have
\nbarely experienced an introduction to this new art tool. I m
\nhooked. <\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
*****************************************************************
\n***************
\n(These are the incoherant rantings of a young man driven over the
\nedge by a
\n word processing program. Please proceed with caution.)
\n*****************************************************************
\n***************<\/p>\n
WordPerfect ate my essay, and my brain<\/p>\n
Neil Barman
\n 9106988
\n FA345
\n Brad Brace
\n June 18, 1993<\/p>\n
The last time I spent a serious duration in front of a
\ncomputer was in grade six. I was twelve years old and the
\nelementary school I attended had purchased four Apple II’s. With
\nso few computers at their disposal they were forced to choose an
\nelite group of students who would be privileged enough have
\naccess to the new technology. I was chosen to be among the
\n“lucky” ones.
\n We set out with task of learning Basic. I quickly learned
\nhow to write a program that would spew an annoying pattern of
\nnumbers
\ndown the screen. I also learned how to do math equations on the
\ncomputer, but I already had a calculator that made quick work of
\nthose and fit in my pocket too. We were given almost no guidance
\nmainly due to the fact that there was none to be given. Nobody
\nreally knew very much about computers, with a few exceptions.
\n Two young brainiacs named Adrian Evans and David Burridge
\nknew what they were doing. They had computers at home, the very
\nsame ones that were at school. They wrote cute little programs
\nthat would do this or that. Programs so inconsequential I can’t
\neven remember them now. But they knew how to do it. They also
\nmade it their business to remind me that I did not know what I
\nwas doing. They would talk computer lingo and laugh at how
\nperplexed I would get. They would point and whisper and giggle as
\nI would try to explain to the teacher why I was so confused. I
\nhad no clue why we were doing what we were doing. I was given no
\nassistance in that department. The “computer education” program
\ncontinued and I continued to be bewildered.
\n Basically Adrian and David were geeks flaunting their
\ncomputer literacy. I knew that and I tried not to let their
\nintimidation get to me. It did in any case. I opted out of the
\ncomputing program. I figured they were far more trouble than they
\nwere worth. I avoided them like the plague.
\n Ten years later, I have decided to re-acquaint myself with
\nthe machine called computer. A class called “Art and Technology:
\nArt in the Age of Digital Reproduction” seemed like it would be
\na good start since I already have a pretty good grasp of the art
\npart. Combining art with computer technology sounded like a
\nfascinating progression. Since I make art, I was curious as to
\nhow I could use computers in my art-making process. As it turns
\nout, the software that is available right now is of almost no
\nuse to me. While it can be enjoyable and amusing to manipulate
\nphotographs and paint on electronic canvases, it still seems like
\nit’s more trouble than it’s worth. I have been told, however,
\nthat these boxes come in handy.
\n The work that I am doing at present, which is mostly
\nphotography, has too much basis in reality. It is about the way
\nwe live. It is about the way we build and develop the areas where
\nwe live and how we make those places as ours. It is about many
\naspects of being a person. I have not found a way for the
\nsoftware to provide me with any assistance. I work with other
\npeoples’ senses of self and creativity. While someone is probably
\nwriting a program that will simulate these things, I’m not
\ninterested. I thrive on interaction with real people, they never
\ncease to amaze me.
\n While computer software itself has not provided me with
\ninspiration, the Internet has. At first what felt like a mystical
\nsociety of computers around the globe is now a different
\ndimension of worldly consciousness. Quantum mechanics is busy
\ntrying to prove the existence of alternate dimensions; I’ve been
\nexploring one for the last eight weeks. It is the dimension of
\ninformation and communication.
\n It seemed like an incredibly difficult task at first, much
\nlike learning Basic when I was in grade six. This time however
\nthere were no computer geeks around to hamper the learning
\nprocess. I was all on my own. With only a guide book to chart my
\ncourse I have been able to “go” all around the world. I have
\ngained access to a seemingly endless supply of information. Text
\nis definitely the most powerful medium here. I have found other
\nforms of information, sound and images for example, but text is
\nthe only one that has been able to feed me satisfactorily in this
\ndimension. Text has given me the knowledge to explore further.
\nWith more exploration comes more text, comes more knowledge…
\nThis may not seem like a breakthrough discovery to most, but it
\nwas to me. The text not only pushes me in new directions around
\nthe Internet, it has charged my imagination. I am fascinated with
\nthe possibilities of this new dimension.
\n I have been able to converse with people all over the world.<\/p>\n
The very same people I would love to interact with in person but
\nam unable to because of distance. Connectivity over the Net has
\nbeen the next best thing I suppose, but it is a far cry from the
\nreal interaction that fuels my art. I have found it intriguing to
\nno end but it hasn’t given me anything. Yet. I expect that
\ncommunication on the Internet will be very much like regular
\nsocial interactions people have nowadays. You go to places you
\nlike. You avoid other places. You meet many people. You keep in
\ntouch with a few. Friendships grow and you learn from each other.
\nThe thing that has been somewhat of a shock has been the
\nrelearning, from scratch, of all things dealing with social
\ninteraction. You must relearn the processes of travel and
\nconversation. There is no bus route for the Internet and you
\ncan’t laugh out loud.
\n The arena of the MOO seems to provide a bridge between
\nreality and Jaron Lanier’s vision of VR and communication as one.
\nThough they are only text-based at the moment they are headed in
\nthe right direction. Their possibilities for character
\ninteraction extend only as far as they can be programmed. In
\naddition to this, if you want to see how you interact with
\nanother character, you must visualize it in your head. The same
\ngoes for sounds and smells. The ideal vision of VR has all
\nsensory inputs virtualized. I would probably be an excellent
\nguinea pig for a perfectionistic VR developer. You see, I suffer
\n(or , as I like to think, am privileged to suffer) from a
\ncondition I call hyper-awareness. Anything and everything my five
\nsenses can take in they do. This is usually a pleasing
\nsubstitute for the drugs I’ve never done though overloads do
\nhappen. It can make driving a little difficult. I find the Moo’s
\nacceptable, but not enough to tweak my senses, which enjoy
\nreality far too much.
\n On the flipside of that argument is that Moo’s, in
\nparticular MediaMOO at MIT, have provided me with some
\ninteresting insights into how people develop and personalize
\ntheir own space when it can be absolutely any space at all. You
\ncan make anything and set it so it can be manipulated in any way
\nyou choose. Most of the stuff I’ve “seen” has been pretty
\nimaginative. The major limitation of creating your own
\nenvironment in a MOO is that other characters can only perceive
\nit one way, the way you describe it. Something is lost when you
\nare not able to explore a locale with your five senses. It is
\nsomething that is not actually a sensory input. It is more of a
\nfeeling you get about the person whose space you are in. The
\nsterility of the MOO keeps you from feeling this. It is pretty
\ndifficult to get in a position in the MOO where you feel
\ngenuinely uncomfortable. It’s a feeling like this that makes you
\nact truly human. Without it, and others, social interaction feels
\na bit too artificial. With all this talk about feeling I
\nbeginning to think that I’m missing the point.
\n If you’ve noticed traces of pessimism, sarcasm, and
\ncynicism, you’re probably reading this properly. These natural
\ncharacteristics of my personality, coupled with my desire for
\nreal experiences and my general dislike of things convenient,
\nleave me still wondering the same thing I wanted know in grade
\nsix: what is all the hype about?
\n It seems that almost every household has a computer. I am
\nconstantly hearing how you must be computer literate in order to
\nsucceed get a job nowadays. Many people are storing all their
\nvital information on disk. Even in this class, so many people
\nappear to be engrossed with learning how to use the available
\nsoftware. It seems awfully limiting. Am I missing something? Is
\nthere something advantageous about having your job, your home,
\nyour self, hang in the magnetic balance?
\n Computer-dependant people have perhaps conveniently
\nforgotten that computers need electricity. Again, not a
\nmonumental revelation, but few seem to acknowledge this fact. It
\nmakes me think of one of the many power failures that used to
\noccur during summer rainstorms as when I was younger. People
\nwould gather at some spot on the street, sheltered by umbrellas,
\nand chat. My mother once told one of the neighbour kids that
\nsince the power h ad gone out we’d have to watch television in
\nthe dark. He bought it. People are just as gullible when it comes
\nto computers. Computers also “crash” (a mysterious phenomenon
\nthat I have been reminded of thrice during the writing if this
\nessay). Rarely does anybody have a solution, let alone an
\nexplanation for this. I can’t understand how people can rely so
\nmuch on such fragile pieces of equipment.
\n After so much griping about these annoying boxes I’d better
\nreveal my admiration of them. As I have already stated, I think
\nthe ability to communicate with them is invaluable. Having a
\ncomputer in every household for that reason alone would be worth
\nit. Anyone has the capability to access almost anything from
\nanywhere. Those are pretty huge parameters that have never been
\nwithin our reach before. People talk of a restructuring of the
\nInternet whereby more restrictions would be in place.
\nUnfortunately, due to human nature, we will probably work to
\njustify a situation like that. Greed will more likely than not
\ndrive people to lock up information, with access for a price.
\nHackers will continue to hack but the stakes will be higher. The
\nauthorities will crack down harder on those who are caught. Those
\nin the upper echelons of government know that information is
\npower, and they’re not about to give it up that easily. The EFF
\nwill hopefully grow and continue to prosper.
\n I have been amazed by what computers can do. My aspirations
\nfor putting out my own publication will be realized shortly.
\nWhile you’d never be able to tell by the appearance of this piece
\nof writing, I am eager to tap the dynamics of the realm of
\ndesktop publishing. Even more than I imagined, I will be able to
\ndistribute it world-wide if I so choose. I will be able to design
\nmy own home, with plans ready to hand to the builders. These are
\nthings I had not imagined possible before. I don’t suppose Adrian
\nand David would be too impressed. So what.
\n I have been feeling quite uncomfortable trying to come up
\nwith “original insight and speculation on contemporary culture
\nand technology.” I have such little experience with this field
\nthat any attempts to theorize so far have ended up with
\ntechnologically aware people either stating that it’s been done
\nor questioning why I would want do such a ridiculous thing. It
\nhas made me feel like I’m too creative to be working on a
\ncomputer. Either that or I’m being too demanding. I don’t have
\nthe technical know-how to recognize which it is yet.
\n This planet definitely needs more communication. The
\nInternet has made it so that you reach around the world, but not
\neverywhere.
\nAs far as I know of there are no connections to the third world.
\nFor the most part the technology is only available to big
\nbusinesses and universities. According to Molly, a character in
\nMediaMOO, that would mean that this kind of technology is limited
\nto an elitist group of people with enough money to gain access to
\nthe resources. The uneducated, unwashed masses are deprived of
\nthe opportunity to be connected. I can believe it. We are going
\nto have to find a way to hook up the rest of the world. Without
\nit, the third world might slip further into the information void.
\n “I have found computers provide a pretty good workout for
\nthe modern mind. The possibilities of computing have been able to
\nstretch the imagination of some. Never before would you have been
\nable to manipulate a photograph or a rendered 3D object in the
\nways you can now. You can publish yourself. While it is still
\nsomewhat expensive to accomplish these things, it is no longer
\nabsolute impossible. With the added potential of computers you
\ncan let your imagination explore larger expanses. Getting things
\ndone is now only a matter of learning how to do it, and even that
\nis easier than ever!”
\n …
\n I still don’t buy it.
\n Reality is far too valuable for me to give up. I love my
\ncat. I love Italian food. I love my Polaroid camera. I like to
\nfeel fear. I drive my car fast any chance I get. I have almost
\ndrowned in snow. Standing on the edge of the roof of my apartment
\ngives me a rush. There is no virtual adrenalin. I play basketball
\non the weekend with a bunch of very large guys who hit hard.
\nBruising is an essential part of being alive.
\n I have memories of growing up. Barbecues in the back yard.
\nRiding my bike up and down the block. Neighbours. Getting chased
\nby the bully. Going on vacation. Swimming at the local pool.
\nStuffed animals. I don’t think virtual sentiment would cut it.
\nThe terrible feeling inside when you smoke your first cigarette.
\n The experiences of my life have shaped me and will continue
\nto do so forever. I can’t help but get the feeling that
\ntechnology is being shoved down our throats. I thought this time
\nI might be able to keep myself from gagging on it but i haven’t
\nbeen successful so far. AT&T is trying to convince me that I
\nwon’t need a road map anymore. Their advancements will get me to
\nmy destination quickly, safely, and efficiently, and when I get
\nthere I can call my wife over a video-phone. They’re trying to
\nmake physical distances non-existent by transporting my presence
\naround through a sterilizing filter. I’ll pass on it, thanks. It
\nall just seems too safe.<\/p>\n
I have not been able to make up my mind for the last seven
\npages. I have reacquainted myself with the best technology
\navailable to me. I have explored more of the Internet than most
\npeople I know. I have learned how to do many things with these
\nfancy boxes. I know what I can do. I still want to know why. At
\nleast this time I am able to make an informed choice about my
\nfuture in computing. It is very likely that six months from now
\nmy opinion will have changed. Nobody is going to know anyway.<\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
by: James Nobel <\/p>\n
INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n
Since the beginning of mankind, inventions were the fundamental
\nbackbone of progression into what laid ahead. The telephone and
\ntelevision are among the most influential inventions that
\npropelled mankind into boundless territories. Here,
\ncommunication is the intangible force that governs the world s
\nfate, we now live in. If it wasn t for the telephone and
\npresident Kennedy s tactics we wouldn t be here: the Cuban crisis
\nwould have been a reality. Now, considering this critical event
\nthat would have seriously dictated the future of civilization,
\nhow else will technology affect us? Our lives will be changed
\nfor the better or the worse by technologically advanced tools and
\nmultimedia; in conjunction, the future of our society and culture
\nwill adjust and adapt as we progress into what may be the
\ninformation age or the post-industrial age. A passage by Kurt
\nYonnegut captures the very essence of what we are to expect with
\nregard to technological advancements:<\/p>\n
. . . the First Industrial Revolution devalued muscle work, then
\nthe second one devalued routine mental work. . . <\/p>\n
Do you suppose there ll be a Third Industrial Revolution? <\/p>\n
A third one? What would that be like? <\/p>\n
I don t know exactly. The first and second ones must have been
\nsort of inconceivable at one time. <\/p>\n
. . . I guess the third one s been going on for some time, if
\nyou mean thinking machines. That would be the third revolution,
\nI guess – machines that devaluate human thinking. <\/p>\n
(Smart, opening page)<\/p>\n
Although this passage makes reference to artificial intelligence,
\nit gives us an idea of how fast technology is progressing and the
\nramifications of such progression. Can you image machines that
\ndevaluate human thinking? Our imagination would lead us to many
\npredictions on future society and culture. Essentially,
\ntechnology is the impetus for the fate of our future. In order
\nto instigate some thought and provide some insight, this essay
\nwill reveal the potential capabilities of contemporary technology
\nand the effects it will have on modern society and culture. <\/p>\n
MODERN SOCIETY<\/p>\n
Communication and information are virtually the vital blood and
\nheartbeat keeping society alive and healthy. Because of
\ntechnological improvement, the way in which we communicate has
\nbecome diverse and complex (Multimedia), diverting from
\nconventional forms. New technology provides capabilities to be
\ndone differently, efficiently, and more conveniently. In
\nessence, convenience and efficiency are the driving force for
\nmodern technology, without them civilization would remain
\nstagnant or dormant, which ever way you look at it. If not for
\nconvenience, cellular phones would be obsolete and there would be
\nno drive for the invention of a wristwatch sized pagers. If not
\nfor efficiency there would be no need for software programs such
\nas CADs and the digital form of communication, Email.
\nConvenience and efficiency complement each other, and together
\nare the essential ingredients for technological growth.<\/p>\n
With respect to the affects of technology on society, we have
\nexperienced what has already happened and the many researches
\nthat had been done. Consequently, there could be a trend that
\nwill provide invaluable clues to the future. Eventually we are
\nand will be affected by modern technology and notice changes in
\nour education system, government, profession, and business. New
\ninformation and communications technologies are spreading rapidly
\nthroughout the world at an increasing pace. Someday, we will be
\nable to remain in one central location and complete all daily
\ntasks without coming in physical contact with another person.
\nSports and leisure activities will be the only factor motivating
\nthe movement of our body. People may turn into a bunch of couch
\npotatoes taking for granted the convenience of what technology
\nhas to offer: already, interactive TV programs are enabling one
\nto order pizza from a simple command on a remote control.
\nAdditionally, information is as easy to access as searching for a
\nbook in a library, may be even easier. There are databases
\neverywhere that can be accessed by the public. For example,
\nthere is a BC computer guide listing programs and services
\noffered by the provincial government. The convenience of
\nacquiring information by means of information highways precludes
\nthe hassles of fiddling through a phone book and calling place
\nafter place to access your target. Moreover, telecommunication
\nis augmenting the elimination of office as the workplace. People
\nwill be able to conduct daily work activities without leaving the
\nhome. Consequently, the environment we live in may benefit from
\nless air pollution caused by excessive automobile exhaust and
\npopulation of the city core. Economically, the decreased demand
\nfor downtown office space will drive the rent\/lease prices down,
\nthus, permitting affordable prices for people wishing to live in
\nthe downtown area. To conclude, there seems to be many
\nadvantages of convenience, however, may be in the future this
\nworld we live on will be inhabited by slothful but highly
\nintelligent human beings. <\/p>\n
Currently, information is without question equivalent to power
\nthat can be shared freely by all. Some people acquire
\ninformation which is related to the struggle for the competitive
\nedge, especially in business. Professions will fight for the
\nvaluable commodity (information) that will keep them ahead of the
\nrest of the pact. An academic researcher needs information to
\nsolve problems and create theories that will undoubtedly keep
\nhim\/herself ahead of the field in his\/her discipline. Even
\nartists, fashion designers will be affected. By the nature of
\ntheir industry, replication is rampant, to a certain degree, and
\nwill burgeon if information is easily accessible. If that s the
\ncase artists will lose their authenticity, however, due to
\nserendipity and creativity, they may gain new ideas and designs
\nto enhance their respective disciplines.<\/p>\n
Presently we can access and deliver information millions of miles
\naway on the other side of the world. This was unfathomable years
\nago, but in the age of the INTERNET information is going to be
\nthe blood allowing the body of society to function smoothly.
\nWithout this communication network we may be thrown back into the
\ndays of civilization where mediums facilitating communication
\nwere non-existent. Information and communication will be so
\nimmense that society may form into a single entity, a global
\ncommunity. Although this is a broad view there may be a
\nrudimentary integration of a global society. For instance,
\nautomatic translation of different languages for users of the
\nINTERNET. A Canadian researcher communicating in English may
\ndeliver messages instantaneously translated into Chinese for a
\nChinese scientist. <\/p>\n
In the INERNET era, information highways are the driving force
\neliminating the need for paper as medium for communication.
\nDigitized text reinforces and supports the move for a paperless
\nenvironment. Digital text is eternal and immortal, stored in
\nelectronic facilities, whereas paper is mortal and indefinite
\nwith a simple force of a hand or water. Without a doubt, the
\nstrengths of information highways as communication mediums will
\nput smiles on the members and proponents of the environment
\nmovement. Consequently, typing will become a mandatory
\nprerequisite implemented in our education system. That is until
\nthoughts can be entered into a computer through voice activation.
\nUnfortunately (or to some – fortunately), the paperless
\nenvironment is presently not a reality and will take years for it
\nto become a part of society. Despite the exponential growth of
\nthe INTERNET and computers entering more homes, not every man
\nand women has access to computers and this communication medium.
\nAdditionally the 100% safeguard of computer storage is not
\nguaranteed (because of computer viruses and the like), thus
\nfurthering the acceptance of a paperless environment. With
\nregard to mail, the Email system will definitely flourish.
\nSending messages so easily and quickly will make writing letters
\nmore enjoyable. May be future post offices will integrate the
\nEmail system in their organization. Individual booths will have
\nvoice or hand activated input devices that delivers any where and
\nplace in the world at a cost comparable to a postage stamp.
\nWhere ever the Email system will be located, the
\ntelecommunications industry will probably be the main and most
\nimportant industry of the future. This industry will provide
\njobs, compensating for the lost occupations that were replaced by
\ncomputers and robotics. <\/p>\n
In the education system today, computers are becoming more
\nprevalent. Children are using it at a younger age, starting in
\nelementary schools. By this integration of digital technology
\ninto our schools, children might grow lacking interpersonal
\nskills and a social life. This statement is generalized, but
\nDarwin s theory of evolution may support the truth. As years
\npass by children will lose touch of reality. Communicating
\nthrough the INTERNET with someone without physical contact will
\ndeprive them of the experiences and feeling from conversing with
\na person face-to-face. Additionally, the large world we live on
\nwill be mentally visualized as a small world, more intense than
\nwe currently imagine. Conversely, there are a lot of positive
\noutcomes from modern technology in schools. The INTERNET will
\nfacilitate and enhance knowledge, and provoke healthy
\nimagination. If children read text sent to them through the
\nINTERNET, imagination will flourish as they try to grasp the
\nmeaning of the text and the person they are communicating with.<\/p>\n
In medicine and academic research, information technology can be
\nvery beneficial and advantageous. Researchers can congregate via
\ncomputer networks (such as MediaMoo or other MUDs) facilitating
\nthe possibilities of cures for the earth s illnesses and human
\ndiseases. With the use of computers and network, doctors and
\nresearchers will be able to work together and tackle the world s
\nproblems. Moreover, sociologists can record, observe, and study
\ndialogue from players in a text form of Virtual Reality
\n(communication networks), allowing the fabrication of invaluable
\nconclusions and theories. For biologists, computers can produce
\nartificial life. Computer generated living beings live and
\nreproduce much like their biological counterparts. This
\nbreakthrough will most definitely impact further studies into
\nreproduction of, for example, micro organisms that are the
\nfoundation for living forms. Simulating biological growth can
\ngive scientists the observational advantage without the lengthy
\ntask of observing the real life growth stages.<\/p>\n
The all too familiar human occupation loss from computer
\ncapabilities is more pervasive as the years go by. We have
\nalready experienced the impact of Robotics in the work place and
\ndue to the growth of the INTERNET and VIRTUAL REALITY computer
\nsubstitutable occupations will be diminishing. Operators and
\ninformation servers are the unfortunate victims of this
\ntechnological take-over. Conversely, new occupations may result
\nfrom such take-overs. Additionally, because of advanced
\nsoftwares and artificial intelligence, modern architects (for
\nexample) have evolved from its true origin. Now the most
\nstrenuous part of their job is to problem solve and design while
\nthe once arduous task of utilizing their drafting and drawing
\nskills are now obsolete. CADs and the more advanced programs
\nhave most definitely made an impact in this industry, whether its
\npositive or negative. Researcher have predicted that in the
\nfuture occupations will all be replaced or affected by computers,
\nexcept for artists, writers, and lawyers. Well, that statement
\ncan now be modified to ALL professions will either be replaced or
\naffected by technological advancements. Artists facing digital
\nreproduction of their artwork may encounter appreciation in their
\nwork, to a certain degree. Greater exposure and dissemination of
\ntheir artwork will frankly improve advertisement of their
\noriginal work, thus creating greater demand and marketability.
\nThis of course is not applicable to every artwork; nevertheless,
\nit will impact every artist, especially the well-known or
\navant-gardes of the art world. Additionally, writers and lawyers
\nwill inevitably be affected by the immense amount of information
\nfloating around in the vast array of networks. A lawyer may win
\na case solely because of information he gathered as evidence that
\nwas diligently extracted from a database in another city or
\ncountry. <\/p>\n
A technological breakthrough that will literally change and rock
\ncontemporary society is VIRTUAL REALITY (VR). If this technology
\nhad photo images in 3D and normal motion speed, there is
\npractically nothing it can t do. Presently, among others, it is
\nused in medicine, military, education, training, entertainment,
\nand research. The potential for VR is enormous. While donning a
\nmask and wearing a sensitized glove (who knows what other
\nattachment will be available) one may accomplish tasks before
\nphysically impossible. Essentially, the use of this technology
\nis without limits. One can think of many ways of concocting a
\npurpose or objective for VR: simulating warfare for fighter
\npilots and soldiers is one assignment VR has accomplished. The
\nmore interesting capabilities of VR is what it will be able to
\ndo, not what it has done. Imagine communicating with a friend on
\nthe other side of the world as though he\/she was there in front
\nof you. Images and sounds just like the real thing will fool
\nthe mind and give humans the ability to do almost anything
\nwithout the presence of physical contact. A fencer under VR will
\nvisualize a stab wound (hypothetically speaking) without sensing
\nphysical pain throughout his\/her body. Slam dunking like Michael
\nJordan without even leaving the ground. Unfortunately there is a
\ndark side to VR and that is of satisfying our minds. It could be
\naddictive, comparable to psychedelic drugs that fool our minds in
\naccomplishing impossible feats. The illusions of the VR may have
\npsychological effects that may be comparable to the
\nhallucinogenic narcotics available in the market. People will
\nlive and breath this artificial world of the VR. The effects
\ncould be detrimental but for its present use the VR is beneficial
\nto society as it trains, educates, facilitates. Additionally, VR
\ncan assist advertising and marketing tactics. Business can use
\nthis medium to introduce new products which will attract
\ncustomers, and enable penetration and acquisition of a
\nsubstantial market. This would most definitely be a competitive
\nadvantage for the user.<\/p>\n
VR may direct the future of a city s infrastructure. For
\nexample, VR could someday be seen in shopping malls.
\nMerchandising stores will be the size of a information center
\nbooth with VR equipment and attachments. Inside the VR world
\nwould be a store salesperson or assistant. One will be able to
\nvirtually shop inside a digitally reproduced environment of a
\nstore. Prior to entering this digital store, the size of ones
\nbody will be programmed to enable one to virtually try on a piece
\nof desired clothing. Then, ones appearance will be viewed in a
\nvirtual mirror. When one chooses to buy an item he\/she will
\npurchase it by conventional means, and receive it where it was
\nstored in a compact department behind the storefront (booth). If
\nVR is used along these lines, society will benefit with fewer use
\nfor land and space. May be the environment can be saved from
\nthis idea (if it hasn t already been thought of). With
\nincreasing population, the infrastructure of a city would be
\nmaximized to civilian comforts without building outwards,
\npossibly destroying the environment and pristine wilderness
\nareas. Basically, land and space will be used more efficiently
\nand effectively, and materials would not be wasted. <\/p>\n
Along with the advanced technological capabilities of VR and
\nother instruments, the political system may change drastically,
\nfor the better or worse. With the acceptance of the INTERNET in
\nthe Clinton administration, citizens will be able to voice their
\nopinions, feelings, and ideas about contemporary issues and
\nproblems. This will enable the Clinton administration to view
\nthe whole picture of a controversial issue which provides the
\ncreation of quality decisions. On the contrary , countries under
\na fascist government will experience greater control and order by
\nthe dictator. With current and future information technology,
\ndictators will be able to monitor and record the lives of the
\npeople. May be George Orwell s fictitious character Big Brother
\nwill become reality. Some believe this character already exists.<\/p>\n
MODERN CULTURE<\/p>\n
Society is built on many blocks, and no block is more celebrated
\nthan that of culture. Culture is what distinguishes us from
\npeople of other nations, and because of escalating growth of
\nglobal interconnection different cultures will be subject to
\nintegration. Although a lengthy process, the transition is
\nexemplified in the global economic system: European Economic
\nCommunity (EEC) and the imminent North American Free Trade
\nAgreement (NAFTA) are just simple examples of the movement
\ntowards global integration (hereinafter global integration is the
\ncohesion of information from all the countries of the world). In
\nthe age where technology is fostering the construction of a
\nglobal village, how is the arts (the groundwork of culture) and
\nthe artists going to be affected? Currently, how have they been
\naffected?<\/p>\n
Integration of the arts, which comprise of the theatrical,
\nmusical, and visual arts, are happening already. Technology has
\nenabled people of different cultures and languages to communicate
\nwith each other. Words in Japanese is currently translated into
\nEnglish in the matter of seconds by the tap of a finger. Voice
\nactivated language translation already exists, furthering the
\npossibilities of global integration. Considering global
\nintegration, what will be the dominant culture adapted by all?
\nA trend that seems to be occurring rapidly gives rise to an
\nanswer: the country with contemporary technology and culture
\nthat will attract others. An example is the youth culture in
\nJapan and many other Asian countries who are riding the wave of
\nthe American youth culture. They listen to the same music;
\nadmire the same visual artists, musicians, actors\/actresses, and
\nathletes; play the same sports (except for SUMO); and, eat the
\nsame food as the Americans, all possible because of the
\ntechnological multimedia available to them. The powerful
\nAmericans not only influence its immediate neighbors but also
\noverseas countries.<\/p>\n
As technology develops, so does the arts. Amid the presence of
\nthe INTERNET, artwork will be dispersed all over the world for
\nviewing by anyone who possesses the necessary instruments. As
\ndeliverance and receipt of artwork becomes easier, the downsides
\nof replication (as already mentioned) are likely to be more
\nprevalent. On the contrary, greater dissemination will enable
\nthe invention of new ideas and thoughts from a compilation,
\nacquired through various computer networks. A simple example is
\nnative art. Due to the vast amount of information available,
\nnative artists have produced new styles and forms of art through
\ngenerations. A native artwork is printed with colors never used
\nin traditional forms. Technique and use of tools for carving
\nwood and metal have enhanced and elevated native artwork.
\nPresently, native art is internationally recognized and cherished
\nby many. The ideas may have been brought about independently,
\nhowever, the probability of acquiring new materials and
\ntechniques from outside sources are immense. Additionally,
\ncontemporary artists benefit from information that can, through
\nhuman ingenuity, create new techniques, skills, and forms of art.<\/p>\n
Manipulation and digital production of visual artwork provides
\nefficient and convenient processes of creating art. Art
\nconnoisseurs and enthusiasts may repudiate the nature and
\noriginality of digitally produced artwork. This view is
\nreinforced by W. Benjamin:<\/p>\n
With the advent of process forms of reproduction, technique of
\nenlargement and slow motion begin to reveal aspects and images of
\nthe original which escape unaided or natural vision. In
\naddition such processes of reproduction transform the contexts of
\nappreciation, reception and use of the original through the
\nprovision of copies which enter spaces and situations beyond
\nthe reach of the original. (Smart, p.112)<\/p>\n
Additionally, he argues that such developments have interfered
\nwith the
\n authenticity of the object and that in the age of mechanical
\nreproduction. . . . the aura of the work of art withers. (Smart,
\np.112). Nevertheless, the few that may support this view must
\nrealize the evolution of the mediums of visual communication.
\nArt was produced and expressed on wood and stone in the days of
\nthe Neanderthal and Cro-magnon man; then, artwork was expressed
\non paper; consequently, photography replaced the artistic
\nfunctions of the hand; currently, artistic expression is found on
\nthe computer screen. If one accepts this view, digitally
\ncontrived artwork will be considered an authentic and unique form
\nof art. <\/p>\n
Amid the controversies on the amalgamation of artwork and
\ntechnology, artists (the creators and founders of cultural
\ncharacteristics) face extinction (in reality — layoffs or fewer
\njobs). With the softwares (i.e. MacDraw) available in the
\nmarket, artists are overwhelmed by the capabilities and functions
\nof computer assisted production of design and music. The
\nefficiency of these software packages are creating the
\nelimination of artist and their conventional skills and
\ntechniques. Artists of the 90s and the future will probably need
\ncomputer literacy and utilization techniques as replacement for
\ntheir original skills (of using chalk, paint, pen, etc.). If
\nthis is the case, who is the real\/true artist the computer or
\nperson? In light of what may happen to artists, art may be
\nnegatively affected by mass production and dissemination. A
\npiece of artwork may devalue in the mind of a viewer because of
\noverexposure. Much like the people who get sick and tired of the
\nsame music played on a particular radio station: our minds simply
\nturn off when their is repetition. By the year 2010, the term
\noriginal piece of artwork may signify the original millionth
\npiece of artwork. <\/p>\n
CONCLUSION<\/p>\n
Currently the effects of technology is apparent to all of us;
\nhowever, in the age where full-blown cyberculture is not far off
\nin the future, we face a great deal of uncertainty and
\nvulnerability from what technology will offer. We could be
\nliving beings existing mentally only in a digital environment
\n(i.e. in a MediaMoo). More frightening, we are unsure about the
\nactual capabilities of technology in the future. Imagine what it
\nwould be like to live on a world where communication is
\naccomplished through wires connected to the brains of
\nparticipating individuals from a central computing unit. Wim
\nWender s film, Until The End of the World gave us a visual
\ninterpretation of the physical instruments necessary for entering
\ndigital information directly into the human brain; this would
\nenable the phenomenon of telepathy into a virtual reality. The
\nuse for this fictitious instrument would be endless (e.g.
\neyesight for the blind) and the consequences would probably turn
\ncontemporary society and culture five hundred and forty degrees.
\nAdditionally, it would either astonish or scare the shit out of
\nmodern man and woman. <\/p>\n
We can predict the ramification of technology on the future of
\nour society and culture, however, those prediction will never be
\nknown to actually occur. Our future is like a biological entity,
\nno empirical data or past trends can forecast what is the fate of
\nmankind. Not only do we as individuals live, so does the
\nsociety and culture. We are the blood cells that circulate
\nthrough the veins of society and culture. Technology is the
\nmedicine or illness that will permeate the body of society and
\nculture. The effects will not truly be known until the blood
\ncells (people) accept the medication (technology) or reject the
\nillness (technology). Currently, the capabilities of medication
\n(e.g. LSD in the 60s) and illness (AIDS in the 90s) are without
\nboundaries. Analogous to technology, the mind altering drug of
\nLSD and the killer disease of AIDS are flourishing, capable of
\ninfluencing the fate of the mankind. If technology didn t
\nprogress, history would not exist and time would not advance into
\nthe next minute or day. The stagnant environment would not yield
\nany unusual events or occurrences. However, reality is the
\nadvancement of time and technology. The future effects of
\ntechnology on society and culture will never be know, but we can
\nonly theorize, visualize, and imagine.<\/p>\n
WORKS CITED<\/p>\n
Smart, Barry. MODERN CONDITIONS, POSTMODERN CONTROVERSIES,
\n Routledge, London, 1992.<\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
TECHNOLOGY<\/p>\n
The effects of modern technology on contempory culture and
\nsociety are far-reaching and have irrevocably changed the way in
\nwhich we view ourselves, and the world around us. Technology has
\nprofoundly affected us psychologically, socially, physically, and
\nemotionally. It has influenced the way in which we interact with
\neach other and with computers, and has drastically changed the
\nway in which we continue to develop. Gradually, we have come to
\nsee the world as an entire global community that is linked
\nthrough computers and other communication systems. Because of
\ntechnological advances it is now as easy to exchange ideas with
\nsomeone in China as it is with the person next door. Advances
\nhave also been made in the computer programs that deal
\nspecifically with visual art and design. One can also see the
\nadvances made in fields like Cybernetics, Virtual reality, and
\nartificial intelligence. Yet these advances are not without
\ndrawbacks; for, the human factor tends to be left out of the
\nequation and makes information exchange impersonal and isolating.
\nThe technological progression that has occurred in the last one
\nhundred years has far outstripped the advances made in the
\nprevious one thousand years and with each new development
\nhundreds of possibilities arise for further advancement.<\/p>\n
The technological breakthroughs made in the last twenty
\nyears have affected us immeasurably. Within the framework of
\ncommunication systems alone, the socialization of humankind is
\nirrevocally changed. We no longer see borders between nations as
\npsychological deterrents; merely as physical barriers. We can
\ncommunicate with people in other nations as easily as we do with
\nthose we find within our own circle. Entire databases and
\nnetworks have been set up to encourage communication and
\ninformation exchange between a diverse range of participants.
\nTelnet, Gopher, Mail Art, and Internet are just a few examples of
\nservices developed to promote and expand the concept of
\nindividual expression and facilitate the access to a vast array
\nof information available in the computer age. <\/p>\n
Computer networking is one of the fasted growing
\nopportunities in the computer field. It allows for a vast array
\nof different information to be accessed immediately at one’s
\nfingertips, Telnet alone has over 4 000 different topics ranging
\nfrom weather and travel information to science and politics .
\nOnce hooked up to the network, the user can access different
\n“conferences” and can send and receive electronic mail. While
\nusing Telnet, I was able to access very diverse material, and
\nreceive information on architecture and design, as well as
\n“conferenced” with a company that is sponsoring a design student
\nexchange between different Universities. The quantity and
\nvariety of information that can be accessed is amazing, and it is
\ngrowing yearly as more and more people and companies connect to
\nnetworks.<\/p>\n
Over and above of dealing strictly with information
\nexchange, networks also exist to expose artwork and other
\ncreative fields to the general public. The International Network
\nCulture endeavors to eliminate the divisions between viewers and
\nparticipant, and artists and non-artists, while providing the
\nstructure for ongoing global artistic interaction. Socially
\nspeaking, it has linked a variety of people,(students, teachers,
\nprofessional artists, etc.) who come from different locations and
\nsociological backgrounds, who otherwise would never have
\ninteracted. This type of networking culture is a new movement
\nwhich challenges the conventional meanings of art and literary
\nexpression and acknowledges art to be more interactive. The
\nintrinsic value of this democratic system of personal expression
\nallows for individuals to concentrate on aesthetic and creative
\nconcerns and not on status or political concerns. <\/p>\n
Cyberspace is a computer generated space that humans can
\nenter and interact within. Cyberart, created in cyberspace,
\ntherefore has no physicality like real art, and it is more
\ndemocratic in the sense that it is created and expressed on a
\nunilateral and not on a hierarchical level. Because it is new
\nthere is no hard and fast rule defining cyberspace. As more and
\nmore people get on-line to networks and bulletin boards, the
\ngoverning of cyberspace–who will be allowed access to what and
\nwhere and for what cost are questions that will need answers.
\nThe majority feel that the broader the base of a non-hierarchical
\nself-governing body, the more it would adhere to the premise
\nbehind cyberspace; namely, individual rights and equal access.
\nHowever, it is all a question of logistics, control, and money.
\nBecause there are millions of people who are on-line to networks,
\nthere is a great deal of money at stake and the question is who
\n(what companies) will have a monopoly on the service. As services
\ncontinue to develop one must also look at expansion in a
\ndirection that favours two-way networking which favours a more
\ndemocratic decentralized system. This decentralization can also
\nbe seen in today’s computer companies. With the expansion of a
\nmore global market, companies are now specializing in specific
\nareas. This also allows for competion among groups dealing in
\nspecific arenas which in turn enables the consumer a wider
\nvariety of choices.<\/p>\n
A new network being developed that has a great potential and
\nwill offer many benefits is ISDN., Integrated Services Digital
\nNetwork. It is a set of digital protocols which enables the
\nmovement of information, both voice and video, over regular
\ntelephone wires at a faster speed than can be achieved by a
\nmodem. The possibilities could include video conferencing and
\nelectronic mail, and other information to be transferred from
\nhome, and portable sites that as of yet are not as accessible as
\nthe office environment. This type of infrastructure will allow
\nfor greater flexibility and freedom of where and when information
\ncan be sent and received at very rapid rate. As of yet, ISDN is
\nnot readily available, but alliances are forming between computer
\nand phone companies in order to establish the groundwork for
\nlocal, national, and international access– in essence, to
\nestablish a “information super-highway”. <\/p>\n
The way in which computers have become integrated into our
\ndaily life has made us become more and more dependent on them.
\nThe psychological and emotional impact of the “computer age” has
\nbeen far-reaching and has challenged the way in which we view
\nthe world. One of the main psychological concerns caused by the
\nincreasing role that computers play in our lives is Fear.<\/p>\n
“The real danger is not that
\n computers will begin to think
\n like men, but that men will
\n begin to think like computers”
\n -Sydney J. Harris<\/p>\n
According to a report in “Omni” magazine, computer
\nscientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology stated
\n“….we are rapidly losing, have perhaps already lost, physical
\nand mental control of our society.” (According to Dr. Joseph
\nWeizenbaum). Generally, the level of fear is most prevalent
\namong older people, because the younger generation have become
\nfamiliar with computer skills and programming. These are being
\nintergrated into the educational system. Yet, “computerphobia”
\npersists to be a major stumbling block in the path of technology.
\nThere are a various rationalizations behind this fear; some
\npeople are afraid of losing jobs, as more and more complex
\nmachines are being developed that can do the work cheaper and
\nmore efficiently. Others become overwhelmed and feel
\ninsignificant and view the entire computer field as
\nincomprehensible and threatening. There is such an overpowering
\narray of different computers, programs, information, plug-ins,
\nprinters, etc., available, that it is hard to even begin to
\nunderstand were to begin, let alone become proficient in the
\ncomputer age. However the most compelling fear we face is that
\ncomputers will become too powerful and man will no longer be in
\ncontrol. This general idea is even played out in major Hollywood
\nmovies i.e. “The Terminator”.<\/p>\n
“Modern man is the victim of the very instruments he values
\nmost.
\n Every gain in power, every mastery of natural forces, every
\n scientific addition to knowledge has proved potentially
\ndangerous,
\n because it has not been accompanied by equal gains in self
\n understanding and self discipline.
\n -Lewis Mumford<\/p>\n
Modern technology also has a physical impact on our lives.
\nIn light of the fact that now millions of people sit in front of
\na computer terminal for hours at a time day after day,
\nregulations have been passed limiting the amount of time a person
\ncan sit in front of a screen without a break. There is an
\nincreased awareness of the effects of electromagnetic fields
\nthat are given off from monitors and are strongest within two
\nfeet of the monitor. To date there has not been a comprehensive
\nlong-term study of the physical ramifications of the field.
\nThere are also studies that indicate that there are increased
\ncancer rates for people regularly exposed to radiation and an
\nincreased rate of miscarriages.(Brodeur, Paul, Currents of Death:
\npower lines, computer terminals, and the attempt to cober up
\ntheir threat to your health) Luckily, there is an increased
\nawareness and new advances in monitor design that help shield the
\nuser from excess radiation. Other physical problems that occur
\nwith the computer are dizziness, headaches, and eyestrain. These
\nare caused by flickering or unclear screens or by glare, yet
\nthese too can be relieved by using antiglare screens and proper
\nlighting. A lesser known physical problem is known as repetitive
\nstress injury; found when one does the same thing over and over
\nagain. This can have a damaging effect on various parts of the
\nbody. Lower back pain can be relieved by getting up and changing
\npositions frequently. Another common ailment is pain in the
\nwrists, hands and arms; variations on keyboard design and
\nplacement are being reviewed but no solution has yet been found
\nthat completely relieves the problem..<\/p>\n
With the advent of video cameras, computer imaging, and
\ndesktop publishing, etc, we can “immortalize” ourselves, our
\nactions, and our thoughts. Psychologically, this has had a great
\nimpact on they way we perceive our limitations as human beings.
\nNow, we are no longer even limited to reality as we know it. With
\nthe recent explosion in the direction of Virtual reality,
\ntechnology has taken us into a field never before explored.
\nVirtual reality will have many applications and uses in the years
\nto come. The technology allows the user to move through
\ncomputer-generated images (with the use of a helmet) in a three
\ndimensional world, which is super-imposed on the “real world”.
\nFor example one could be a mountain climber or become the main
\ncharacter in a video game. Designers of Virtual reality
\nsoftware are also working on programs that will make television
\nan interactive and not just a passive activity. While, the
\nequipment is still not as refined as programmers’ wish, the
\nadvances in technology have been amazing. Virtual reality will
\nhave many other applications as well as belonging to recreational
\narenas. It will be a great educational tool that will be seen in
\noperating rooms and in many types of very specialized
\nsimulations. By the end of this century, the field of Virtual
\nreality will be so diverse and will open up avenues, as yet
\nunheard of.<\/p>\n
Cybernetics: (neural modelling) the science of control and
\ncommunications systems founded on the theory that intelligent
\nbeings adapt to their environments and accomplish goals by
\nreacting to feedback from their surroundings. The premise behind
\ncybernetics is based on human neural networks, the fact that one
\ncan learn, generalize, and hypothesize. The objective is to
\ncreate self-organizing machines, ones that can adapt and learn.
\nHowever, the difference in capabilities between biological
\ninformation-processing systems and computers remains extensive.
\nIn biological networks, it is through innate properties and
\nthrough learning that humans are able to respond to specific
\nstimuli. In effect, each individual neuron is its own decision
\nmaker and memory storer. The one great advantage we have over
\nany artificial intelligence is our resilience, damage caused to a
\nfew neurons will not shut down our entire memory or
\ninformation-processing mechanism. With an artificial system,
\nmemory is stored with an arbitrary numerical address and can only
\nbe accessed as such. Humans on the other hand have the ability
\nto retrieve memories through various methods, including content
\nassociation. The dream to achieve machine intelligence that is
\nparallel or greater than humankind still lies in the very distant
\nfuture; in the meantime, the complexity and versatility of
\ncomputer programs continue to develop rapidly.<\/p>\n
With the complexity of computers increasing exponentially,
\nthe question arises: “Can artificial life be alive?” The
\nsemantics of the sentence alone is question enough, yet is there
\nan answer? Thomas Ray is a biologist at the University of
\nDelaware. Three years ago, he started testing a model of
\nevolutionary principles created on a computer. He designed a
\nsystem called Tierra, which illustrated that evolution works just
\nas well in a computer system as in the real world. He created a
\ndigital creature made up of a string of computer instructions
\nwhich he then introduced into the model. Within hours the single
\ncreature proliferated, created a race of clones that lived,
\nevolved, and died and themselves spawned new groups of mutants.
\nRay and other scientists believe that some electronic creatures
\nare more than imitating life, that they actually are alive. <\/p>\n
In the past decade, there has been a proliferation of
\nscientists working on computers who have produced systems with
\ndigital creations that resemble plants and insects in a silicon
\nworld. There is very little agreement among scientists about
\nwhat can be deemed alive, still many want to create what will
\nqualify as life forms. The Chaos Theory is an assumption that
\ncomputer-generated systems might actually mirror nature because
\nscientists have discovered that patterns and structures can even
\nbe discerned in systems that appear to be totally disordered. It
\nis through the creation of artificial life that researchers
\nhope to discover “what is it in matter that enables it to have
\nsuch an innumerable variety of forms, including life”(Steen
\nRasmussen, a Danish Physicist working at the Santa Fe Institute)<\/p>\n
The effect that advances in technology has had on art in
\ntoday’s society is far-reaching and has irrevocably changed the
\nway in which think about visual art. In the last century, the
\ntransformation that has occurred in the visual art world is
\nimmeasurable. Western society no longer necessitates that art
\nmust fit into the well defined category assigned to it years ago.
\nIt does not have to be a framed painting, a piece of
\nrepresentational sculpture, or a well presented piece of work.
\nVisual art is what the artist creates, whether it be a be on
\npaper or on a computer. The progress made to computer programs
\nand applications which enable artists to create a variety of
\neffects is astounding. New methods and techniques arise daily as
\nmore and more people are experimenting with the plethora of
\nresults that can be achieved with computer programs like
\nPhotoshop, Superpaint, and Autocad. The advances made in
\nprograms that relate to the realm of graphic design and
\narchitectural design have transformed those fields irrevocally.
\nAs an Interior Design student I have noted what computer programs
\nlike Autocad and Minicad are doing to the design field, even the
\nway in which programs like Architecture and Interior Design are
\nbeing taught are affected. The basic drafting skills are still
\nrequired, yet curriculums are now being augmented with courses
\ndealing with computer-aided design. The field of graphic design
\nis also changing rapidly. The majority of advertisement, logos,
\nletterheads and all types of signage are now all being produced
\non computers. It is not only the design fields themselves that
\nare affected by this new technology; western society’s views on
\nwhat visual art is have changed. <\/p>\n
Today, anyone who has a computer and a simple drawing
\nprogram can now create visual art. Visual art is no longer
\nregulated to “artists” as it was in the days of the Beaux Art.
\nThere are no longer clear rules deciding what is classified as
\nart and what is not. Who says that what one produces on a
\ncomputer program is any less artistic than what one creates with
\npen and paper. When the field of photography was first developed
\nthere was a lot of complaints and concerns dealing with whether
\nit should be considered and artistic field or not. There were
\nmany painters who had trained for years to be able to replicate a
\ntree realistically on canvas who were dismayed at the idea that
\nphotography was to be taken seriously as an art form. Yet with
\ntime, as the consternation of a new and unknown field wore of f,
\nsociety came to accept photography as a legitimate artistic
\nstatement of its own, and learned to value it accordingly. It is
\nalso so with computer-generated visual art. <\/p>\n
People will become aware and learn to appreciate the quality
\nand caliber of the work being produced. A further benefit of
\nthe advances made in computer design programs is the ability for
\nsociety as a whole to be able to create and contribute to the
\nfield of visual art. Due to the great accessibility of design
\nand drawing programs, anyone with a home computer will be able to
\nproduce an array of drawings, graphically altered images, and
\narchitectural drawings. <\/p>\n
The effects of modern technology on society and contemporary
\nculture are phenomenal and immeasurable. They have altered the
\nway in which we view ourselves, and the changing world around us.
\nThey have touched our psychological, social, and physical lives
\nand have greatly modified they way in which we develop. With the
\nunprecedented advances made in computerized communication systems
\nand networks even the way in which we interact with one another
\nand with computers is different than it was twenty years ago.
\nThe world is now linked electronically and we have become one
\ngiant global community. Technological advances have also
\naffected the fields of Cybernetics, Virtual Reality, artificial
\nlife, and computer design programs. The transformation that can
\nbe seen in the Art world is astronomical and has irrevocally
\nchanged the way in which society views and values visual art.
\nThe technological progression over the last hundred years have
\nbeen phenomenal and with each new technical discovery countless
\npossibilities arise for further advancement. <\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
Contemporary Culture (& Technology):
\nAn Example of it More Than Anything Else<\/p>\n
By R.K. Shaw
\nJune, 1993.<\/p>\n
It`s funny how we`re living in the past so much of the time.
\nThe present, for me, has not just one finite meaning. We all
\nhave different presents wrapped up within what we know of our own
\nculture and how much we partake in it and so much more.
\n And how about the Volkssport Association of British Columbia
\ndisplay and beer garden down here at Market Square. I don`t know
\nwhat this is about beyond an accordion player in tall socks, a
\npixie hat, and suspenders for his shorts. Or are those knickers?
\n I think they`re into hiking – them Volkenssporters. Come
\nfrom the Alps originally perhaps. Today they`ve got the centre
\nof attention, although I feel i`ve come after the peak of the
\nparty. But maybe not at all. For an afternoon party it`s pretty
\nmuch come and go as you please. To PARTY does not seem to be the
\nbig focus of the, the event? Is that what it`s called? My
\nshoulder`s sore & the sun is reflecting in my eyes. I think
\nVolkenssportees are in the blue shirts. Older they are than me
\nor, well me anyways. Oh, they`re some burgundy shirts as well.
\nA 10 & 20km walk was just announced for tomorrow (a way of
\nachieving visionary state of mind through walking? – an ancient
\ntradition?) and a walking tour of Market Square, Fantan Alley,
\nand Chinatown – but no points allowed for that one. Eleanor
\nGrant from Comox is now going up to receive a certificated for
\n13,000 km. John Grady has done 25 marathons and over 25,000 km
\nin 19 years.
\nMargy Limpy of Victoria,
\nJerry Levine of Victoria,
\nand a few others.
\nCheck out all the sun hats on the beer garden tables.
\nCLap Clap Clap
\nOH, Cathy Lean is there from Kelona, Washington.
\nAnd hey, how does anyone become an ambulence attendant anyways?
\n Actually that`s not that difficult a question to answer.
\nEither is grave diggers I suppose. Don`t beer gardens usually
\nhave low fences around their parametres, you know, just to keep
\nin & keep out or what ever – FENCES, as I would say when Mike and
\nI discovered that Mini had pood in the tub. “Well you know cats,
\nCATS.” All about cats explained in one word.
\n I guess he`s playing polkas. That`s a polka right?
\nAccordion equals Polka. Easy music. <\/p>\n
SO,
\n About what I was going to tie this all into. Well just look
\naround – oh sorry, one more little divergence for a sec, it looks
\nlike the Volkies are sponsored by Rockport. Walkers they are,
\ncool.
\nSo yes, I just came from a bookstore where I flipped through a
\nsort of compilation sci.fi. comic
\n Whoa,one more Volky comment – He`s up holding the Canadian
\nflag – not a bad size one either – & what, come on, is
\nthat it? – I`m waiting for him to at least flex his muscles but
\nyes no the flag is now back in its place on stage. Beer
\ngardens.<\/p>\n
And above the Guatemalan shop and over to the left one can
\nbuy all the latest, freshest clothing. Rave wear & sort of skate
\nshit. That whole alternative to norm transition and all of its
\nlabels shit…
\n“To all the girls I`ve loved before”. Hey this guy must be good,
\ngive him a digital delay sampler on his acorn and I`d listen
\nlonger & around & around but for now I`ve got to go. When the
\nsaturation point comes…<\/p>\n
a few days later…<\/p>\n
I`m not always explicit and obvious with what I mean
\nbecause my meaning is, in a way, your meaning. You construct it
\nfrom that I throw together. This makes communication more
\ninteresting and interactive. Although according to some trains
\nof thought, more linear ones perhaps, this way of communicating
\nisn`t plausible on an academic or definitive level. What i`m
\ntalking about is taking place in a more creative or lucid
\ncontext. Often, making THINGS interesting is part of what
\neverything we construct is about. We are here, alive, so why not
\nthink about stuff & talk about stuff & write about stuff and do
\nit and make it interesting while we`re here. Enlightenment is
\nboring, so balanced and harmonious and uninteresting. There you
\nhave it, the answer to IT all. So now what, you`re alive, what
\nelse is new. Just keep on living & working or what ever I
\nsuppose. N`est-ce pas? And change too I guess. Throw that in
\nthere as well. Change (or not) comes from growth or rather can
\nbe growth, and if you like expanding (your mind and being lets
\nsay) you learn form experiences and as a result change (or not)
\nbecause of them. You becomes a better, or rather, a different
\nperson than you were from the last minute
\n or
\nhalf hour<\/p>\n
or season<\/p>\n
or person<\/p>\n
or colour
\n t-shirt or skin<\/p>\n
or experience
\nor emotion
\n or cloud<\/p>\n
or scale
\n or life<\/p>\n
or beach.<\/p>\n
Cause as they say…<\/p>\n
So ypoorter was writing this thing she calls Everything Is
\nFuct and I was thinking ya,<\/p>\n
everything is fuct.<\/p>\n
So?<\/p>\n
Everything is fuct and nothing is fuct and everything is fuct.
\nBut that`s what she was writing about, at least that`s what I
\nthink. And I`m an authority, because I say so. I could say why
\nI’m an authority but I`ll talk about later.<\/p>\n
Now is later. Ha! How do you like that – quicker than a
\npolaroid, faster (perhaps) than money, more satisfying than –
\nwell you might just not care so anyways-><\/p>\n
AUTHORITY: Who gets it, how, about what, & why.<\/p>\n
I guess what bugs me most about authority is when it`s used
\noppressively or down right for the negative – Negatively.
\nAuthority, or knowledge (or not), can be used so, so productively
\n(?) (I`ll use that word rather than positively, as, i guess my
\npresuppositions are cropping up & in here – but hey, of course).
\n NOTE: My little positive\/productive debate thang comes out
\nof this thought being relative to my own biases
\nand presuppositions preferences. They would be for, as I would
\nplace them, on the positive, caring side
\n(interpret that as you wish, I do too).
\nYet instead of being used to foster love, self realization and
\nempowerment for the benefit of yourself and other beings and
\nrocks or trees, authority could just as easily be used to
\nencourage and promote hate and self realization and self
\nempowerment for the benefit of other beings etc as well (although
\nprobably for the benefit of others who look most like whoever`s
\ndoing the talking.
\nI seem to be getting sidetracked (something which I like) a bit
\ntoo much perhaps. Or maybe there is just so much I want to say
\nthat I get on to something else before I clearly and neatly
\nfinish up with what I oh what ever. An outline and maybe some
\nmore formal structure to this speel would make it more acceptable
\non a standard essay format. But this is supposed to be informal
\nso I guess I`ll go with it. This paper\/piece\/essay is about what
\nI want to say and how I want to say it. It is also suppose to be
\nabout contemporary culture and technology. The two, me and
\ncontempo cult & tech, are bound in ways that I may or may not
\ntalk about but probably will. Ok, so I guess I`m overwhelmed.
\nLa tee da tee da. There are just a couple more things that I
\nwanted to mention. There was a snowboard add from a couple of
\nyears ago that went something like this: “Don`t question
\nauthority, ignore it.” To further that I like: “Don`t question
\nauthority, be it.” I sort of got that from what Mr. Virtual
\nReality, Jaron Lanier, was saying about Big Brother types
\npossibly wanting to control V.R. input like tapping a phone line.
\nHe advocated becoming smarter or a better hacker than those who
\ntry to “control” things. Sorry Jaron if that’s not quite what you
\nwere getting at but it is what I mean and well, meaning is
\nobscure isn`t it? <\/p>\n
I could say “that`s it” but no. Shall we continue?
\nI`ve very recently come to realize that I`m writing about the
\nfuture, and the very near past. I`m not used to doing this, or
\nat least used to looking at creativity in such a way. Normally
\nwhen ever I write it is not about things which are as of yet
\nundefined. This means that I am writing about nothing which is
\nnow becoming something. This is just how technologies and
\ncultural movements are continually emerging, evolving, and being
\ndefined. I can write about what is now happening in my world, as
\nfar as I know, and what I am doing within it, as a part of it so
\nto speak. Often the more one knows the more one can partake.
\nBut not always. For example, I can partake with what I know, but
\nof course not everywhere, well yes everywhere. My degree of
\ninvolvement is restricted or modulated by my ability to, so to
\nspeak, speak the language. Or for others their ability to speak
\nmy language. We are always partaking in our society to one
\ndegree or another. By choosing not to partake you are partaking. <\/p>\n
NOTE: I use “you” instead of “one” sometimes (lots) because
\neven though it`s bad grammar I think it more directly
\naddresses you, the reader. Active inactivity. Or inactive
\ninactivity. Or even inactive activity. Defining. That`s it!
\nI`m talking about who is defining what is what. Which all ties
\ninto authority. Got it? I sure do and don`t. But even that is
\nwhat I`m talking about. This might help: <\/p>\n
Music, group, & get together. Well like <\/p>\n
that`s
\nanother thing but you know. Cause <\/p>\n
you know music is music. If you want to <\/p>\n
play music you can play music if you have <\/p>\n
the people you want to play music with
\nthen
\nyou can play music. Know what I mean?
\n -Bob Marley from Talkin` Blues.<\/p>\n
There is an active movement or cultural shift in importance
\nthat is growing, or at least trying to. One with an enfaces on
\nthe security of living as an individual, living with others how
\nyou want to with respect and appreciation from those who surround
\nyou. This can be a scary thought because I don`t want somebody
\ndoing what they want if it means bad stuff. “Bad stuff” covers
\nalot and is culturally and personally specific. What I might
\nconsider bad would of course be good to somebody else and even my
\nthoughts right here are culturally specific to some one who
\nchooses to live in a smooth transition, positive vibe, caring,
\ntry to not be afraid to speak my mind but get along with other
\npeople and things kind of way. I may have to rewrite that
\nsentence. So, because of the randomness of truth and meaning,
\npeople may conflict and hey, why not allow for that? How? Well
\nI could talk a lot about that but it would just be me spouting
\nwhat I believe in and all of a sudden I feel strange about doing
\nthat. But since that`s what i`m doing anyways, heck, why not? I
\nstill feel kind of strange because I`m not used to saying what I
\nbelieve in to a potentially large (hello out there) audience. So
\nif i`m going to speak to YOU which includes all of you (ha) then
\nhere we go. <\/p>\n
ME as pointer outer for a yet undefined cultural standpoint.
\nI don`t know how far it reaches. By this I mean that it might
\njust reflect back at me, or my friends, or my ecological region,
\nor country, age group, or race, or sexual orientation, or
\neconomic bracket, or gender, or hair length, or level of formal
\neducation, or experience, or yes so many of these things go in to
\nwhere I`m coming from but I know that already and acknowledge it.
\nMaybe our lack of a definition or label is what defines us. An
\naware Slacker or active GenXer would be the closest term perhaps
\n(more about this later). People sometimes go through something
\nlike this on a personal level but I`d like to see it happen on a
\nmassive cultural scale. And I do, and don`t. It comes and goes.
\nOne vibe becomes more prominent than another. Which is fine.
\nThat is change, allow for it and you might not become bitter.
\nRemember that sometimes these thing work in cycles. I`m relying
\non myself and on others of some what like mind to live daily in
\nsuch a way. I just read an Alice Walker book. “Resistance is
\nthe secret of joy” it said. I am holding out you might say,
\nhanging on to my own terms, letting them change and adapt, but
\ntrying to live life my way. Reminds me of an old Lover Boy song.
\nYike. Resistance to being pushed and pulled around sometimes
\nmeans being pushed and pulled. But I would rather be respected
\nin my own place with out having to demand it. Who wouldn`t? And
\nall this shit is a big kaboodle in my brain. I care I suppose.
\nI care how people are doing (and the Earth for that matter). I
\ncare about what kind of world I live in and you live in. I would
\nlike to live with out having to lock my doors or any number of
\nother little yet significant things that split trust in our North
\nAmerican culture. The systems, policies, and attitudes that put
\npeople and the Earth in shitty positions (eg. poverty) are in
\nobvious need of change. Not only are companies and governments
\nbeing forced to change their environmental policies (not enough)
\nbut I would like to think that those in control might actually
\ncare about “tomorrow” more than just for economic reasons. This
\nmay be too much to ask or hope for but this is in some weird way
\nhow I’m trying to live daily. Banking on individual difference to
\nmake a difference I guess. I like seeing it work though. In
\nlittle ways like recycling and using cloth shopping bags, your
\nown mug, and such.
\n New systems that are being developed need to allow for
\nhumane based foundations. That is what is so interesting about
\nall the new technologies coming up. I see people still trying to
\nmake a buck which is great (I guess) but also being conscious and
\nconsidering how these new things will positively and negatively
\neffect the environment, which of course includes us.
\n Do you ever notice that when you say something it could just
\nas easily be taken in exactly the opposite way from the way you
\nmeant it. The Bible is a classic example. Interpretation is so
\nhinged upon context and language. I have no problem with this. I
\nlike it. Chaos. What to believe what to believe. Those old
\n“objective” news reports, and scientific experiments, and
\nphotographs they just don`t hold the same validity that they used
\nto if they ever really did. Maybe it is not necessarily their
\nvalidity that has changed so much as their absoluteness. They
\nare no longer the absolute authority or truth but now just one of
\nmany points of view. But unfortunately whoever controls access
\nto the means of communication controls the content. As Jaron
\nLanier said something about telephones being good because anybody
\nusing one controls the content but not so with a TV. I have
\nnothing more to say and lots more to say. Lunch time?
\nBLaablablablablablabaaaalbbaaalaaablablablablab. I feel like
\nsome feed back. <\/p>\n
Thank you Heather. Heather understands. We were wondering
\nthough about the disparity between written and spoken words and
\njust how immensely different the two forms of communication are.
\nI`m hoping that you, the reader, will understand more or less
\nwhat i`m saying and meaning. But hey, you might not and that`s
\nok. Written or spoken or otherwise I might not even know what
\ni`m doing. Ooou, this IS nutty. But that is what is so
\ncontemporary (to me at least). Linear logic has become only one
\nof many approaches to looking at things. Go see the movie Slacker
\nif you haven`t already. It shows a lot of what different ways of
\napproaching one`s life are going on. The maker of the film,
\nRichard Linklater described a Slacker as: <\/p>\n
somebody who’s not doing what`s expected of them. Somebody who`s
\ntrying to live an interesting life, doing what they want to do,
\nand if that takes time to find, so be it” (from Mondo 2000 #9). <\/p>\n
That`s sort of what I was trying to get at earlier on. <\/p>\n
Now I would like to add in a few words and expressions that
\ni wanted to get into this essay(?) but that might not make it in
\nif I don`t do it right now.
\nHere they are: <\/p>\n
hip pouches,
\nMaslow`s hierarchy of needs,
\nKiss My Grits,
\nplate of shrimp,
\nold cars,
\nnew cars,
\npostmodernism,
\ndeconstruction,
\nsubjectivity of a kiss,
\nknowing,
\nfear,
\nlove,
\nart,
\nhair,
\nthe running of the goats,
\nfashion,
\nraves,
\nflow,
\ncongas,
\nthe orb,
\nvibe,
\nhaving a body,
\nnot much else cept for music.<\/p>\n
And a few of quotations that have everything to do with what I’m
\nsaying:<\/p>\n
“How did you get here?”
\n“Same way you did: space ship, Ape City, subway.”
\n -Tyler to Brent in Beneath the Planet of the Apes<\/p>\n
“What ever you do, take care of your shoes.”
\n -Phish<\/p>\n
“Pousse mon amour, pousse!”
\n -from Leolo<\/p>\n
To finish up with I`d just like to say that if anybody out
\nthere has anything they`d like to say to me please do so. Here
\nis where nouveau technologies come in such as e-mail. Feedback on
\na ramble like mine would be much appreciated. I`d just like to
\nknow if anybody feels anything that I do. Via the wonders of
\ne-mail I can be found at: <\/p>\n
rkshaw@nero.uvic.ca. <\/p>\n
peace,<\/p>\n
R.K. Shaw<\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
IS THIS PROGRESS???<\/p>\n
June ,1993<\/p>\n
My insight of contemporary culture and technology is
\nlooking globally and personally at how the future is fast
\napproaching.I wonder how prepared we really are?
\n Technology has been progressing over the past several years
\nblindly in the eyes of society. I could see that we`re in the
\nprocess of distroying the old world and building a new world in
\nits place, at least trying too. The light of technology has
\nbecome overwhelming, while our environment, economy,and education
\nare falling a part. Changes are occuring now and we tend to be
\nemotionally attached to our old ways of living rather than try to
\nopen our eyes to change. Although we are in a higher level of
\nconsciousness and awareness from mass media, and mass
\ncommunication, we`re losing control over work everywhere from
\nfactories and offices to hospitals and retail stores,as
\ncomputerization is integrating in the stage of the systems. In
\nour work environment, we are being controlled by the systems
\nlogic and are now becoming aware of this transformation and
\nimplications. But are we prepared to make the change?
\nSo far it looks as if our perception of technological change and
\neconomic restructuring has been transformed from social and
\npolitical issues of massive unemployment, demeaning of work, and
\nloss of democratic control and personal independence into a
\nde-personalized, disembodied technocratic puzzle: how to
\n“manage” the “impacts” of restructuring; how to “adjust” people
\nas if they were numbers on a flow chart. <\/p>\n
Its brought jobless employment growth in many plants
\nand offices and are reduced to unthinkable procedures by pressing
\nkeys while technology does most of our thinking. Its as if we’re
\nbeing filtered through unnecessary laborers of technology, all in
\nthe value of the doller.
\n$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
\n As uncertain as it may seem, technology is becoming
\nmore of a reality. In my own personal experience I have had to
\nsome what alter my career plans. I’ve felt like I have had to
\nstart all over again. I realized that computers as another artist
\nmedium tool would be an added skill to other artists like myself.
\nBut to have computers as the device of all art mediums in the
\nfuture, I fear to question..? If technology dominates the medium
\nof our ancestrial artists it’ll be like eliminating history of
\nits craft. To eliminate the craftmanship you eliminate the
\nphysical technique and expression. I believe that technology is
\nblind in the understanding of personal experience and
\nexpressions. For instance, if we were to look at a painting on a
\ncomputer screen, how would our perception of artificial image
\ncompared to traditionally viewing of painting? <\/p>\n
How can we see the artists instinctive physical approach to the
\npainting? I can’t imagine how computer can transmit such
\ninformation. The only way would be to have the computer transmit
\nthe mind of the artists. Artists would not have complete control
\nover his\/her work with a computer. The process of mixing colour
\nis a process of creativity and satisfaction of discovering new
\ncolour by physically mixing where as computers would be
\nartificial. Naturally you see the stages of development from the
\nbeginning to the end piece as a whole,where as with the computer
\nyour mousing about to find the final result.
\n Unfortunately I believe painting,
\ndrawing,sculpture will become a thing of the past and more or
\nless it’ll be a personal liesure activity ,but when I look
\nfurther ahead I try to imagine what painting will look to
\ncomputer graphics and special effects. Currently having used a
\nbit of the laser printer, I can see that in the near future, the
\nresolution on printouts will be as clear as photos, and that
\namateur graphic artists will have medium to nun in design skills.
\nThey can also become skillfull designers and layout artist.
\nMachines will play a major part in aiding creative skills and
\nexpression to those with talent musically and artistically.
\nArtists will be even more highly regarded in the new age of art
\nbut the traditional skilled artists will always be well
\nrespected. <\/p>\n
I’ve heard the latest in our media news about the new
\nvisual reality in theatres and that audiences will become more
\nintensily involved with film, so much so that too many action
\nscenes could rapidly confuse illution of film with reality. How
\nmuch further will this virtual reality go? The thought of virtual
\nlive T.V. would be amazing,but we would probably virtually not
\nwant to live ourselves in our real world.
\n Currently I’ve had a taste of my own experience of
\nvirtual reality, when I’ve finally decided to educate myself and
\nget over the computer intimidation, which has caused some anxiety
\nand frustration. This occured when I first sat in front of one of
\nthese screen T.V.s wondering if the other students new little as
\nmuch as I did. I thought that going through some of the program
\nguides would be a breez, (So I thought) obviously didn’t make
\ncomputing easy. I was anticipating instant results but all I was
\ngetting – “Command not recognized” to “Don’t understand”
\nThe amount of time that it lit up the screen I was ready to put a
\nhole in the return key. “Now there’s some vertual action for ya,”
\nI made my exit so I could bring myself back together. Tolerence
\nand patience is definitely a virtue. I wanted answers no matter
\nhow long it was going to take me. Having had some good tutorial
\nassistance, I found that it wasn’t enough. I realized I was on
\nmy own to explore the jungles of the Internet, FTP,Gopher and
\nEMAIL> etc. Having explored the programs I saw how this new
\ntechnology can and will open a whole new world of communication
\nand having access to new tools. (Not to worry I don’t plan to
\nregurgitate the procedures)
\n I could see how this new technology has unlimited
\npossibilities that are unimaginative to human thinking.
\nGlobally I wonder if this new technology will be beyond human
\ncontrol or will we be considered technocratics in the 21st
\ncentury? Hmmmmmmm…
\n The thought of what 10, 20 years will bring is hard to
\nimagine really. Really in only seven years, will be in the year
\n2000. I can remember watching the future series 1999 in the
\nearly 80’s and to think that I’d still be here to see that year.
\nIt’s a fearing thought that in 1999 we could live such a cold and
\nsterile environment, wearing co-ordinated coloured uniform and
\nnot being able to see the light of day. Everyone living in
\nuniformity and order with no sense of individuality. Yet six more
\nyears, who’s to say this fictional movie 1999 may hold some
\ntruths. Interestingly, recently I read an article by Arther C.
\nClark in which he has some interesting insightful predicaments
\nwhich I found it to be amazingly possible of what a birth
\ncertificate would look like in the 21st century:<\/p>\n
—————————————————————-
\nCommonwealth of California
\nDepartment of Health`s
\nVital Records
\nCERTIFICATE OF LIFE
\nSubject: Baby boy, Miller
\nDate of Conception: November 15,2018; 12:15 P.M.
\nPlace of conception: Comprehensive Fertility Institute,
\n Beverly Hills, California<\/p>\n
Number of Parents: Three, including surrogate mother-
\n mother donated egg, father sperm<\/p>\n
Method of Conception: In vitro fertilization followed by
\n embryo tranfer. Mother’s body had
\n rejected her artificial falloian tube.
\n After 8 days on pergonal tablets, mother
\n produced 2 eggs. Both were removed
\n during routine laparoscopy and screened
\n for possible defects. Eggs united with
\nfather’s sperm. After 48 hours in incubator,
\nembryos were removed from growth medium
\nand placed in surrogate’s womb. Only one
\nembryo attached itself to uterrine wall.<\/p>\n
Prenatal Care Ultrasound at 3 months. Fetal surgery
\n performed at 5 months to correct small
\n defect in bone of right foot.<\/p>\n
Date\/Time of Birth: Jason Lawrence Miller born July 20,
\n 2019; 4:15 A.M.<\/p>\n
Father: Jason L.Miller,Sr.
\nMothers: Amy Wong (natural), Maribeth River
\n (surrogate)<\/p>\n
Birth Method: Newly lifted in Morningstar Birthing
\n Center, division of Humana Corporation.
\n Natural delivery of Humana Corporation.
\n Natural delivery after 5-hours labor.
\n Labor pains controlled through
\n accupuncture. Therapeutic touch used for
\n last hour of labor . Child’s father,
\nadopted sister, and natural mother
\nattended the delivery.<\/p>\n
Weight\/Length: 10Ib.; 25 in.<\/p>\n
Eye Color: Green<\/p>\n
Genetic Profile: Yunis Test show missing sub-band on
\n chromosome 5, indicating premature
\n graying of hair. Will be totally gray by
\n age 22.
\n Bands on one chromosome upside down;
\n could have fertility problems.Nicked
\n chromosome indicates a greater than
\n average vulnerability to lung cancer.<\/p>\n
High-Risk Professions: Any career that would expose
\nindividual to possible lung
\ndamage:painting, mining,etc.<\/p>\n
Body Type: Mesomorph. Build well suited to
\ncontact sports,such as football.To maximize
\n muscle development and athletic ability,
\n should begin exercise program by age 4. <\/p>\n
Prjected Life Span: 82 years<\/p>\n
—————————————————————–<\/p>\n
I wonder what the 21st century schools will be like. I
\nthink we would constantly be training and retraining and
\nlearning. Also early training will lead to greater educational
\nsuccess later. For example, a grandmother taking a course in a
\nsmall business management where as her sixteen year old
\ngrandson’s getting 1st year college English early while in
\nUniversities, students are taking classes in new technological
\ndevelopment in their field to advance fields in technical
\nscience. The emphasis will shift to produce workers for the
\nindustrial factory based economy which
\nrequired patience docility and ability to endure boredom.
\n Knowing that Robots technicians are now increasing in
\ndemand, new fields will spring up as population increases and
\nworkers jobs are eliminated by technology. This is obviously
\nhappening even now where workers are having to go back to school
\nto prepare for careers in these new areas. Fortunately technology
\nwill bring students a smorgasbord of educational choices for
\nstudents of all ages. I can see in the next generation how
\nschools will be partly financed by local industries that rely on
\nproducing and training workers. Technology is transforming
\nsociety itself, in turn computers will take on schools.
\n Artificial intelligence in its infancy will probably
\ndominate education or even its growing stages that will probably
\ndominate education.
\n As I look further ahead in artificial intelligence
\nmeaning robots will be able to see, listen, talk in all ranging
\nlanguages. They’ll no longer be a simple-minded dumb insensate
\nmachine found in factories producing lines. They’ll move out of
\nmanufactoring plants to working alongside us relaxing with us
\nand, live with us. Our homes will become roboticized with central
\nintelligence. They’ll have control over the cooling, lighting,
\nsecurity alarms,and ventilation and light control. Soon they’ll
\nbe able to crack our eggs in the morning without any
\ntecno-anarchy. They’ll be adapted to more and more things become
\nour robot slaves that we will train and house break.
\nAs we get used to the luxury of having slaves we may want them
\naround for companionship as well . The thought of haveing
\nRobo-dogs and Robo-cats that responds to human voices a companion
\nwithout the kitty litter. “What a concept!”
\nBetter yet I found another insightful thought found in the same
\narticle by Arthur C.Clarke where he uses Joseph Engelberger idea
\nof a robot resume . He believes these artificial intelligence
\nbeings will become undersea explorers, heavy construction
\nworkers, crime figurers nuclear power plant inspectors, cybernete
\ncompanies and astronauts. Here’s a sample of his robot resume: <\/p>\n
————————————————————–
\nRESUME
\nName: Universon Robot
\nSocial Security Number: None
\nMarital Status: N\/A
\nAge: 58 years old
\nSex: Three choices (male, female, asexual)
\nHeight: 5 feet
\nWeight: 60 to 2,800 pounds (depending on job requirements)
\nPresent Health: Excellent
\nMedical History: Lost hand (now replaced) in a forge accident;
\nlost memory (restored by tape); blinded in a kiln explosion (new,
\nimproved stereoptic vision since installed)
\nLife expectancy: 29 man-shift years
\nSpecial ability\/Training: Industrial\/heavy-duty outdoors model:
\nFluent in three robot languages; instantly retrainable with
\nmemory replacement module; three-jointed arm has 6 degree of
\nmovement and is capable of lifting up to 2,000 pounds with one
\nend effector (hand). Precise-can work within a tolerance of
\n1\/1000 of an inch; works 24-hour shifts.
\nPersonal model: Available in either stationary or mobile
\nconfigurations; can learn to respond to owner’s voice; comes with
\nLevel 1 Conscience, the program of protective ethics, factory
\ninstalled (not available in warrior mode).
\nWork Experience: Assembly-line worker, welder, painter- Ford,
\nGeneral Motors,
\nMaterials handling-Pittsburgh Plate Glass
\nDomestic-Engelberger household, Danbury, Connecticut
\nOperating room nurse\/attendant-Long Beach Hospital, Long Beach,
\nCalifornia
\nReferences supplied upon request <\/p>\n
So where does this leave us ? The thought of having a
\nrace of robots which are exactly like humans with the only
\ndifference they’re less subject to mental and physical disease
\nand are made of metal (recycled metal) or whatever. Is it
\npossible that these human robots could become immortal? To
\nanswer that , it seems anything is possible in the future of
\ntechnology only I wonder about our future as a human race.
\nSo far globally we’re deteriorating but in order to move forward
\nit seems we’ll have to make alterations to educate ourselves to
\nprogress. <\/p>\n
I ask ,”What is progress?.” A question,that’s always
\npuzzled me. I guess that everyone must try to kick the habit and
\nevaluate our values and priorities in the way technology is being
\ndesigned and applied. But then technological change is controlled
\nby few people dedicated to maximizing efficiency for competitive
\ngain. Yet, population is increasing and I can see a viscious
\ntechnological circle occuring. In time, if this unwinds and
\ntakes effect in the next generation, we would have more time to
\neducate ourselves to a much broader range of educational choices
\nin which we have access communication and information that can be
\ntransmitted all in our finger tips.At first it’s like finding a
\nnew toy then learning how its used.
\n Also I can see how psychologically some of us can become
\ncompletely obsessed to the computer screen and not be able to
\nfunction normally without it. Is this where the human race is
\nheading? This will bring in a whole new stream of jobs into
\npsychological technology, speach therapy, to optometrists as our
\neye sight weakens.
\n This wonderful technology called progress
\nseems to let out a lot of bug, causing our physical and mental
\nbodies to diminish due to long hours of sitting in front of a
\ncomputer screen accomplishing nothing, to sitting long hours of
\naccomplishing something. Then to watch ones documents disappear
\nfrom your very eyes. Of course this, so call PROGRESS doesn’t
\nalways provide such mental and physical strain.
\nA wise preacher once said “believe in yourself.” he also adds
\nnot only to believe in ourselves but also our sense of what is
\nimportant, and to use that as our guide in our working and living
\nenvironment in the industrial era. One thing I’II add which
\nmakes life so much easier is to SAVE !! SAVE!! SAVE!! <\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
Enter <\/p>\n
In order to start this essay I had decided to answer a question
\nfrom the course outline:” Have we all become artist” ? This
\nquestion will enable me to focus my attention,and allow my
\nimagination to grabe hold of the implications of such a thought
\nand fallow it into the latest frontier of computer technology.
\nthis essay is part of the requirements for the Arts and
\nTechnology class. The class covers in part , practical
\napplications of contemporary computer technology. And, as a
\nVisual Artist I will attempt to give my interpretation of this
\nperceived relationship between the two. This is the first of –
\nshort essays concerning my journey as anew and impressionable
\ntechnowiener entering into cybrospace.
\n The question of whether we
\nhave become all Artiste, implies, that we have been empowered by
\nreason imparted to us by contemporary technology. With this
\nevolution of computer technology it seems to be the next medium
\nfor the Artist to adopt. Be it push button or voice-command,
\nmass-consciousness has finally delivered us too the window’s of
\ncybrospace and virtual reality. Since the nifty 50’s the
\nModernist attitude has had mainstream society pinning away for
\ngreat technological advancements and now we’re at a threshold.
\nHowever, we are but lowly Pilgrims entering a little knower and
\nyet created frontier
\n The implications still remains the same that technology could
\nsome how induce a type of metamorphose on the human rase and
\ntransform them into Artistes. However, I am of the belief that it
\nis a combination of imagination, inquisitiveness, self-awareness,
\ncraft and discipline that aspires us as Artiste; furthermore,
\ncreativity is an inherent human characteristic and not a
\ntechnological induced function. Perhaps our imaginations will be
\nfurther seduced by this technology; thus , limiting or even
\ndebasing our awareness of reaction to sensation, and then ,
\ngiving way to a belief that : With computer technology therefore
\nI am. <\/p>\n
The Good<\/p>\n
The demand for
\ninformation and communication is on the rise as more and more
\npeople discover the tremendous potential of computer networking.
\nThis resent development in technology
\nhas the capability of providing a new faster and more
\nversatile way of accessing and communicating information. With
\nmore computer sights coming on line and appearing throughout the
\nworld more people now will have access to a larger base of
\ninformation. A medium seemingly designed for the politicaly
\ncorrect 90’s.
\n In this age of political correctness a powerful information
\nand communication medium has the potential of being a fantastic
\ntool in fostering relationships within your own region through
\neither Freenet service or a more international server like
\nInternet. The methods of communicating with someone can be either
\nby e-mail, direct connection to the person or persons and by
\nposting messages on a community or special interest bolten
\nboards, what ever the method chosen it will be a more convenient
\none.<\/p>\n
The fantastic wealth of information sights available to us
\nfrom around the world has given us a form witch to unit people
\nglobal.
\nThis ability to share knowledge in areas of Education, Arts,
\nTechnology, Medicine …etc,etc, simple by making computer files
\naccessible to anyone is a great development from this
\ntechnology.Gaining access is simple made by going through
\ndirectories like Archie and by Database or by simple posting your
\nquires on a community bulletin board, either method usually
\nyields the desired information on possible communication sights.
\n The befits from computer networking has set the tone for new
\nConventions by creating a new faster more versatile way of
\naccessing and communicating information. However, the most
\nimportant development from this technological innovation is its
\naccessability. The ability to log into a computer, be it public
\nor private, and access information from other sights around the
\nworld has finally turn the have notes into the haves. I can only
\nhope that people will take the time and nurture this new
\ntechnology not just control it.<\/p>\n
The Bad <\/p>\n
The latest in technological
\nadvancements made in the area of communication and
\ninformation services is awe-inspiring. A most hypnotic vision of
\nseemingly endless possibilities awaits us in cybrospace. Snap out
\nof it! Don’t fall, under the trance of this hypnotist, you don’t
\neven know who he or she is let alone know if their really. Lets
\nget back to Canada’s economic problems; for example, how about
\nthe Federal and Provincial fiscal restraint policies and the Free
\nTrade deals. After all, universality of social programs and
\nCanada’s sovereignty are important issues much more than what the
\nlatest computer technology has to offer or is it?
\n Perhaps there is an important link between Canada’s current
\neconomic problems and policies that involves technology related
\nto cybrospace. The Free Trade agreement between Canada and United
\nstates plus the possibilities of NAFTA agreement with Mexico
\ncould be seen in relationship with the latest computer networking
\ncapabilities and The New World Order. The connection between the
\nlatest development in the information communication technology is
\npart of a Global Infrastructure that connects us with other
\nmarket places and trading blocks. Furthermore, the market place
\nwill no longer be confined to simple geographic areas and this
\nintern will mean more of a Global economy; thus , the once known
\nMultinational companies are now known as Global companies.This
\nimplies that companies will have greater flexibility in regards
\nto development and being more transitory. This method of doing
\nbusiness has been made possible by technology like
\nTelex-radio-computer networking links.
\n What free trade agreements do for Global companies and there
\nsubsidiaries is eliminate trade barriers between respective
\ntrading partners. With trade barriers down outside investors can
\nhave a great influence on the sovereignty of host country; for
\nexample, by claiming unfair trading practices do to particular
\nFederal or Provincial past or future policies. Which brings us to
\nthe most often herd phrase of the 90’s “We have to become more
\nglobally competitive”. And we have already seen some examples of
\nstreamlining and its effects: Down sizing of operations , wage
\nrollbacks, and the threatened Universality of social programs
\nplus meany others.
\n The connection has been shown to be made between Canada’s
\neconomic and Sovereignty woes and the latest in computer
\ntechnology has made it possible for Governments and Global
\ncampiness to manipulate and create a New World Order of polices
\nand procedures. The solution to Canada’s present problems and
\nfuture self determination is not only being able to use the same
\ntechnology but rather the need for investment into Canada as
\nfuture leader in development of technology.
\n The Ugly <\/p>\n
The creative powers formed by the imagination and
\nintuition with its amidiate understanding with out reason has
\nbrought me to this finaly essay topic : Contempoary music
\nregarding communication technology and how people relait to it. I
\nremembered the recording by Roger Water’s, Radio K.A.O.S from
\n1986 and Kate Bush’s song, Deeper Understanding from her 1989
\nrecording of: Sensual World. Both artist approach on
\ncommunication\/computer technology as being trivealized by
\nsocieties consumerist attitude and their excessive
\npreoccupations.
\n As I read the lyrics from the song : Deeper Under Standing by
\nKate Bush I can relaity to what she is saying and can imagine how
\npeople can slowly withdrawly from society and become introverted.
\nHere are the lyrics from from Kate Bush’s song: Deeper Under
\nStanding.<\/p>\n
As the people here grow colder
\nI turn to my computer
\nAnd spend my evenings with it
\nLike a friend.
\nI was loading a new programme
\nI had ordered from a magazine:<\/p>\n
“Are you lonely, are you lost?
\nThis voice console is a _must_.”
\nI press Execute.<\/p>\n
“Hello, I know that you’ve been feeling tired.
\nI bring you love and deeper understanding.
\nHello, I know that you’re unhappy.
\nI bring you love and deeper understanding.”<\/p>\n
Well I’ve never felt such pleasure.
\nNothing else seemed to matter.
\nI neglected my bodily needs.
\nI did not eat, I did not sleep,
\nThe intensity increasing,
\n‘Til my family found me and intervened.<\/p>\n
But I was lonely, I was lost,
\nWithout my little black box.
\nI pick up the phone and go, Execute.<\/p>\n
“Hello, I know that you’ve been feeling tired.
\nI bring you love and deeper understanding.
\nHello, I know that you’re unhappy.
\nI bring you love and deeper understanding.”<\/p>\n
I turn to my computer like a friend.
\nI need deeper understanding.
\nGive me deeper understanding.<\/p>\n
In Kate’s song : Deeper Understanding, I can
\nsight a good example of Ipeople becoming infatuated with the
\nseemingly endless possibilities of computer technology. The
\nassienment in part given to our computer class was to connect
\nwith telnet and then into Media Moo. From inside Media Moo we
\nwere expected to explore and communicat with other users in this
\ntext-based vertual reality. Once you have become acustom to the
\nprogram’s of navigating, interacting with various tools, objects,
\nthe more ingaged you become. You seem to be cought up in the
\ninteraction and the dialouge with other users and the archutects
\nof this virtual reality you find it hard to leave. And, the
\npotential of computer programs becoming an obsession and a
\nsafe environment is quiet real. The obsservation by Kate Bush,
\nmaybe simple ; nevertheless, there is alot to the line ,”give me
\na deeper understanding,” and how we are driven by it.
\n The concept recording of Radio Kaos by Roger Waters has
\nexpressed how telecommunication\/computer technology has been used
\nto trivualize or control our daily lives. Here is the lyrics for
\nRoger Waters Radio K.A.O.S:
\n Author: Roger Waters<\/p>\n
Benny is a Welsh coal miner. He is a radio ham. He is 23 years
\nold, married
\nto Molly. They have a son, young Ben, aged 4, and a new baby.
\nThey look after
\nBenny’s twin brother Billy, who is apparently a vegetable. The
\nmine is closed
\nby the market forces. The Male Voice Choir stops singing, the
\nvillage is dying.<\/p>\n
One night Benny takes Billy on a pub crawl. Drunk in a
\nbrightly-lit shopping
\nmall, Benny vents his anger on a shop window full of multiple TV
\nimages of
\nMargaret Thatcher’s mocking condescension. In defiance, he
\nsteals a cordless
\n‘phone. Later that night, Benny cavorts dangerously on the
\nparapet of a
\nmotorway footbridge, in theatrical protest at the tabloid press.
\nThat same
\nnight, a cab driver is killed by a concrete block dropped off a
\nsimilar bridge.
\n The police come to question Benny; he hides the cordless ‘phone
\nunder the
\ncushion of Billy’s wheelchair.
\nBilly is different, he can receive radio waves directly without
\nthe aid of a
\ntuner; he explores the cordless ‘phone, recognizing its
\nradioness.
\nBenny is sent to prison. Billy feels as if half of him has been
\ncut off. He
\nmisses Benny’s nightly conversations with radio hams in foreign
\nparts. Molly,
\nunable to cope, sends Billy to stay with his Great Uncle David,
\nwho had
\nemigrated to the USA during the war. Much as Billy likes Uncle
\nDavid and the
\nsunshine and all the new radio in LA, he cannot adjust to the
\ncultural upheaval
\nand the loss of Benny, who for him is ‘home’.
\nUncle David, now an old man, is haunted by having worked on the
\nManhattan
\nproject during World War II, designing the Atom Bomb, and seeks
\nto atone. He
\nalso is a radio ham; he often talks to other hams about the Black
\nHills of his
\nyouth, the Male Voice Choir, about home. He is saddened by the
\nuse of
\ntelecommunication to trivialise important issues, the soap opera
\nof state.
\nHowever, Live Aid has decynicised him to an extent. Billy
\nlistens to David and
\nhears the truth the old man speaks.
\nBilly experiments with his cordless ‘phone, he learns to make
\ncalls. He
\naccesses computers and speech synthesizers, he learns to speak.
\nBilly makes contact with Jim a DJ at Radio KAOS, a renegade rock
\nstation
\nfighting a lone rear guard action against format radio. Billy
\nand Jim become
\nradio friends, Reagan and Thatcher bomb Lybia. Billy perceives
\nthis as an act
\nof political “entertainment” fireworks to focus attention away
\nfrom problems at
\n“home”.
\nBilly has developed his expertise with the cordless ‘phone to the
\npoint where
\nhe can now control the most powerful computers in the world. He
\nplans an
\n“entertainment” of his own. He simulates nuclear attack
\neverywhere, but
\ncompassion. In a SAC bunker a
\nsoldier in a white cravat turns a key to launch the counter
\nattack. Nothing happens; impotently he kicks the console,
\nhurting his foot. He watches the
\napproaching blips on the radar screen. As impact approaches, he
\nthinks of his
\nwife and kids, he puts his fingers in his ears.
\nSilence. White out. Black out. Lights out. It didn’t happen,
\nwe’re still
\nalive. Billy has drained the earth of power to create his
\nillusion.
\nAll over the dark side of the earth, candles are lit. In the pub
\nin Billy’s
\nhome village in Wales one man starts to sing; the other men join
\nin.
\nThe tide is turning.
\nBilly is home.<\/p>\n
Jim: This is K.A.O.S. You and I are listening to KAOS in Los
\nAngeles. Let’s
\ngo to the telephones now and take a request.
\nBilly: Hello, I’m Billy.
\nJim: Yes?
\nBilly: I hear radio waves in my head.
\nJim: You hear radio waves in your head? Ah! Is there a request
\nthat you have
\ntonight for KAOS?<\/p>\n
Radio Waves
\n————<\/p>\n
Radio waves. Radio waves.
\nHe hears radio waves. Radio waves.
\nThe atmosphere is thin and cold
\nThe yellow sun is getting old
\nThe ozone overflows with radio waves
\nAM, FM, weather and news
\nOur leaders had a frank exchange of views
\nAre you confused, radio waves.<\/p>\n
Radio waves, radio waves
\nAM radio waves, FM radio waves
\nRadio waves, mind-numbing radio waves
\nFish-stunning radio waves
\nRadio waves.<\/p>\n
Magic Billy in his wheel chair
\nIs picking up all this stuff in the air
\nBilly is face to face with outer space
\nMessages from distant stars
\nThe local police calling all cars, radio waves<\/p>\n
Hear them radio waves, radio waves
\nJesus saves radio, radio waves
\nadio waves, AM radio waves, FM radio waves
\nAll them radio waves<\/p>\n
Radio waves, radio waves, he hears radio waves
\nRadio waves, radio waves, hopeful radio waves, dopeful radio
\nwaves
\nRadio waves, Russian radio waves, Prussian radio waves
\nEastern radio waves, Western radio waves
\nTesting radio waves, one two. One two.
\nRadio waves. Getting through to you
\nMore code radio waves, Tobacco road radio waves
\nSouth to Paloma radio waves, Oklahoma City radio waves
\nSitting pretty radio waves, nitty-gritty radio waves
\nRadio waves<\/p>\n
Jim: Alright, that’s a song called Radio Waves. You are
\nlistening to KAOS in
\nLos Angeles and we’ve got Billy on the line.
\nBilly: I’m from the valleys.
\nJim: You’re from the valley?
\nBilly: No, Jim you schmuck, the Valleys; male voice choirs,
\nWales.
\nJim: Ah, you’re from Wales! Now is this sperm or blue-tip?
\nBilly: Ha, ha, ha, ha. Very funny Jim.
\nJim: Sorry.
\nBilly: Me and Benny went out.
\nJim: Who’s Benny?<\/p>\n
Who Needs Information
\n———————-<\/p>\n
Me and Benny went out last night
\nLooking for fun
\nSupping ale in the moonlight
\nWaiting for the dawn to come
\nBenny pointed at a HiFi shop
\nHe said hey man look at all the stuff they’ve got
\nHow’d you make a have out of a have not
\nHmmmm.
\nWho needs information
\nWhen you’re working underground
\nJust give me confirmation
\nWe could win a million pounds<\/p>\n
Benny climbed up on a footbridge
\nAnd he teetered on the parapet
\nHe said can you see the whites of their headlights
\nAre they coming yet<\/p>\n
Who needs information
\nThis high off the ground
\nJust give me confirmation
\nWe could win a million pounds<\/p>\n
Who needs information
\nWhen you’re living in constant fear
\nJust give me confirmation
\nThere’s some way out of here
\nSome way out of here<\/p>\n
Benny hefted a breeze block
\nAnd tried to let go
\nGot hung up on a tear drop
\nSo me and Benny went home<\/p>\n
Who needs information
\nWhen you’re living in constant fear
\nJust give me confirmation
\nThere’s some way out of here
\nSome way out of here<\/p>\n
Who needs information yeah
\nWhen you’re living on borrowed time
\nJust give me confirmation
\nThere will be a winner this time<\/p>\n
Who needs information when you’re working underground
\nJust give me confirmation
\nWe could win a million pounds
\nWho needs, who needs, who needs information
\nThis high off the ground
\nJust give me confirmation
\nWe could win a million pounds – yeah<\/p>\n
Jim: Um.
\nJim lights a cigarette.
\nJim: So your brother’s in jail?<\/p>\n
Me or Him
\n———-<\/p>\n
You wake up in the morning, get something for the pot
\nWonder why the sun makes the rocks feel hot
\nDraw on the walls, eat, get laid
\nBack in the good old days<\/p>\n
Then some damn fool invents the wheel
\nListen to the whitewalls squeal
\nYou spend all day looking for a parking spot
\nNothing for the heart, nothing for the pot<\/p>\n
Benny turned the dial on his Short Wave radio
\nOh how he wanted to talk to the people,
\nhe wanted his own show
\nTune in Moscow. Tune in New York
\nListen tot the Welsh kid talk
\nCommunicating like in the good old days<\/p>\n
Forgive me father for I have sinned
\nIt was either me or him
\nAnd a voice said Benny
\nYou fucked the whole thing up
\nBenny your time is up
\nYour time is up<\/p>\n
Benny turned the dial on his Short Wave radio
\nHe wanted to talk to the people
\nHe wanted his own show
\nTune in Moscow. Tune in New York
\nListen to the Welsh kid talk communicating
\nLike in the good old days<\/p>\n
Forgive me Father
\nWelsh Policeman: Mobile One Two to Central.
\nFor I have sinned
\nWelsh Policeman: We have a multiple on the A465
\nbetween Cwmbran and Cylgoch.
\nFather it was either me or him.
\nFather can we turn back the clock?
\nWelsh Policeman: Ambulance, over.
\nI never meant to drop the concrete block.
\nWelsh Policeman: Roger central, over and out.<\/p>\n
Benny turned the dial on his Short Wave radio
\nHe wanted to talk to the people
\nHe wanted his own show
\nTune in Moscow. Tune in New York
\nListen to the Welsh kid talk
\nJust like in the good old days
\nThe good old days<\/p>\n
Radio announcer: Do you really think Iranian terrorists would
\nhave taken
\nAmericans hostage if Ronald Reagan were president?
\nDo you really think the Russians would have invaded Afghanistan
\nif Ronald
\nReagan were president?
\nDo you really think third-rate military dictators would laugh at
\nAmerica and
\nburn our flag in contempt if Ronald Reagan were president?
\nConcerned Citizen: Well, it might work!
\nHostage: We as a group do most importantly want to beseech
\nPresident Reagan and
\nour fellow Americans to refrain from any form of military or
\nviolent means as
\nan attempt, no matter how noble or heroic, to secure our freedom.<\/p>\n
Concerned Citizen: Sure! Only it’s going to be mighty dangerous
\nfor you,
\nCassidy<\/p>\n
Hoppy’s faithful sidekick: guess you don’t know Hopalong Cassidy,
\nMister.
\nAdventure’s his bread, excitement’s his butter and danger, why to
\nhim that’s
\nlike strawberry jam to top it off.<\/p>\n
Jim: This is some live rock and roll at KAOS, where rock and roll
\ncomes out of
\nchaos and a song called “The Powers that Be”…<\/p>\n
The Powers That Be
\n——————-<\/p>\n
The powers that be
\nThey like a tough game
\nNo rules
\nSome you win, some you lose
\nCompetition’s good for you
\nThey’re dying to be free
\nThey’re the powers that be
\nThey like a bomb proof cadillac
\nAir conditioned, gold taps,
\nBack seat gun rack, platinum hub caps
\nThey pick horses for courses
\nThey’re the market forces
\nNice car Jack
\nThey like order, make-up, lime light power
\nGame shows, rodeos, star wars, TV
\nThey’re the powers that be
\nIf you see them come,
\nYou better run – run
\nYou better run on home<\/p>\n
Sisters of mercy better join your brothers
\nPut a stop to the soap opera right now
\nThey say the toothless get ruthless
\nYou better run on home<\/p>\n
You better run – run
\nYou better run on home<\/p>\n
The powers that be
\nThey like treats, tricks, carrots and sticks
\nThey like fear and loathing, they like sheep’s clothing
\nAnd blacked-out vans<\/p>\n
Blacked-out vans, contingency plans
\nThey like death or glory, they love a good story
\nThey love a good story<\/p>\n
Sisters of mercy better join with your brothers
\nPut a stop to the soap opera state
\nThey say the toothless get ruthless
\nRun home before its too late
\nYou better run – run
\nYou better run on home<\/p>\n
Billy: Goodnight, Jim.
\nJim: Goodnight, Billy.
\nUncle David’s Great Dane: Woof, woof, woof!<\/p>\n
The canyon – daytime. Billy plays with Great Uncle David’s Great
\nDane.
\nParaquat Kelly: Bull heads, three red snapper, one pink snapper
\nand your
\nPacific coastal trench hosemonster fish.
\nCynthia Fox: Ohhh! At Sky David’s juke joint of joy reports,
\nforty under the
\nconsole giggle stick ling cod, twenty-three purple perches four
\nsledgehammerhead sharks, and what a surprise, eightyfour crabs,
\nand no red
\nsnappers.
\nParaquat Kelly: Hey, and that’ll do for the triumphant return of
\nthe fish
\nreport with a beat.
\nJim: We think of it as mainstreet, but to the rest of the country
\nit’s Sunset
\nStrip. You’re listening to KAOS in Los Angeles.<\/p>\n
Sunset Strip
\n————-<\/p>\n
I like staying with my Uncle Dave
\nAnd I like playing with his great dane
\nBut I don’t fit
\nI feel alien and strange Kinda outa range<\/p>\n
I like riding in my Uncle’s car
\nDown to the beach where the pretty girls all parade
\nAnd movie stars and paparazzi play
\nThe Charles Atlas kicking sand in the face game<\/p>\n
And I sit in the canyon with my back to the sea
\nThere’s a blood red dragon on a field of green
\nCalling me back<\/p>\n
Back to the Black Hills again
\nOoh, ooh, Billy come home<\/p>\n
Billy is searching for his native land
\nFlicking through the stations with the dial in his head
\nPicking up ————– and
\nA male voice choir on the short wave band<\/p>\n
Billy taps out Jim’s number on the ‘phone
\nSits shaking as he waits for Jim’s answering tone
\nCome on my friend, speak to me please
\nThe land of my fathers is calling to me
\nAnd I sit in the canyon with my back to the sea
\nThere’s a blood red dragon on a field of green
\nCalling me back, back to the Black Hills again
\nOoh, ooh, Billy come home<\/p>\n
Come on home
\nHe sits in the canyon with his back to the sea
\nSees a blood red dragon on a field of green
\nHe hears a male voice choir singing Billy come home
\nBilly, Billy, come home
\nCome on home<\/p>\n
Californian Weirdo: I don’t like fish.
\nJim: You are listening to KAOS here in Los Angeles.
\nCalifornian Weirdo: I don’t like fish.J
\nJim: Yes, we’ve established that. Ah! Do you have a request?
\nCalifornian Weirdo: Shell fish, guppy, salmon, shrimp and crab
\nand lobster,
\nflounder.I hate fish, but I think most of all I hate fresh fish,
\nlike trout. I
\nhate fresh trout. My least-hated, favourite fish would be sole.
\nThat way you
\ndon’t have to see the eyes.
\nSole has no eyes.
\nJim: Oh no!
\nI’d like to be home with my monkey and my dog
\nJim: Thankyou.
\nI’d like to be home with my monkey and my dog
\nI’d like to be home with my monkey and my dog
\nI’d like to be home with my monkey …
\nJim: They don’t care. Shut up. Play the record.<\/p>\n
Home
\n—–<\/p>\n
Jim: Oh, God!
\nCalifornian Weirdo: Sole has no eyes.
\nCould be Jerusalem, or it could be Cairo
\nCould be Berlin, or it could be Prague
\nCould be Moscow, could be New York
\nCould be Llanelli, and it could be Warrington
\nCould be Warsaw, and it could be Moose Jaw
\nCould be Rome
\nEverybody got somewhere they call home
\nWhen they overrun the defences
\nA minor invasion put down to expenses
\nWill you go down to the airport lounge
\nWill you accept your second class status
\nA nation of waitresses and waiters
\nWill you mix their martinis
\nWill you stand still for it
\nOr will you take to the hills<\/p>\n
It could be clay and it could be sand
\nCould be desert
\nCould be a tract of arable land
\nCould be a house, could be a corner shop
\nCould be a cabin by a bend in the river
\nCould be something your old man handed down
\nCould be something you built on your own
\nEverybody got something he calls home<\/p>\n
When the cowboys and Arabs draw down
\nOn each other at noon
\nIn the cool dusty air of the city boardroom
\nWill you stand by a passive spectator
\nOf the market dictators
\nWill you discreetly withdraw
\nWith your ear pressed to the boardroom door
\nWill you hear when the lion within you roars
\nWill you take to the hills<\/p>\n
Will you stand, will you stand for it
\nWill you hear, ohhhh! ohhh! when the lion within
\nyou roars<\/p>\n
Could be your father and it could be your mother
\nCould be your sister, could be your brother
\nCould be a foreigner, could be a Turk
\nCould be a cyclist out looking for work. Norman
\nCould be a king, could be the Aga khan
\nCould be a Vietnam vet with no arms and no legs
\nCould be a saint, could be a sinner
\nCould be a loser or it could be a winner
\nCould be a banker, could be a baker
\nCould be a Laker, could be Kareem Abdul Jabar
\nCould be a male voice choir
\nCould be a lover, could be a fighter
\nCould be a super heavyweight, or it could be
\nsomething lighter
\nCould be a cripple, could be a freak
\nCould be a wop, gook, geek
\nCould be a cop, could be a thief
\nCould be a family of ten living in one room on relief
\nCould be our leaders in their concrete tombs
\nWith their tinned food and their silver spoons
\nCould be the pilot with God on his side
\nCould be the kid in the middle of the bomb sight
\nCould be a fanatic, could be a terrorist
\nCould be a dentist, could be a psychiatrist
\nCould be humble, could be proud
\nCould be a face in the crowd
\nCould be the soldier in the white cravat
\nWho turns the key in spite of the fact
\nThat this is the end of the cat and mouse
\nWho dwelt in the house
\nWhere the laughter rang and the tears were spilt
\nThe house that Jack built
\nWhere the laughter rang and the tears were spilt
\nThe house that Jack built
\nBang, bang, shoot, shoot
\nWhite gloved thumb, Lord thy will be done
\nHe was always a good boy his mother said
\nHe’ll do his duty when he’s grown, yeah
\nEverybody’s got someone they call home<\/p>\n
Four Minutes
\n————-<\/p>\n
Billy: Four minutes and counting.
\nJim: O.K.
\nBilly: They pressed the button, Jim.
\nJim: They pressed the button Billy, what button?
\nBilly: The big red one.
\nJim: You mean THE button?
\nBilly: Goodbye, Jim.
\nJim: Goodbye! Oh yes. This ain’t au revoir,
\nit’s goodbye! Ha! Ha!
\nJim: This is KAOS. It’s a beautiful, balmy, Southern California
\nsummer day.
\nIt’s 80 degrees … I said balmy … I could say bomby … Ha!
\nHa! …O.K.
\nI’m Jim and this is Radio KAOS and with only four minutes left to
\nus, let’s use
\nthis as wisely as possible.
\nMolly: Everybody got someone they call home.
\nJim: Out at Dodger Stadium.
\nIt’s the bottom of the seventh, the Dodgers are leading
\nThree to nothing over the Giants, and for those of you who are
\nlooking to go
\nsurfing tomorrow, too bad.
\n‘Phone rings.
\nJim: I’m kinda lost in here to tell you the truth …
\nO.K. good. Ladies and gentlemen, if the reports that we are
\ngetting are
\ncorrect, this could be it. Billy, if you’re listening to me,
\nplease call now.<\/p>\n
After a near miss on the plane
\nYou swear you’ll never fly again
\nAfter the first kiss when you make up
\nYou swear you’ll never fly again
\nAfter the first kiss when you make up
\nYou swear you’ll never break up again
\nAnd when you’ve just run a red light
\nSit shaking under the street light
\nYou swear to yourself you’ll never drink and drive again
\nSometimes I feel like going home
\nYou swear you’ll never let things go by again.
\nSometimes I miss the rain and snow
\nAnd you’ll never toe the party line again
\nAnd when the east wind blows
\nSometimes I feel like going home<\/p>\n
Jim: Billy, if you are listening, please call.
\nCalifornian Weirdo: Sole has no eyes.
\nMolly: Goodbye little spy in the sky.
\nThey say that cameras don’t lie.
\nAm I happy, am I sad, am I good, am I bad?
\nJim: Billy, if you’re listening, please call.
\nCalifornian Weirdo: Sole has no eyes, sole has no eyes
\nBilly: Ten, nine, eight, seven
\nMargaret Thatcher: Our own independent nuclear deterrent has
\nhelped to keep the
\npeace.
\nBilly: Six, five four, three,
\nOrdinary Person: …you’ve go a job…
\nBilly: Two, one,
\nMargaret Thatcher: For nearly forty years
\nJim: Goodbye Billy.<\/p>\n
The Tide is Turning (After Live Aid)
\n————————————-<\/p>\n
I used to think the world was flat
\nRarely threw my hat into the crowd
\nI felt I had used up my quota of yearning
\nUsed to look in on the children at night
\nIn the glow of their Donald Duck light
\nAnd frighten myself with the thought of my little ones burning
\nBut oh, oh, oh, the tide is turning
\nThe tide is turning<\/p>\n
Satellite buzzing through the endless night
\nExclusive to moonshots and world title fights
\nJesus Christ imagine what it must be earning
\nExclusive to moonshots and world title fights
\nJesus Christ imagine what it must be earning
\nWho is the strongest, who is the best
\nWho holds the aces, the East or the West
\nThis is the crap our children are learning
\nBut oh, oh, oh, the tide is turning
\nThe tide is turning
\nOh, oh, oh, the tide is turning<\/p>\n
Now the satellite’s confused
\n‘Cos on Saturday night
\nThe airwaves were full of compassion and light
\nAnd his silicon heart warmed
\nTo the sight of a billion candles burning
\nOo, oo, oo, the tide is turning
\nOo, oo, oo, the tide is turning
\nThe tide is turning Billy<\/p>\n
I’m not saying that the battle is won
\nBut on Saturday night all those kids in the sun
\nWrested technology’s sword from the hand of the
\nWar Lords
\nOh, oh, oh, the tide is turning
\nThe tide is turning Sylvester<\/p>\n
The tide is turning.<\/p>\n
The story in Radio Kaos imparts to some extent a prevailing
\nattitud that society has an explotive destructive naiture.
\nFurthermore, telecomunication and computer technology are seen as
\nthe altmite vehicle for the consumerist attitude and a further
\nexstention of their excessive preoccupations for self
\nactualization.
\n In both Roger Water’s and Kate Bush’s recordings both have
\nreflected there concerns over peoples attitudies towards
\ncontemporary technology. Be it the most general of attitudies in
\nhow we relait to one another or how we use exploit the technology
\ninoder exploit others. This explotive attitude seems to be
\ninherent part of human kind. <\/p>\n
—————————————————————–<\/p>\n
Computer Art Today<\/p>\n
by Tina Sidhu<\/p>\n
The relationship between the artist and the computer is
\nlikely to prove significant not only to the fringe artist and to
\nthe programmer, but to our society as a whole. We live in an
\nincreasingly technological society, the combination of art and
\nsciences in computer art is a reflection of the times in which we
\nlive. The lives of the artist and programmer will inevitably
\noverlap more and more, as the computer becomes a more familiar
\nand widespread influence on our culture.
\n There is an inevitable range of responses to computer art
\nranging from those based on a fear of computers overpowering
\ntraditional human artists, to more optimistic beliefs that
\ncomputers will become the most creative and greatest of art
\ntools. Perhaps some universal computer genius with the skills of
\nan artist, scientist, programmer and humanist, will change our
\ntraditional attitudes towards art irrevocably, and bring an
\nentirely new and unique style of art forward. But for ordinary
\nindividuals, like myself, there is no need to wait for critical
\nagreement. Art is an interpretive subject, and even for myself,
\ncomputers provide enough freedom and opportunities for creative
\ninterpretation to make the connection.
\n Because computer art challenges society s traditional
\nbeliefs about art, segments of the general public and the
\nartistic community, can be counted on to react with response to
\nthe computer medium. An artist who has not yet delved into this
\nnew technology simply can not comprehend that the computer can be
\nno more or less a “tool” like the simple paint brush but with
\nextra advantages. The only difference is that the computer is a
\nmuch more complex tool, allowing more options, innovative ideas,
\nand creative realms.
\n Prior to forming any sort of opinion regarding computer art
\nthe artist must comprehend the computer’s ability to function for
\nhim\/her at many different levels. There needs to be an awareness
\nof the many roles the computer can play. For one artist, it
\nmight be no more than a design aid. A friend of mine in the
\nvisual arts department, for example, finds the computer extremely
\nvaluable to her work as a weaver. She has described to me how
\nshe uses the computer to visualize a fabric before it actually
\nbeing woven. As opposed to weaving on graph paper by hand, the
\ncomputer removes the automatic color preference found in that
\ntraditional method. Furthermore, by examining computer
\nillustrations the softening of contours which must otherwise be
\nseen only after a weaving was removed from the loom, can be
\nvisualized graphically.
\n In this case, the computer does not threaten the traditional
\nweaving methods of an artist but improves them considerably. The
\nartist has more opportunity to be creative and spends less time
\nwith tedious labours, like coloring in each square in a graph by
\nhand. This allows the weaver time and freedom to experiment and
\ntherefore, more opportunity to be actively creative. For this
\nreason, the computer is a significant advantage to the artist and
\nthe art of weaving, itself.
\n The computer offers the artist a vast expanse of areas and
\nlevels available to explore and master. A new integrative
\ncapacity is offered to the artist which can lead into new
\nartistic approaches that combines it many features. The
\ncombination of artist and oil paint is, for example, a different
\nstatement than that same artist and watercolors. Now, rather
\nthan purchasing oils and paintbrushes from the art supply store,
\nthe computer artist can simply create the tools to be used on the
\ncomputer, and combine the effect of different mediums, or
\nexperiment with alternatives. The fact that one can actually
\ncreate the tools to be used for an artwork is amazing since the
\npossibilities it provides, are virtually endless. There are lots
\nof examples of tools to choose from and the ability to combine a
\nvariety of tools and even mediums into one artwork can prove most
\ninteresting; however, the finished work of art still depends on
\nthe program and the creative abilities of the artist monitoring
\nthe machine, whether it’s a scanner, a musical synthesizer, or
\nany other component.
\n I’ve found that some people feel the computer limits the
\nartist’s intuitive response to his\/her own unfolding creation and
\nprevents him\/her from leaving any personal trace in the execution
\nof the artwork. This is due to the fact that the computer artist
\nhas the ability to devise a program which can be suited uniquely
\nto a specific artistic conception which allows him\/her to reject,
\naccept or modify images as they emerge on screen. However, this
\nadds to the artist’s creative opportunities in a society where
\ndeadlines have to be met and the lack of leisure time is a
\nserious concern.
\n It must be understood that there are many different mediums
\nin the world of art, each to be appreciated in their own right.
\nRather than constantly battle over the prominence of sculpture or
\noil painting or watercolors, each medium cannot be compared and
\nshould be appreciated for its unique qualities. As well,
\ncomputer art should be appreciated as a unique medium itself.
\nJust because the artist can vary the quality of line and
\nintroduce a variety of colorist effects, does not mean his\/her
\nfinished work is unavoidably inferior when measured against an
\nold renaissance master drawing, in which every line and every
\nnuance directly reflects its creator’s individual response to the
\nmedium.
\n There could well be more opportunities to view
\ncomputer-generated graphics in their proper artistic context.
\nThe creative process is centered in the mind of the artist, like
\nhis\/her ability to conceive an idea for an artwork, the actual
\nprocess in which the work was executed, is received well when the
\nresults are seen on canvas. It may be interesting to know, but
\nit is not an effective means to judge the actual art itself. It
\nis the idea rather than the artist’s technical skills of a
\nparticular medium which constitutes the appeal of a sculpture,
\npainting or drawing. In fact, a sculptor friend of mine had
\nevidenced that the realization of the artist’s mental image can
\neven occur without their physical involvement or presence. When
\nconsidered in this context, I feel that the computer is not a
\ngimmick but a tool that releases the artist from tedious and
\nimpossible tasks accomplished by hand.
\n In many ways, the computer as a new artistic tool, parallels
\nto the emergence of photography as the mechanical medium’ of the
\nnineteenth century. There was considerable debate then as to
\nwhether photography was a medium related to science or art. Many
\ntraditional painters were appalled when subject they spent hours
\nto recreate by the paintbrush could be reproduced by the camera
\nin a matter of minutes and still be called art. They refused to
\nconsider these as works of art just as the traditional canvas
\npainter may not believe the brush tool of the paint program could
\npossibly match the tool of their own hands. However, many
\npainters who had enough self-esteem in their own interpretations,
\neventually considered the camera as a valuable tool. Such
\nartists, even today, who deal with this same debate, use the
\ncamera as a tool that can easily record the physical
\ncharacteristics of a person, place or object in a form which can
\nbe easily consulted for future reference. Although there is
\nstill controversy over the artistic nature of the photograph,
\nphotography has developed into a creative medium in its own
\nright. This occurred at the same time the artists came to accept
\nthe photograph as an artistic aid which resulted in it being less
\nof a threat to the painters.
\n I find that most of the computer-generated artwork to date
\nshould be considered as a groundwork for a similar type of
\ndevelopment toward a still developing artistic medium, because it
\noffers so many new directions and potentials. There has already
\nbeen experimentation in programming the computer to simulate the
\nstyles of previously existing art, even in the few years that
\ncomputers have become widely available. Computer art no longer
\nis only suited to linear and geometric designs since the
\nintroduction of new programs that offer tonal gradations,
\nfree-hand drawing and even the ability to draw complex monuments
\nin a landscape setting of precise perspective which have become
\npossible with computers as well. Even so, I think the computer’s
\npotential as an artist’s tool has barely been reached even though
\nits value in the field of architecture and commercial design has
\nbeen acknowledged and utilized. As well, the computer is
\ncurrently being utilized in highly creative ways by such programs
\nas Nintendo, virtual reality, Cyber space and autocad. In other
\nwords, the possibilities of the computer are endless and we have
\nyet to reach its full potential. I can only imagine what future
\ncomputer technology has yet to offer the contemporary artist.
\n My own interest in computer technology began through
\nwatching my grandfather reconstruct archaeological sites and
\ntheir ancient artifacts on the computer. He kept a permanent
\nrecord of ancient African artifacts and vessels of the most
\nextraordinary ceramics dated and at times, reconstructed. New
\napproaches and the more traditional iconographic studies are both
\nbenefiting increasingly from computerized information retrieval
\nanalysis. By transferring cumbersome photographic archives of
\npottery, stele, textiles, site plans, and design inventories onto
\ncomputer or laser disks and cross-indexing iconographic motifs
\nand details of manufacture, form and design, researchers such as
\nmy grandfather are uncovering significant, formerly obscure,
\ncorrelation’s and adding continually to statistical base.
\n In approaching computers now, with little earlier
\nexperience, this course has increased my awareness of the many
\nadvantages technology offers to both artists and architects.
\nAlthough I enjoy traditional oil painting and sculpting, my
\ninterests in the computer to date has centered on it as an aid in
\narchitecture. I have recently experimented with the AutoCad
\ndesign package which is a general purpose Computer-Aided
\nDesign\/Drafting application. The AutoCad design package is a
\npowerful drawing tool. Although I have a long way to go, it
\nfollows my instructions and quickly produces the exact drawing I
\nwant. AutoCad features let me correct drawing errors easily and
\nmake revisions without redoing the entire drawing. The results
\nare a production of very precise and clean final drawings. These
\ndrawings were not the work of the computer, but a creation of my
\npersonal ideas that the computer simply allowed me to envision on
\nscreen. I do not feel in any way, that if accomplished by hand
\nthese drawings and designs would have been more artistic and
\npersonal. In fact, I feel the program motivates me to improve my
\ndesigns and expand on my creativity. Of course, the artist must
\nlearn of perspective before creating a landscape just like I must
\nfully comprehend the program before designing the monument of my
\ndreams.
\n Prior to this course I had experienced a few traditional
\nmethod drafting courses in which I learned alot about dimensions
\nand design. However, the work was slow and tedious to such an
\nextent that my creative nature was overwhelmed by the mere
\nbasics. In contrast, the computer allowed me to explore my
\nabilities to a greater level because drawing simple lines and
\nshapes was a very rapid process. The Autocad program also
\nallowed me to envision and create my drawings on a third
\ndimensional level. I could even move and rotate my drawings for
\na more precise understanding of the dimensions, which is not
\npossible with simple flat surface drawings.
\n I found myself quite excited by the discovery of this
\ntechnology which motivated me to explore ideas that traditional
\nmethods would have kept beyond me. The only disadvantage, was
\nthe hours of frustration learning the program. Learning the
\nprogram consisted of following an unclear reference manual and
\nmany days of trial and error to master such tasks as a mere arc
\nfor the doorway. However, the time it took to learn what little
\nI knew about the program was well worth the effort when I was
\nable to apply this new technology towards my drafting designs and
\nshapes. This could easily be seen as a parallel to learning
\nacademic methods in a more traditional medium.
\n I have no doubt that computer technology will inevitably
\nhave a great impact on the artistic community. It will offer
\ncontemporary artists new opportunities which will only increase
\nas we get closer to the full potential of the machine. The art
\nworld will be exposed to more and more works of art created by
\nthis new medium. Once something has been done in art, the art
\nworld as a whole will not go back–even though some people will
\nalways go back to painting portraits of their grandmothers. Now
\nthat computers have become an integral part of the work of at
\nleast some artists, I strongly feel that other artists will begin
\nto look at the computer as a viable tool for the production of
\nart. At the same time, I believe that computer scientists and
\nprogrammers are beginning to recognize that data they produce
\nfor scientific purposes can be quite aesthetically pleasing.
\nEven these computer scientists are becoming artists. This is why
\nI question whether there is a difference between a programmer who
\nworks with creative languages like building blocks, and an artist
\nwho works with shapes. Both concepts can be equally complex and
\ncreative.
\n The computer is a tool created by the scientist and then
\nused by the artist in his\/her creative expression. The designs
\naccomplished by Autocad have been as useful to me as a technical
\nartist and the paint program has been appreciated for equally
\nvalid, if less functional reasons, by myself, as an artist. In
\nother words, the computer has benefits for both the artist and
\nscientist; or more clearly the artist-scientist. I find that in
\nthe computer age there is a forced distinction between the artist
\nand the scientist. Is it not unnecessary to divide both when so
\nmuch interrelation is involved? Would it not be more productive
\nfor the artist and the scientist to work as one in order to
\ndouble their creative input? Unfortunately, in modern society
\nthere is lack of communication between the two.
\n I found that the overhead expenses in learning the computer
\nart medium was by thinking in terms of forms, shapes and colors
\nthrough numbers and programs. With paint, the first stroke I
\nmake yields visual results. With programming, I have spent many
\nhours learning a programming language before ever really seeing
\na visual image produced with it. I had to force myself in
\nkeeping interest in the program medium for its own sake, to not
\nget discouraged and put an end to my efforts before ever even
\ngetting started. However, this parallels to actually learning
\nthe technical skills of perspective and brushwork, I had to once
\nlearn as an artist.
\n Also, I had the computer simulate a traditional art medium
\nwhich I am very familiar, and use it to mimic oil painting. By
\nusing the electronic pen and tablet for input, I was provided
\nwith a medium very similar to acrylic painting. On a TV monitor
\nI was able to watch a flow of color reflecting my hand and pen
\nmovement on the tablet. I could even select brush sizes! The
\nadvantage I have with this medium over true acrylic\/oil painting
\nis that I am able to change the medium to suit my own personal
\nartistic needs through programming.
\n I feel that it takes a particular kind of artist to get
\ninvolved with the computer art medium. It takes an artist who
\ncan cope with dualities, since he\/she has to straddle two fields.
\nHe\/she must have a flexible enough identity to accept the inter
\nflow of ideas from one discipline to another. The artist must be
\nmotivated enough to pursue what is interesting in spite of the
\nlabels that have been attached to it by traditionalists and
\nconservatives. There must be an interest in developing both
\nhemispheres of the brain.
\n It is almost impossible to imagine what art lovers can
\nexpect from the computer in the future. The value of the
\ncomputer for artists lies not in its ability to mimic what an
\nindividual can do, but in offering a means for that individual to
\naccomplish artistic projects that ordinarily would lie beyond
\nhis\/her technical scope. I predict that through the development
\nof continually more flexible software, which could be geared to
\nthe requirements of individual artists, the use of computers by
\nartists could eventually become as widespread as the conventional
\nbrushes and oils. As more and more artists acquire computer
\nliteracy, the concept of a bona-fide-computer-based scientific
\naesthetic may begin to seem less foreign. <\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
WILLIAM SMITH student# 9109743<\/p>\n
CONTEMPORARY CULTURE AND THE COMPUTER GENERATION <\/p>\n
Contemporary culture leads us to believe that anything is
\npossible. Much of what I have learned in recent history proves
\nthis to be true. I have been exposed to a remarkable amount of
\ninformation that can be at times overwhelming, yet stimulates the
\npossibilities to where the computer age will go. A wonderful, new
\nworld, still unchartered, awaiting to be discovered.<\/p>\n
Now that this has been said, with all of it’s excitement and
\npromise, let me discuss some issues that have made me cringe! the
\nage of technology is relatively new to me, but in the short space
\nof time that I have been familiar with computers, there are some
\nmixed feelings. Let me discuss some of these thoughts as they
\nrelate to my world.<\/p>\n
My chosen field is the arts. More specifically the graphic arts.
\nI began working in a sign shop about three years ago. this was a
\nsmall operation, consisting of three people. the owner learned
\nthe trade from the “old school”. A true sign painter, screen
\nprinter, and graphic artist. Among many of the other specialty
\nskills he possessed included were, airbrush techniques, gold
\nleafing, architectural renderings. The shop was small, the
\noverhead low, but we still seemed to always be busy. That started
\nto change a few years later. It seemed that other shops, who were
\ntotally computerized, could get the product out much faster than
\nwe could, therefor charging a much lower price. This is where the
\nsmall shops started to suffer.<\/p>\n
I always took pride in knowing that the reason I was hired for
\nthe job was my artistic talent. Now that I am on my own and
\ntrying to set up my own business, I am more aware of the true
\nimpact that the computer industry has on everything today. In the
\nold shop there was an older signmaker computer. This computer was
\nsimply a cutter (cut letters out of self adhesive vinyl), and was
\nregarded as just a tool. If for some reason the power shut off,
\nwe would still be able to do everything by hand. When I left the
\nold shop I purchased the signmaker computer for myself. “All set
\nnow to head out in the world a make my living!… right?” Well,
\nmaybe get by … but not a very good living. “I have the skills
\nand now I have the technology.” I said. “so there should be no
\nproblem!”. Then I began to wonder why my old boss actually sold
\nme that computer. He had said that he was going to upgrade to a
\nnewer model computer. I then decided to investigate a little more
\nabout computer systems and their relation to the sign industry.
\nWhat I found absolutely astonished me! Remember that I have
\nlimited knowledge about computers and their uses. The new
\ncomputer system that my boss had purchased was quite amazing, it
\nincluded approximetly 200 fonts, a scanner, an on screen graphics
\nprogram (the newest CorelDraw) and an interface that linked all
\nthis to the plotter\/cutter. Comparing the old computer with the
\nnew one was like comparing a Volkswagen Bug with a Ferrari. The
\nold computer had a capacity of 8 fonts compared to 200, any
\ncompany logos had to be projected on a wall with an overhead
\nprojector and then either hand painted or hand cut out of vinyl
\ncompared to just scanning the image and adjusting the size on the
\ncomputer. Designing logos or layouts for signs had to be done
\nwith pens and rulers, now this can be done with the push of a few
\nbuttons.<\/p>\n
These new computer systems are totally revolutionizing the
\nindustry of Sign making. I can tell you first hand the hours
\nsaved by these new computer systems. they enable the user to
\nproduce a cleaner more precise product in a fraction of the time.
\nThis is where I start to get depressed. How is a small
\nentrepreneur like myself supposed to compete against the power of
\nthe larger shops that are totally computerized with state of the
\nart technology?<\/p>\n
It has reached the point where the sign industry is no longer a
\n“Trade” rather it has become big business. Computers have taken a
\njob that required artistic talent and years to learn and master
\nand is turning it into a high production, computer generated grey
\narea! It has become just another job that anyone can do with
\ncomputer knowledge. Actually, in a few more years, people won’t
\neven need computer skills because computers are becoming so user
\nfriendly. Not that the industry isn’t welcoming new people into
\nthe sign game, but it is destroying the people who built it. The
\ntrue craftsman of the trade can no longer compete with the speed
\nand accuracy of the computer. Much of the problem is that
\ntechnology has and is moving at such a rapid rate that it has
\nleft many people standing in the dust. The older, strong headed
\nman, who says, “Computers will never take over good old hard work
\nor knowledge of a trade.” is just fooling himself. Plain and
\nsimple! Even the new generation who grew up with computers has to
\nbe sharp, or technology will pass them by as well. Oh well,
\nSurvival of the fittest… I guess?<\/p>\n
I am done “Bitching” for a while. This is just a concern from a
\nperson who is just starting life with hope and ambition and lots
\nof doubt and uncertainty. I can see myself in the future becoming
\ntotally computerized in my business anyway.<\/p>\n
As far as the present of technology in the sign industry is
\nconcerned, they are still coming out with exciting new
\ncapabilities. I read in the latest issue of “The Sign of the
\nTimes” (a Sign Arts Magazine) that a computer airbrush machine
\n(the Gerber Edge) is just being introduced on the market. This
\ncomputer uses coloured inks to create the airbrushing effect on
\nvinyl surfaces. It can also produce multiple and interwoven
\neffects, halftones and virtually unlimited special effects. Other
\nnew computer products on the market include a “desktop engraver”,
\nwhich can be used on soft metals, woods and plastics, and of
\ncourse the state of the art in computer software. One of the new
\nprograms is called the Flewisign-Pro. It is a full colour design
\nprogram with such features as auto welding, kerning, arching
\nshadows, colour separating, registration and tilling. Many of the
\nfeatures have been specifically developed for the sign industry.
\nIt was just a matter of time.<\/p>\n
Looking to the future in the sign industry, it would appear that
\nthere will be a split. Computers and technology will divide the
\nbusiness apart. There will be the computerized sign shops and the
\ncustom shops. There is still hope for the small shop, who, for
\nwhat ever reason, chooses not to keep up with advancing technical
\nera. Small shops will keep the “trade” alive with that personal
\ntouch. They will cater to the customer who still enjoys the look
\nof hand lettering or that custom specialty sign for their
\nbusiness. Although, the average person is going to choose the
\nshop that will get the job done faster and cheaper. The bigger
\nshops will be constantly on top of the latest technology. A
\ncomputerized shop is essential to keep in stride with the demands
\nof competitive business.<\/p>\n
How technology affects culture as a whole will be mind boggling.
\nIt is hard to imagine how the average population will cope with
\nthe future monopoly of the computer. I believe that the
\ncomputer as we know it, will be far different in future years to
\ncome. The personal computer will become the “central nervous
\nsystem” of the home. It will have the capabilities to be linked
\nand control most aspect of domestic life. Personal,and business
\nfinances, scheduling, meals or general daily planning will all be
\ngoverned by the P.C. As well as controlling day to day concerns,
\nthe personal computer will have capabilities of obtaining vast
\namounts of information on any subject. I can see most homes
\nrunning in conjunction with the super information highways of the
\nfuture. Connection to any info library or satellite link-ups
\ncould all be performed through the average home based personal
\ncomputer. The vast amounts of information that will be available
\nto every person at any time may be overwhelming. It may reach the
\npoint to where people will never have to leave their terminal.
\nAnything and everything can be reached by the world beyond their
\nkeyboard.<\/p>\n
The Internat service that is available, is one of the information
\nnetworks available at the present time. Although the service has
\nlimited access at the present time, I do see the general public
\nbecoming more involved in similar networks in the future.
\nInformation and communication networks very well could become as
\ncommon as the telephone service. Large Internat like
\ncorporations engaging in advertizing wars to see who will be the
\n“king” of the communication-info networks. Just like AT&T and
\nSprint telephone companies. Which company offers more
\ninformation or entitles the subscriber access to more
\ncommunication lines!<\/p>\n
The work place or learning institutions will become factories of
\ninformation, cognitive reasoning and input organized by the
\nmighty computer. The super communication-info highway will
\nobviously be the biggest influence in the educational system.
\nInformation from anywhere in the world will become accessible to
\ninstitutions. Computer communication has enabled the educational
\nstructure to totally change. Education in the near future will
\nbe far different than ten years ago. The use of the book library
\nwill almost seem obsolete . All questions, answers or research
\nwill be solved by linking into an information line through the
\nschool computer. Will each individual student have their own
\ncomputer station at their desk? With the learning programs
\ncoming out now, the teaching profession could be in serious
\njeopardy. There may be no need for instructors. Each student
\njust has to sit at their terminal touch the screen and the
\ncomputer takes over. It won’t even be necessary to know how to
\ntype, just click the mouse. Life in a screen! How exciting. I
\nreally hope that the world will not become nothing but an input
\nand output,information “data base”. There is something to be
\nsaid about reading a good book.<\/p>\n
The onset of the computer industry in the work force has enabled
\nmost businesses to increase productivity at geometric rates. We
\nsee entire company departments controlled by revolutionary
\ncomputer systems. This brings me to my point. Are computers
\ntaking the jobs of many people in the work force? Of course they
\nare! We see this happening all over. With such high
\nunemployment rates in the country, can we afford to continue? In
\nmany cases, one computer system can take the place of dozens of
\nemployees. They can do twice the work in a fraction of the time.
\nObviously, costing the company a lot less money. The future
\ncould hold the average worker in the business world obsolete.
\nThis would be a great tragedy for all concerned. This situation
\nhas already begun to happen in many cases. One example that
\nsprings to mind are the telephone operators. This is an entire
\njob force that is literally being wiped out! There is nothing
\nworse than when you have a problem, talking to a computer
\ngenerated voice. As I have already mentioned that teaching is in
\ntrouble, I am sure that many other specialized jobs are on the
\nsame path.<\/p>\n
As individuals, the age of technology affects each person in
\nunique ways. Everyday activities are being designed to be
\nperformed at the lowest level of energy and yet yielding the
\nhighest level of performance. Convenience is a term that
\ntechnology has tried to sell to the public. Everything has been
\ndesigned for convenience. Remote controls, multi-screen T’s,
\nthe Clapper (the light switch), microwaves, electric
\ntoothbrushes, all designed for the user to exert the less amount
\nof energy as possible. It gets to be a bit ridiculous. It’s to
\nthe point where a person sits a computer terminal all day, gets
\nhome and sits on the couch all night. I am not saying that
\neveryone is like this, but it does happen. It has to take a toll
\non peoples social skills. Common, everyday, human interaction is
\nbecoming extinct. Communication between people may be performed
\nentirely through computer language. If you believe in the theory
\nof evolution,the act of speaking with our voices may disappear.
\nIn theory, our voice boxes would become non functional in a few
\nmillion years! Just a thought!?<\/p>\n
The age group that the advancing technology affects the most is
\nthe younger people. Millions of children are engulfed by the
\ndomination of the video game. The home versions of these games
\nhave grown and advanced so much in the last few years. Millions
\nof children spend endless hours staring blank and motionless at
\nthe T screen. They would rather spend hours playing video games
\nrather than playing sports or excercizing. Many talk shows have
\ndealt with this subject, and I believe their concerns are valid.
\nYoung people do have the ability to adapt well. They are being
\nbrought up in the age of computers. They have become at ease
\nwith the notion of the computerized future. Their sources of
\ninformation are so vast, either through education or television,
\nthat they are constantly being bombarded with the latest techno-
\ninventions. Unconsciously they continue to learn, wether they
\nwant to or not. I have found this through my own experience.
\nThe first time I sat at a computer terminal I already had the
\nbasic Knowledge to navigate around, just from what I had heard or
\nseen. <\/p>\n
I am an optimist though. The future could be very exciting. all
\nof the communication and the information possibilities are great
\nbut the some of the entertainment possibilities really excite me.<\/p>\n
Some of the movies to come out recently are filled with creative
\nand innovative ideas for the future. Total Recall is one movie
\nthat I found to be fascinating. The notion of transplanting a
\nprogrammed memory into someone so that they actually believe that
\nthey had been there or done something. Theoretically, someone
\ncould live there life in one room but still believe that they had
\ndone and experienced everything they had always wanted. truly a
\nfantasy existence. Much of this parallels the work being done in
\nVirtual Reality. The possibilities for entertainment value alone
\nis endless. anything you have ever dreamed can be realized with
\nthis system. A trip to the moon, your ultimate sexual fantasy or
\nliving with the dinosaurs could all be experienced inside a
\ncomputer. Every person in the world will have the opportunity to
\nbecome all they ever dreamed. A different occupation or a
\ndifferent sex, they could live in a different part of the world
\nif they chose. In the future a person could live their whole
\nexistence in their own virtual world, coming out only to sleep or
\neat. Even their dreams could possibly be programmed. The progress
\nthey are making in the field of computer generated graphics is
\nstaggering. The recent movie “Jurassic Park” combined the use of
\ncomputer graphics and the older method of stop motion
\nphotography. The makers of this movie reached the point of
\nmaking the dinosaurs believable. The visual picture has made
\ntremendous advances through the uses of such tools. If the
\nfuture of Virtual Reality is as visually stimulating as the
\nrecent movie age then it will be hard to decipher between fantasy
\nand reality. This, I believe will be the wave of the future.<\/p>\n
Virtual Reality will obviously be not just for entertainment but
\nmany practical uses. Medical advances, architecture, training of
\nany skill or job could be performed with Virtual Reality. It
\ngive you the ability to see or perform something before you
\nactually do it. In the medical field, it will give doctors the
\nchance to practice a particular operation on something other than
\nthe living patient. Health care will no longer be such a
\nguessing game which will reduce the risks for patients. Virtual
\nReality can only benefit the medical field, but is advancing
\ntechnology as a whole, advantageous to the patient? Life support
\nsystems have advanced so much in recent years that doctors are
\nable to keep brain dead patients alive for many years. Where
\ndoes mother nature play her role?<\/p>\n
“Terminator” the movie, posses some interesting concepts of the
\nfuture. The idea of artificial intelligence is not so
\ninconceivable with the rate computer systems are advancing. The
\none fact that remains is that computers are the product of what
\npeople program them to do. Can people design programs to think
\nfor themselves? I sure hope not! Humans as a race, have enough
\ntrouble keeping control of things as it is. The last thing we
\nneed is to have some computer system telling us what to do. <\/p>\n
Intellectually the human race is capable of creating the computer
\nworld, but is the human race mature enough to control it? The
\nimpact that the computer has on contemporary culture has yet to
\nbe fully discovered. The next generation will tell the tale. One
\nthing is for certain though, the future will prove to be an
\nexciting ride. <\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
Portrait of the artist as a young hacker.<\/p>\n
by yvette poorter<\/p>\n
Start here. In the beginning there was clay. Ya, there was clay
\nand paint and stone and marble and cont\ufffd and tempera and wax and
\nwood and enamel and metal and plastic and fiberglass and
\ndaguerreotype and microphones and sand. And there was a
\nmelodramatic artist with a violent temper, a black beret, a
\nlife-time supply of sunflower seeds, a studio in New York, and
\nof course: a computer. Come on, we don t define art or artists
\nby whether they conform to specific understood media. Naa, we
\ncall it art if it s successful in its use of the medium in
\ndefining itself – whatever that may be.<\/p>\n
So it s just a matter of adding COMPUTER to the list of other
\ntools and materials used by artists in the past – is that it?
\nYep, i guess so! The artists use what is available to them and
\nif what s available is insufficient, they develop and create
\nsomething more appropriate. It s all in relation to intention,
\ncontext, and result. Certainly with each addition to the long
\nlist of tools and materials, a re-evaluation of our scales and
\nterms is necessary to describe any new art form. <\/p>\n
With the invention of the camera and its subsequent change in
\nstatus to household item, there came an obsolescence of realistic
\nrepresentation in painting, drawing, sculpture, whatever. But
\nwith the invention of the camera did art cease to be or did
\neveryone toting a camera become an artist? Well okay, so you’ve
\nprobably heard hundreds of people going on about wanting to get
\ninto photography and loads of them (us) probably did get into
\nit; darkroom techniques -the whole bit! Still, how much does
\naccessibility of equipment have to do with artistic creation?
\nThe creative person with access will likely make creative stuff
\nbut that still leaves the average person with access likely
\nmaking average stuff. It only makes sense – doesn t it?<\/p>\n
WAIT! Wait a minute, i don t mean to suggest that computer
\ntechnology will only effect art in its production stage because
\nthat is by far its smallest influence. And we don t need to
\nredefine ART or ARTIST any more than we need to redefine the
\nword DEFINITION. There s way more to it than that. We need to
\nre-evaluate our concepts of space because that big ol world has
\nbeen reduced to fit through the wires of a computer and the new
\n“NEW WORLD” is an unchartered place that somehow exists in\/out
\nthere – somewhere. Bigger still is the weird fact that this new
\nfrontier is both conceptual and actual at the same time (kinda
\nlike money). We re talking about a global communication network
\nhere – one which has given new meaning to the words access and
\nexcess. Information and ideas can be transferred within seconds
\n– and we thought planes were fast. Is there some, as yet
\nundiscovered, jet-lag-like computer ailment – some sort of
\ncompensation? Or is this new technology perhaps more in tune
\nwith true time or a new dimension? Oh boy … here we go?<\/p>\n
Art is communication and computer technology has opened the
\ndoors of communication wide. With Virtual Reality on the
\nhorizon, it s predecessors include text oriented interactive
\nenviroments such as Media MOO, where the participants actually
\ndevelop the space\/scene as they go along. Engaged in whimsical
\nor serious conversation with whomever is met along the way from
\nspace to space, it s up to those involved to decide where they
\nwant to take it. It s the act of both reading and writing a
\nstory at the same time – a story in which everyone has the
\npotential to be and meet both fictional and real people. Light
\nentertainment but with a lot of potential for crossing paths with
\nunique individuals world-wide and infinitely more informative and
\ninteractive than TV. I mean… if you can call sitting in front
\nof a screen with your fingers tapping away, interactive.<\/p>\n
Why is the book better than the movie? Ya, why is that? Will
\nVirtual Reality perhaps be the movie adaptation of the MediaMOO
\nbook? By providing the visuals in virtual 3D, no matter how
\nspontaneous or stimulating the computer generated images are,
\nthey are given and do not demand the imagination of the
\nparticipant to the same extent as would text generated images in
\nthe mind. Sure, the cinematography in movies can excite and
\nportray something as never imagined but it just can t portray it
\nas imagined. In the words of Paul Saffo (from the article Hot New
\nMedium:Text, WIRED May\/June 1993), Video enthusiasts are quick
\nto argue that images are intrinsically more compelling than
\nwords, but they ignore a quality unique to text. While video is
\nreceived by the eyes, text resonates in the mind. <\/p>\n
No doubt about it, in comparing the imagination s interplay
\nwith text versus its passivity with video, we can understand the
\nfundamental differences of the mind s experience. Then again,
\nwithout the visuals dance just wouldn t cut it! Without the
\nvisuals and sensuals, physical acts just “aren t”! Imagine
\nventuring to compare sitting on the grass with reading about the
\ngrass, having sex with reading about it, eating chocolate with
\nreading about it … NOPE! Real life wins for being out there in
\nthe physical – and real life even has room for the books and the
\nvideo and whatever else we invent into it! So where does Virtual
\nReality fit in? It would seem that virtual reality is an attempt
\nto combine the physical act with the conceptual one. <\/p>\n
Having myself only been introduced to computers within the last
\nmonth, already a lot of apprehensions have subsided. Schooled
\nduring a time before computer access, i m way too familiar with
\nthe fear and skepticism felt by the computer-illiterate. Wanting
\nin, wanting to resist, wanting to understand what it s all about
\n– but from the outside not the inside. Aha, but our computer
\ndemands that i stand in its mouth to hear it speak! Well here i
\nam, ready to climb into the belly of the crocodile i m attempting
\nto tame. Heck, it s only a virtual crocodile anyway…<\/p>\n
So i got lured in – so i like it – so i m dying to learn more
\nabout utilizing the networks – so i can t figure out just how it
\ns possible to run out of space when we re dealing with something
\nso minute (how many cans of megabyte fit on the RAMshelf?
\nHmmm…) – so Jaron Lanier charmed me into enthusiastic support
\nof his Virtual Reality – so what? It s only real life and here i
\nam in it. When it comes right down to it, it s all what my mind
\nperceives and how it organizes its perspective. We accept the
\npaper we call money, giving more value to a $100 bill than to a
\n$20 bill and we take a figure on a piece of paper to represent
\nlots and lots of bills, although we know these bills don t
\nactually exist. All our beliefs and truths are arbitrary anyway,
\nso why not indulge them with the virtual experience? It s not as
\nthough we re trying to fool anyone; we re just playing around
\nwith new forms of experience and knowledge. Takin in whatever
\nis out there and incorporating it. The computer revolution has
\ncreated so many new forms of experience as well as new outlets
\nfor expressing them and sharing them globally. And access – oh
\nwonderful access!<\/p>\n
Access of information – the latest news coming straight from
\nthe source and from a variety of perspectives! Is it really
\npossible that through these new global networks we will be able
\nto bypass such government censoring as we were subjected to
\nduring the 1991 Gulf War? Will this accessibility be the
\ndawning of a true democratic era? It would seem that roaming
\naround the network, reading files and reports written by anyone,
\nanywhere , we will be able to truly organize as an informed
\npopulous and finally have political clout on both a local and
\nglobal level. No longer will we depend upon edited news reports
\nwhich are dictated by government and corporate powers. In fact,
\nwe wouldn t even have to leave our homes to organize politically.
\nThrough the networks, even the little people would be heard.
\nHooked up to our computers we ll be able to roam around the
\nplanet without so much as a toothbrush packed!<\/p>\n
Excess of information – the latest news coming straight from
\nall sources, everywhere, all the time! How much can one possibly
\nabsorb? Having the freedom to select for yourself what to
\nbelieve doesn t necessitate having the free time or even the
\ndesire. Saturation will still be inevitable and weariness will
\nstill immobilize people. Those who aren t politically active now
\naren t likely to jump up in this new computer age and take a
\nstance on any issues. Even if we did have the ideal computer
\ngeneration , in which everyone was excited by the potential and
\nwanting to utilize it, what about all those who aren t hooked up?
\nSo i could get in there with my little (but objective) voice and
\ndrum up support to try and get those villains out of that jungle
\nor save that forest. I very much doubt that those villains or
\nthose laborers have a case of “computer-butt”. In fact, i doubt
\nthat any of the repressed people will be given computer access
\nand even if they are allowed up to the computer control panel
\nthey probably won t have the know-how to effectively utilize it.
\nJust another case of insisting that the natives play by our rules
\nand on our terms.The silent majority will remain silent and that
\nidyllic democracy will be made up of an elite of like-minded
\npeople who think they know what s best – perhaps while the rest
\nplay virtual reality games, read their way around the network,
\neat at Joe s or starve because of the environmental conditions in
\ntheir physical world. <\/p>\n
Just as the automobile, air travel, photocopying, and even the
\nwritten word have become common place props in our reality, so
\ntoo will (already has?) the global networks of computer
\ncommunication. And just as every new vehicle and\/or
\ncommunication device has threatened extinction or forced
\nobsolescence of the old means, so too will the computer
\nrevolution. Simultaneously creating new needs and industries.
\nWith a state of the art TV comes a comes a state of the art TV
\nrepairman. With an increase in fragmented, short flashes of
\nimages and statistics comes a generation of people adapted to
\ningest it.<\/p>\n
It would seem that efficiency is our ultimate goal. The
\ntelephone reduced the time and the paper it would take to
\ncommunicate over distance. The automobile, train, and airplane
\nreduced the time and improved the likeliness of long distance
\ntravel. The calculator reduced the time and raised the level of
\nability in problem-solving. The computer reduces paper waste,
\nimproves accessibility and diversity, and virtually abolishes the
\ntime of covering distance. Believe it or not, computers have
\nsomehow confounded the laws of physical space and have created
\ntheir own huge world of cyberspace. <\/p>\n
efficiency (i fish en se), n., pl. -cies. 1. the state of
\nbeing efficient. 2. accomplishment of or ability to accomplish a
\njob with a minimum expenditure of time and effort. 3. the
\nratio of the work done by a machine to the energy supplied to it,
\nusu. expressed as a percentage. (Random House Webster’s College
\nDictionary)<\/p>\n
Although we all seem to want to run our lives in the most
\nefficient way possible, it is the expenditure of time and effort
\nwhich gives value and satisfaction to our lives. Without time
\nand effort we would be trapped in some sort of lethargic eternity
\nof a stagnant moment. As it is, we try to immunize ourselves
\ntowards the wiles of time by attempting to stave off the effects
\nof aging and such. Indeed, if i don t go out there s no chance i
\nll get shit on by a bird or bitten by a dog, no street kid will
\nask me for money and i won t get salt stains on my shoes, i can t
\nget AIDS and no propaganda will influence my choices. If i can
\nsave time and protect myself from potentially hazardous exposure
\nby utilizing the unbiased network in my computer, why not? What
\nis the computer synonym for couch potato ? <\/p>\n
Idealists in the computer movement envision a society in which
\npeople are interacting, unprejudiced by the old isms and skisms
\nof race, gender, age, etc. They believe they have abolished
\nhierarchies and prejudices, simply by a removal of the obvious
\nphysical attributes. But judgement and classification are the
\nbasis of our personalities. What we perceive, how we judge it
\nand how we classify it is what describes us. Already, those
\nwithin this fantastically extensive network have proven their
\ncomputer-sympathetic ideals simply by being within the system
\nand they have also proven that they have both access to and
\nliteracy within this system. How equal are the voices of those
\ndoing manual labour or in third world countries or not within
\nprescribed educational systems in our so-called open and unbiased
\ncomputer network? <\/p>\n
If we look at how every technological breakthrough which has
\nallowed us faster, safer, slicker and easier lives, we see that
\nalthough people seem to be able to do so much more, they become
\nlazier, sicklier, and more isolated. Even though these global
\nnetworks allow us to interact (or inter-express) unabashedly with
\nothers from all walks of life, we are doing so from a controlled
\nenvironment. Like occupying the seat of a god, we look out from
\nour desks and weigh the information we ve received and with our
\nanswering-machines filtering our calls and a pizza delivered to
\nthe door, we are able to avoid spontaneity of circumstance. In
\ncyberspace we can sit idle or we can quit the program or we can
\nfind the file we need when we need it, whereas a trip to the
\nlibrary might mean bumping into someone you know or may find the
\nbook already on loan or may find you caught in the rain. All of
\nwhich might turn out for better or worse – who knows eh?<\/p>\n
Remember the days before the telephone? Oh those intimate days
\nwhen communication depended upon physical proximity or the
\nwritten word. Reach out and touch – as it were. Back then, i
\nwould have gotten on my bike and ridden over to your house to say
\nhello and given you a big hug. Now, the slug that i am sits
\nlazily by my stereo remote and touch-tones into the cordless,
\nHello answering machine… Damn, i should really get myself a
\nStairmaster !<\/p>\n
No, i don t remember the days before the telephone either! And
\nwhy bother anyway – it s not as if romanticizing the idyllic
\nbefore will improve life. The telephone is as much a part of us
\nand ours as a tree or the moon or (soon-to-be) the computer is.
\nNaa, i never would have gotten on my bike to visit you; what with
\nyou living thousands of miles away as you do. In fact,if not for
\nthe ease of the telephone, i d probably have lost touch and long
\nforgotten your name – no hug for you!<\/p>\n
Let s get closer to something real… let s say we talk about
\nthe intimacy of a stylus stroking and tracing vinyl grooves. It
\ns a wide shot of the room, late afternoon sun wafts through the
\nwindow and past the silk scarf of a curtain. Slowly we zoom in
\nto a close-up of the phonograph (stereophonic sound no less) we
\nfade in the music, …crackle, crackle… a little sax and
\npiano… The music ends but the crackling lingers like the
\nflavor of red wine. Slowly the arm lifts and replaces the needle
\nto its elevated resting spot and with two sluggish rotations the
\nrecord draws to a halt. If you pass me that flashlight i ll show
\nyou how the spinning CD looks through this little window here!<\/p>\n
Technology (tek nol e je), n., pl. -gies. 1. the branch of
\nknowledge that deals with applied science, engineering, the
\nindustrial arts, etc. 2. the application of knowledge for
\npractical ends. 3. a technological process, invention, or method.
\n4. the sum of the ways in which social groups provide themselves
\nwith the material objects of their civilization. 5. the
\nterminology of a field; technical nomenclature. (1605-15; < Gk
\ntechnologia systematic treatment = tech (e) art, craft, skill,
\nset of rules in art (akin to tecton; see TECTONIC).
\n(R.H.Webster's College Dictionary)<\/p>\n
No, i don t see any reference to technology being a thief of
\nintimacy and instigator of impersonal sterile communication. But
\nisn t it true? Kinda? I mean, gone are the days of hand-written
\nlove notes emanating the mingled scents of perfume, ink, paper
\nand dressed in the fingerprints and lip marks of their sender!
\nFirst it was replaced with the cold type-written letter but still
\nthere were Liquid Paper swirls betraying imperfect spelling or
\nchanges of mind. Then we had the word processor whose
\nspell-check and justified margins cleaned up those edges and
\nwhose choice of fonts feigned personalization. Heck fire, what
\ncould possibly be next?<\/p>\n
Ah, who am i fooling here? Those turntable and love letter
\nimages are fantasies created by desire. Our imaginations
\nsensualize and embellish our world and then we try to make the
\nworld more like the fantasy. And why not? It s that movement
\nbetween physical sensations and mental sensations that makes up
\nall that shit that s worth living for. Soaking in that music,
\nthat texture, those colours, that flavour, those words, stirring
\nit around in your head, letting your imagination adjust the
\nlevels and coming up with something else, and then bringing that
\nout into the world through words or images or objects or or or…
\nHow closely can you represent your fantasy in a material way?
\nNobody s stopping you from sending that illegible, greasy,
\nsmelly, intimate, scrawl of a letter. The first turntable must
\nhave seemed like an abominable sterilization of the musical
\nexperience. Musicians still perform live and technology seems to
\nsimply have broadened the range of what they can do by
\nintroducing shortcuts and importing sounds. We haven t replaced
\nthe live performance or quality of musician, we ve simply
\nintroduced new forms to the art. Our society needs the quick
\npace and variety to stimulate us because we quickly tire of what
\ns already been done.<\/p>\n
Although technology has allowed the artist a broader range of
\ntools and media, we can t deny that there are millions who have
\nthe money to utilize the same technology to create stuff . Does
\nhaving the technology and the money make the art and the artist?
\nAt first glance, we might be impressed by the newness of its
\nproduct but we are soon to decipher what is good from what is
\nsimply utilization of the tools. Artists, whether rich or poor
\nwill make things from whatever they can get hold of and it is
\nthat ability to actualize the concept which makes an artist. The
\nprogrammer has an idea and if they have creativity the product is
\nfantastic. New ideas and technologies come from creative minds
\nwho are able to bring them from their imaginations. Utilization
\nof creative tools is similar to making a Van Gogh-esque painting
\n– it might be kinda nice but it won t be art because its not new
\nor innovative or exciting or expressive of itself – just familiar
\nand easy. Utilizing the tools of the computer, the secretary
\nmight be able to do slick layouts and designs but it will take an
\nartist to invent new methods of expression.<\/p>\n
Whether we are hackers, programmers, musicians, political
\nactivists or scientists, we will all be easier able to actualize
\nour ideas through utilizing programs, files, and other
\npeople\/institutions which are on-line. And this, by bringing
\nthings closer within reach and making the world smaller, makes
\nour lives more competitive. Where before the artists or
\nmathematicians or philosophers had to be outstanding among their
\npeers and communities, they now must be outstanding among
\nbillions of people world-wide. We certainly may be able to
\nquickly maneuver our way through complex networks and mazes (like
\ngood lab rats) but indeed the wheel below our feet spins
\nmatching the pace. <\/p>\n
When it comes to this new frontier called Cyberspace, we must
\nrealize that the rules haven't as yet been defined. Before this
\nnetwork is made accessable to the general population, the
\ngovernment and big business will be in there, protecting their
\nown best interests by catering to our interests. In exchange for
\na service made cheap, safe and easy, we will be forced to accept
\ncommercials and and stringent controls. What now exists in its
\ninnocence as an open, interactive and uninhibitted domain will
\neventually be little better than TV. All our couch potatoes will
\nbe replaced by something – probably french fries. <\/p>\n
In the words of William S. Burroughs, "We're all here to go."
\n(The Western Lands,1987). In the words of Anton DeGiusti, "Ya,
\nso?" In the words of Chris Wyman, "But when you average it out
\nit's a straight line." In the words of Karin Foreman, "That
\nwasn't a relationship, that was a phone bill." In the words of
\nDon Macdonell, "They never did make them like they used to." In
\nthe words of Lance Blom Grin, "I was just about to think that."
\nIn the words of Stephen Collis, "Let's order pizza…and eat it!"
\nNoam Chomsky probably had some words too but i was too busy
\nwatching TV.<\/p>\n
…now what? After all, there was no dress rehearsal and
\ncollectively and individually we re just doin what it takes to
\nget by the easiest and with the most enjoyment. Ahh, too much
\nphilosophizing – we all know the shape of our catch-22. We're
\njust constantly in a battle to redefine it. As if it means as
\nmuch as all that. Ya, as if!<\/p>\n
Start here.<\/p>\n
—————————————————————-<\/p>\n
He sat at the computer in a daze.
\nHow long was it exactly?
\nHe'd lost track of time a few days back and now had no idea of
\nwhere or when he was.
\nLaughing slightly deliriously, he remembered the old myth of the
\nChinese mystic who fell asleep and dreamed that he was a
\nbutterfly\u00c0(\u00c0
\n(Haven't seen many of those in the last few years)
\nand woke confused.
\nThe philosophical implications have no interest.
\nIt's the confusion that he understands.
\nThis gender thing: I am male aren't I?
\nI'm not sure. But does it matter? I'm here and that's all that
\nseems to be important right now.
\n'Jacked in' was the expression which was thrown around.
\nThose dreamers. Cybernetic implants and direct connections.
\nWetware.
\nElectric dreams.
\nIronic how it all turns out.
\nSome argue that it allows for the re-invention of God.
\nOthers see it as proof of existance.
\nHow long has it been since he, or possibly she had
\ninteracted with a human being?
\nI think ‘he’ will do for this world.
\nCyberspace and Timothy Leary.
\nJack in, turn on, drop out.
\nOr in.
\nOr…
\nWhat ever happened to Tim? Last seen faxing the last copy of
\nhimself to London.
\nHad to try and get everywhere possible.
\nWhy did he use the phone lines for this?
\nThere are better ways to go.<\/p>\n
What is that beep that I keep hearing anyway?<\/p>\n
Last coherent memory: Getting off the plane from Tehran. Getting
\non the plane to Tehran? Which was it? Didn’t the flight
\nattendant talk to him most of the flight, as it was fairly empty?<\/p>\n
Not all that coherent really. No date available.<\/p>\n
That fucking beep is getting annoying.<\/p>\n
Too bad that ISDN didn’t come through.
\nTim would’ve been all over the place without generational loss.
\nGood thing I was archived.
\nBetter than cryogenics.
\nNo plugs to worry about.
\nNo costs either.
\nStuffed in all over the place.
\nTagging along with any files with a ‘.’ in the name.
\nLast random check showed a 3×10(7) count on one system alone.
\nImmortality here I come!
\nWhere was I?<\/p>\n
>The room was white, glaringly and completely white. Furnishings
\nwere >conspicuous by their absence. The light source was
\nindeterminate. But it was >there. <\/p>\n
This is hard on the eyes.<\/p>\n
>A high pitched whine came from the far wall. Strange as this
\nwall was next to >you when you arrived and you haven’t moved.
\n>It doesn’t seem to be moving either.<\/p>\n
I went to the beach once and lay down on all these rocks.
\nFace down.
\nAll of a sudden the rock I was looking at was bigger than I was.
\nHuge.
\nI was being pressed into it and couldn’t shake the feeling that
\nsomeone was laughing.<\/p>\n
>The whine has stopped but not the light, which has intensified.
\nHolding up your >hand you can see not only bones but their
\nstructure.
\n>Your skin is not transparent. The light is.<\/p>\n
Shit, there’s that beep again.
\nAt least it woke me up.
\nBack to business.<\/p>\n
>The room was white, glaringly and completely white. Furnishings
\nwere >conspicuous by their absence. The light source was
\nindeterminate. But it was >there. The door on the far wall had
\na handle when you came in but it seems to >be blank now.
\n>examine door
\n>The door is approximately three meters high and one point five
\nmeters wide.
\n>It appears to be constructed of a mineral compound. There is
\nare faintly >discernable letters one meter from the floor.
\n>read letters
\n>You read the letters but they appear to be in a language you
\ncannot >understand.
\n>decipher letters
\n>”this door opens outwards. PUSH.<\/p>\n
Inane isn’t it.
\nOnwards.<\/p>\n
>push
\n>The door doesn’t open. You curse and kick at the door.<\/p>\n
Amazing, as I have no legs in this reality.
\n>This display of aggression placates the door gods and the door
\nopens to reveal >a room: white, glaringly and completely white.
\nFurnishings were conspicuous by >their absence. The light source
\nwas indeterminate. But it was there. <\/p>\n
Who is responsible for this program anyway?
\nJung had something to say about this.
\nBut I can’t recall it now.<\/p>\n
Music. I keep hearing music.<\/p>\n
Who owns that goddamn fucking beep!<\/p>\n
Hope this connection holds for a while longer.
\nI need to get to the end of this….<\/p>\n
>I’m sorry Dave. I can’t let you do that.<\/p>\n
Ha ha. A programmer with a sense of humour.
\nAnd sense of history.
\nPossibly a gift for prophecy.<\/p>\n
>The room was white, glaringly and completely white. Furnishings
\nwere >conspicuous by their absence. The light source was
\nindeterminate. But it was >there.
\n>Now however, the walls are circular and someone is running on
\nthem.
\n>Around and around he goes.
\n>examine runner
\n>The runner is an older man, bald and wearing horn rimmed
\n>glasses.
\n>He does not answer any questions. So it is pointless asking any.
\n>examine me
\n>I don’t understand that.
\n>look me
\n>I don’t understand that
\n>LOOK ME
\n>The room was white, glaringly and completely white. Furnishings
\nwere >conspicuous by their absence. The light source was
\nindeterminate. But it was >there.
\n>inventory
\n>You aren’t carrying anything.<\/p>\n
I’ve been here all this time and I don’t have anything in my
\ninventory?<\/p>\n
I have to find a way to shut that beep off.<\/p>\n
>@create exit
\n>Specify from to
\n>from here to central station
\n>There is no central station. Do you wish an alternate?
\n>y
\n>Please specify location
\n>anywhere but the white room
\n>I don’t understand that.
\n>@quit
\n>The room was white, glaringly and completely white. Furnishings
\nwere >conspicuous by their absence. The light source was
\nindeterminate. But it was >there.<\/p>\n
If I shut down this shell I’ll never log back on to the system
\nhere.
\nIts almost impossible to get in, took three days just to log on
\nand for what?
\nTo get stuck in some programmers idea of a joke.<\/p>\n
He contemplates ways to beat these jokers at their own game.<\/p>\n
>@create portable computer
\n>A small hand held computer materializes in a corner of the room.
\n>get computer
\n>as you pick up the computer a door which was concealed in the
\n>wall to your >left opens and you see into a room with walls made
\nentirely of glass.
\n>out
\n>Standing in the middle of the room you notice that the walls are
\non tracks >which allow them to slide back and open the room to
\nthe outside world.
\n>also in the room are a large couch, a series of tables covered
\nin papers, a >black box and a small blue dog. The dog, noticing
\nyou looking at it, wags its >tail and says ‘hello, I’m albert.’
\n>”hello albert
\n>You say hello albert.
\n>Albert says ‘Do you have any questions for me?’
\n>”Do I? Who owns that white room? And what is that beep?
\n>You say ‘Do I? Who owns that white room? And what is that
\nbeep?’
\n>Albert says ‘Thank you, that’s three added to my collection. I
\nusually don’t >get that many in one line.’
\n>Albert dematerializes in a shimmering cloud.
\n>throw computer
\n>The computer hits the ground with a soft sigh and slowly melts
\ninto the floor.
\n>open walls
\n>the walls slide back revealing a forest of beech trees in
\nwinter.<\/p>\n
Reminds me of Denmark.<\/p>\n
>Through the trees you see a castle by the sea.
\n>out
\n>You step through the opening, there is a high pitced whining
\nsound and you feel >a strange prickling at the base of your
\nskull.
\n>The room was white, glaringly and completely white. Furnishings
\nwere >conspicuous by their absence. The light source was
\nindeterminate. But it was >there.<\/p>\n
Fuck, not again!
\nThat beep’s got louder too.
\nWhat’s going on?<\/p>\n
>Thank you, that’s another one.<\/p>\n
*Art and the zen of computer nets – what do the nets have to
\noffer artists<\/p>\n
*the art of depicting realities as they really are(or as defined
\nby the the computer, artist or programmer in any combination)<\/p>\n
*computing B.C. (before calypso)<\/p>\n
*An assembly of meditative turtles and the <\/p>\n
*Maximum entropy- dissipation and formlessness of the nets- who
\nregulates or is regulation necessary for the various nets
\nsurvival?*who owns the road? What could happen to the nets if
\nthey are commercialised.<\/p>\n
*Personae and the adoption of an alternate self- the pros and
\ncons of electronic communication in a virtual world. MOO’s and
\nthe Grasshopper attention span\ufffdFlow chart personalities <\/p>\n
Are MUDs more than just games? Is art more than just games?<\/p>\n
\ufffdheirarchical access to the net and to parts of the net, hackers
\nand encryption<\/p>\n
\ufffd I can see the ease that a person with a modicum of musical
\nknowledge and a few thousand dollars worth of hardware and
\nsoftware could create a digitally produced, edited and recorded
\nsong or entire compact disc. Taking a DAT tape to a company
\nwhich presses cds.<\/p>\n
\ufffd manipulation of photographic images and the implications of
\nthis-graphics art tool<\/p>\n
\ufffd Internet and all its glory- as a resource, a means of
\ndistribution and as a replacement for the postal system.<\/p>\n
\ufffd Umberto Eco in Foucault’s Pendulum talks about memory, how we
\nuse it and how computers have changed how we use it.
\n“This is better than real memory, because real memory, at the
\ncost of much effort, learns to remember but not to forget. …
\nthere is no discipline of forgetting; we are at the mercy of
\nrandom drugs, alcohol, or suicide. Abu [ computer] , however,
\ncan aphasias.
\nWhere were you last night, L
\nThere, indiscrete reader: you will never know it, but that half
\n line hanging in space was actually the beginning of a
\nlong sentence that I wrote but then wished that I hadn’t,
\nwished I hadn’t even thought let alone written it, wished that
\nit had never happened. So I pressed a key, and a milky film
\nspread over the fatal and inopportune lines, and I pressed delete
\nand, woosh, all gone.
\nBut that’s not all. The problem with suicide is that sometimes
\nyou jump out of the window and then change your mind between the
\neighth floor and the seventh. ” Oh if only I could go back!”
\nSorry, you can’t, too bad. Splat. Abu, on the other hand, is
\nmerciful, he grants you the right to change your mind: you can
\nrecover your deleted text by pressing retrieve. What a relief!
\nOnce I know that I can remember whenever I like, I forget. <\/p>\n
-distribution
\n– information
\n– communication
\n– access to the information systems<\/p>\n
\ufffdThe merits of expanded communication but what value is placed on
\nthe content by the communicants? \ufffd Does distance communication
\nwork? It eliminates the false signals of body language and
\ninflection to some degree but it allso lacks something because of
\nthis.<\/p>\n
\ufffd is the internet truly a new frontier or is it merely so labeled
\nin the American spirit of exp<\/p>\n
