I am interested in tools because they can jolt my mind into finding /
expressing / using things it couldn't otherwise envision. The
"constraint" of tools is the key to aesthetic transformation, which
then helps me see / live better the rest of the time.
I'm not interested in unfiltered manifestation of something direct
from my, or anyone's, brain. I already live there. Same even with the
"dream" of 3D 360degree cinema - I already live in a 3D immersive
world. I need things like cinema to enlighten, inform, enhance being
alive, not duplicate it - goes for the life outside as well as inner
life.
Making art is a way to surpass the limitations of the brain. The
constraints of the tools are catalysts in this process.
Brook
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Aaron F. Ross
<aaron_at_digitalartsguild.com> wrote:
> This is not unsettling to me, I've been waiting for it to happen
> since I first read science fiction stories as a young boy.
>
> With brain-machine interfaces, the opportunities for self-expression
> will be blown wide open. At that point, I'm hoping that the most
> imaginative visionaries should be able to rise to the forefront of
> public awareness. No longer will we be constrained by tools.
> Artisanal craftsmanship will no longer exist, to be replaced by pure
> intellect. And that's a good thing.
>
> I gave a talk this year that touched upon this topic, mainly in the
> context of how 3D graphics has widened the scope of possibilities for
> art and communication. I know that computer art is very unpopular
> among this crowd, I've been attacked again and again for mentioning
> it, so let the flames begin. I'm wearing my flame-retardant vest.
>
> http://www.dr-yo.com/video_dorkbot_2011.html
>
> Aaron
>
>
>
>
>
> At 10/28/2011, you wrote:
>>Interesting article with complex social, biological, as well
>>as aesthetic implications into the future. . . . Obviously,
>>capturing imagery is a far cry from understanding the complexities
>>of 'thought,' and it's still very futuristic, but as we conceivably
>>'think' to each other, or project our thought/images, there would
>>have to be resultant changes in consciousness, and the role of the
>>artist would necessarily be re-defined along with
>>everything/everyone else. "Direct" visual art? Ultimate loss of
>>the artisanal? And/or a revitalizing of same? I realize this has
>>little or no immediate relevance to anyone here (probably), but it
>>showed up in my email and I just thought some frameworkers would
>>possibly find it interesting as well:
>>http://gizmodo.com/5843117/scientists-reconstruct-video-clips-from-brain-activity
>>Marilyn Brakhage _______________________________________________
>>FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
>>https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Aaron F. Ross
> Digital Arts Guild
>
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
--
____________________________
Brook Hinton
Moving Image and Sound Maker
www.brookhinton.com
Associate Professor / Assistant Chair
Film Program at CCA
California College of the Arts
www.cca.edu/film
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks_at_jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Received on Sat Oct 29 2011 - 14:01:09 CDT
