Saturday, September 26, 2015
Homework 3: Article Paragraphs
I chose this article to talk about primarily for two reasons: I love videogames, and I love M.C. Escher's artwork. The detailed, almost-dreamlike worlds and scenes he created enchanted me as a child, and they still do to this day. I never get tired of looking at them. Therefore, the idea behind Manifold Garden (formerly Relativity), a game in which one gets to roam a world modeled after his art, bending gravity to discover new locations and solve puzzles, is an intriguing concept. I also believe that a game like this further demonstrates how videogames are quickly becoming a viable medium of art and a means of narration. This doesn't necessarily mean that all games are art, or even that a game has to be artsy to be good. The primary purpose of a videogame is to entertain the player, and to try to take the 'game' out of 'videogame' essentially reduces it to little more than an interactive picture (though that might actually be interesting to see, as long as it doesn't pretend it's a videogame).
Thankfully, Manifold Garden seems to balance art and gameplay rather well. The player is tasked to roam an open world and solve puzzles by changing the laws of gravity and shifting through different gravitational fields. One example shown in the Devlog requires a player to keep a purple cube on a purple wall panel suspended off the ground in order to unlock a door. The solution involves using a blue cube in a different field of gravity as a shelf to hold up the purple cube--one field's wall is another's floor. Mind-bending puzzles such as this engage the player and give them a reason to explore the world, aside from simply taking pictures of any cool impossible architecture they happen to find.
I feel that games such as this are an excellent example of technology and art working together in harmony to produce something wondrous and engaging. They are more than just a videogame or a piece of art, they are an interactive experience. Manifold Garden has great potential, both as a game and as a work of art, and I hope to see it come to fruition.
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Project 1: GIF
Okay, so the explanation behind this...thing is that she's a creature I like to doodle every now and then. Mostly wolf, but with some bear and bighorn sheep thrown in too. And she has four eyes. For some reason. She's actually almost blind. Looks scary, but is a gentle giant and enjoys taking long naps in the sun.
Thursday, September 17, 2015
Homework 2: GIF Paragraphs
Like the internet that spawned them, GIFs are a relatively new phenomenon that have practically exploded onto the scene in the short time since their creation. They are not quite a picture and not quite a video, rather a hybrid between the two that can only really exist in a digital medium. Their purposes are many: some capture short scenes, others evoke emotions, and some are simply humorous to look at. They can be beautiful, frightening, nonsensical, emotional, or a mixture of any of these. They are easy to find and share, and can serve to add tone or emotion to a bland text post, or even tell tiny stories of their own. Go on any discussion forum or browse the comments section of an image-sharing site, and you'll find that they are often full of "reaction GIFs" serving these exact purposes. In a nutshell, they are fun.
And yes, in some cases GIFs can be seen as having artistic value. The effort poured into works such as these gorgeous 8-bit-esque GIF landscapes is plain to see. There's something special about being able to capture a moment and repeat it indefinitely, studying every detail and absorbing it fully into your memory. GIFs allow for the preservation and sharing of such moments, potentially even calling into question the very concept of time, at least in the electronic realm if not the physical world.
However, the idea that GIFs are the latest and greatest form of art, that recording a few seconds of something "deep" and "meaningful", stripping it of sound (not to mention visual quality, in many cases) and calling it fine art, is ridiculous. While many GIFs may be pretty to look at, is a GIF of a model dancing in another model's hand really on equal footing with some of the works hanging in the Louvre, or any other classic galleries? Does a medium's newness automatically mean that it is good? I don't believe it does.The idea of GIFs (which are often freely available for viewing and download online) being sold for thousands of dollars is even stranger than the idea of them being considered fine art. The Internet's backbone is shared and open content, making a GIF somehow exclusive to one person removes it from it's own origin, like taking a fish out of water. The concept of GIF graffiti is equally odd, and appears at it's core to be little more than an attempt at grabbing a confused bystander's attention (as well as a waste of money--iPads aren't cheap).
GIFs are fun, but the vast majority of them are not fine art, and to be honest, to me it sounds an awful lot like snobs with too much money and too little common sense attempting to stay on what they believe to be the cutting edge of "art".
And yes, in some cases GIFs can be seen as having artistic value. The effort poured into works such as these gorgeous 8-bit-esque GIF landscapes is plain to see. There's something special about being able to capture a moment and repeat it indefinitely, studying every detail and absorbing it fully into your memory. GIFs allow for the preservation and sharing of such moments, potentially even calling into question the very concept of time, at least in the electronic realm if not the physical world.
However, the idea that GIFs are the latest and greatest form of art, that recording a few seconds of something "deep" and "meaningful", stripping it of sound (not to mention visual quality, in many cases) and calling it fine art, is ridiculous. While many GIFs may be pretty to look at, is a GIF of a model dancing in another model's hand really on equal footing with some of the works hanging in the Louvre, or any other classic galleries? Does a medium's newness automatically mean that it is good? I don't believe it does.The idea of GIFs (which are often freely available for viewing and download online) being sold for thousands of dollars is even stranger than the idea of them being considered fine art. The Internet's backbone is shared and open content, making a GIF somehow exclusive to one person removes it from it's own origin, like taking a fish out of water. The concept of GIF graffiti is equally odd, and appears at it's core to be little more than an attempt at grabbing a confused bystander's attention (as well as a waste of money--iPads aren't cheap).
GIFs are fun, but the vast majority of them are not fine art, and to be honest, to me it sounds an awful lot like snobs with too much money and too little common sense attempting to stay on what they believe to be the cutting edge of "art".
Thursday, September 10, 2015
Homework 1: Magazine Paragraphs
It is
undoubtedly true that more and more people, especially youth, are carrying
around smartphones, tablets, and other screened devices. And it is also true
that the definition of “art” is changing, as it has with every successive
generation. It may be true to many young adults that art must be entertaining
to be meaningful. With the rise in popularity of videogames and other means of
interactive storytelling, merely looking at a painting or sculpture may be
underwhelming to some if there is no underlying meaning or story. And in an era
where memories can be recorded in audio, video, or photographs with a few taps
of a screen or a press of a button, it is becoming increasingly unnecessary to
commit every moment of an event to memory.
But is this
necessarily a bad thing? By recording experiences, it becomes possible to share
those experiences with others, or preserve a memory clearly and completely for
far longer than the mind can. While the brain is an unquestionably powerful
entity, it is also prone to forget. Memory fades, while pictures can remain
clear for years afterward. However, this does not necessarily mean that digital
recordings are damaging the human mind’s ability to remember. Rather, it could
be considered a safeguard or backup, of sorts. The electronic mind can remember
what the organic mind may disregard. It is up to the individual to decide if
they wish to record a memory or keep it only in their mind, and which method is
the more “sincere” way of remembering. And is “retinal masturbation”, as Panera
calls it, really such a bad thing? We live in an age where video and audio are
everywhere. We read graphic novels, play videogames, listen to music, and get
spammed by ads. The internet has allowed humanity to communicate and share
ideas, values, and memories on a scale never before seen in our history.
Admittedly,
this freedom of exchange also means that we are monitored on a scale never
before seen in our history. Some of this monitoring is accepted willingly: many
people document their entire lives on social media, where it can be reviewed by
anyone from family members to mortal enemies. Other times, our personal
information is in jeopardy, whether from advertisers looking to focus their
efforts on the most likely customers, or for more shady purposes. The same can
go for media and memories posted on the internet: it is very much true that,
once something goes up online, it can never be taken down completely. Photographs
and videos may be used for purposes not anticipated or accepted by their
creators. This is perhaps the greatest drawback to being able to contain a
moment behind a screen.
But,
ultimately, this new trend of digital memory is not something to fear.
Technology and culture are always changing and innovating, for better or for
worse. To become an “emancipated observer” is to embrace this new practice and
utilize it for the progression of humanity, ensuring that moments meant to be
seen and remembered always will be.
Thursday, September 3, 2015
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)