Re: [-empyre-] Re: trends in airport novels

[Auriea Harvey <a@e8z.org>]

At 12:20 +1100 on 25-03-2002, Melinda Rackham wrote:
> It all fits neatly into the very 70's and 80's retro aesthetic that pervades
> everything now.. , just as the aesthetics of the 80 ands and 90s harked back
> to the 50s and 60s as a time of simplicity and honesty and stability,
> everyone knew thier place in socitey .. now we hark back to the 80s .. so we
> like media art that is hardedged, eg the sort of java.art just commissioned
> by the guggenheim.. electronic art that is obviously made by a computer, a
> friendly non threatening computer that simply manipulates shapes.. a
> computer which we grew up with playing pacman and tarrrus, nothing too
> complicted, nothing that is too demanding of the viewer.

i've said it before and i will say it again... Simplicity is Overrated.
> i keep throwing out teh "why do we go back to simplicity" line..

A crutch if you will.

> our
> computers are capable of much muchmuchmore than we are demanding of them..

and i belive that viewers are ready for much more than what one
artist can do with their "maintainable codebase". this is not about
legacy but about li/f/v/e !

> and i think its undervaluing the general public to think that all they want
> from net.art or 3d.art is a one liner.

precicely ;
standardization == stagnation

i have never seen a VRML artwork that was more emotionally effective
than Tomb Raider or to be more current play Silent Hill2 or Rez and
then talk to me about immersive 3d environments.

Limiting yourself to what can be easily maintained over time -
holding onto the digital Art "object" can only limit ones conception
i believe. yes concept first but be open to technology find what will
make the project work best even if that means you must learn C++
yourself or learn several exotic 3d applications or how to work with
some commercial 3d engine. i'd never rule out using vrml but Open
standards usually equates to inflexible, slow moving,
paaasssssssseeeeeeeé ........

The plays the thing .. that lives  on in the mind. touch the mind.
touch the mind of the viewer. photorealism is not necessary but a
touch of the familiar an atmosphere touching their bodies though the
eye/hand .  it is not necessary that the code live forever .
everything is deteriorating . we will all die one day . this is not
about legacy but about life .

> maybe as a society we are still very technophbic..

i have noticed that many artists seem to be.

>  and the idea of multiple
> levels of intellectual and emotional interaction with our machines is a bit
> scary.  wonder what happens when the playstayion generation take over..

they already have .
--
http://e8z.org/html
3 years of YES!