Howdy. I’m Tia.
I’m in my 4th and final year of my BFA as a VISA major, but plan on continuing to get my MFA in VISA as well.
I prefer to work with more traditional mediums, and usually work with whatever art materials I have lying around; currently, that would be paint. As for content, I’m currently stuck in a loop of analyzing female video game characters, and their relationships to divinity and potential.
“If the word revolution is used seriously and not merely as an epithet for this season’s novelties, it implies a process. No revolution is simply the result of personal originality. The maximum that such originality can achieve is madness: madness is revolutionary freedom confined to the self.” (Process and Originality)
“‘Le cubisme a-t-il rendu sensible l’espace abstrait `trois dimensions géometriques, ou rendu abstrait le sensible? Posons la question. Si le cubisme a rendu abstrait le sensible, il se rattache `l’esthétique platonicienne, dans des conditions historiques (conditions de classe) qui ont amenéune sorte d’hyper-intellectualisme dit “moderne”. Mais peutêtre le cubisme doit-il se caractériser par la coéxistence et le conflit de ces deux aspects, de ces deux interprétations. Il aurait `la fois et d’une façon contradictoire (donc instable) intellectualisé le sensible et sensibilisé l’abstrait.’” (Political Conflict)
“Man was the eye for which reality had been made visual: the clear objective eye, the focal point of Renaissance perspective. The human greatness of this eye lay in its ability to reflect and contain, like a mirror, what was.” (The Eye of Man)
“The difficulties were probably both intellectual and sentimental. The naturalist allusions seemed necessary in order to offer a measure for judging the transformation. If the subject could not be identified by a naturalistic clue, the picture became abstract. Subsequently most abstract art has failed to solve the same problem in reverse: without reference to specific experience it is very hard to create any sense of urgency.
Perhaps also the Cubists were reluctant to part with appearances because they suspected that in art they could never be the same again. The details are smuggled in and hidden as mementos. It is this which gives these Cubist works their unrepeatable poignancy.” (Pure Theory)
Stiegler:
It’s strange to hear the tale of Prometheus and Epimetheus with opposing visuals; they don’t seem to match up until the end of the recollection – with the imagery of man taming fire.
Interesting to start technics/culture with the Greeks; as one could argue that the relationship with the two started far much earlier in terms of ‘technological ruptures’ – as from what I gather, his ruptures are rapid technological advancements that outpace the present culture and/or time period.
Traditional spheres are overturned with the introduction of the internet? How so? Have they not evolved with modernisation?
‘The world always remained the same’. Yes, for the poor. The rich saw technological and societal advances long before the 18th-19th centuries – but the ‘middle class’ is a relatively newer concept, and so therefore yes, most of the world remained the same as they simply had no other choice.
It also wasn’t always stable; wars were abundant, as well as colonization, and conquest. Suggesting that creates stability is naive.
The Brain:
Humans really are just smaller meat sacks piloting much larger meat sacks.
Interpretations of social interactions are also based heavily on conditioning from birth; groomed to act or react to unconscious cues.
All these interactive behaviours are assuming the brain healthy to begin with, and not mentally ill.
‘Curing’ aspergers with magnets? That seems sketchy.
Both the Botox responses should be a little more expected to begin with – it’s a neurotoxin, facial muscles or not, the small doses are still ending up in the bloodstream – and henceforth in the brain.
The concept of empathy in people is actually a relatively newer one; 18th – 19th century concept. I’m also not exactly sure if their use of empathy is correct; relating to fictional characters, people, or even narratives is not normally considered an empathic reaction. There are also different types of empathy; cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, and somatic empathy.
Fear mongering is powerful; a brain confronted with a loss of social power, or the fear of a loss of social hierarchy will react violently. Fear forces hive mind like brains among mass populations.
We were talking about loot crates/loot boxes at some point in the class (I don’t exactly remember how this came to be), but I’ll post some more info about the subject and its consequences.
Will The Future Be Human?:
So essentially giant corporations own us now because of our easily shared data, and will continue to do so in the future?
Machinery replaces land as most important asset? Land is limited – machinery less so. Now data replaces machinery? The method of obtaining power evolves, but those who hold it stays relatively the same. This also suggests that land and machinery is therefore now less valuable than it was previously – obviously this isn’t the case, as the prices attached to both still increase with every passing year.
Oh dear god machines figure out our sexuality for us that’s not terrifying at all.
Essentially there will be no self-discovery or self-understanding because a machine will ‘know’ right away from birth what our capabilities will be.
So our future’s gonna be some Blade Runner/Deus Ex-like aesthetic. Great – and by his observations, it sounds like this version of the future has already begun – it’s not the future, it’s the present.
The Net:
This film was previously assigned as a part of another one of your class readings in a previous year.
Incredibly interesting, but I will not have the chance to watch it again – it’s a movie length documentary.
Google’s Origins:
This seems more like a click bait article? Or a conspiracy envisioning of Google.
The intelligence community will turn anything into a tool for their use – so Google’s sudden shift into data gathering/mining is not at all surprising.
I mean, aren’t these claims already known in the underlying subconscious mind? I mean, how is any of this actually surprising?
China Credit System:
Sounds more like weaponized behavioural conditioning. It’s not about creating a culture of ‘sincerity’, it’s about enforcing hive-mind authority to create a culture of non-resistant being. Unified instead of individualized.
It doesn’t just sound like gaming – it sounds like the worst kind of gaming. Like the loot crate type of gaming that we spoke of earlier.
Yes, the west has had a monetary credit check system for decades now. You cannot suggest that these two systems are one in the same.
Howdy. I’m Tia.
I’m in my 4th and final year of my BFA as a VISA major, but plan on continuing to get my MFA in VISA as well.
I prefer to work with more traditional mediums, and usually work with whatever art materials I have lying around; currently, that would be paint. As for content, I’m currently stuck in a loop of analyzing female video game characters, and their relationships to divinity and potential.
Tia, I really want to see you developing this ideas!
Week #1 Response:
“If the word revolution is used seriously and not merely as an epithet for this season’s novelties, it implies a process. No revolution is simply the result of personal originality. The maximum that such originality can achieve is madness: madness is revolutionary freedom confined to the self.” (Process and Originality)
“‘Le cubisme a-t-il rendu sensible l’espace abstrait `trois dimensions géometriques, ou rendu abstrait le sensible? Posons la question. Si le cubisme a rendu abstrait le sensible, il se rattache `l’esthétique platonicienne, dans des conditions historiques (conditions de classe) qui ont amenéune sorte d’hyper-intellectualisme dit “moderne”. Mais peutêtre le cubisme doit-il se caractériser par la coéxistence et le conflit de ces deux aspects, de ces deux interprétations. Il aurait `la fois et d’une façon contradictoire (donc instable) intellectualisé le sensible et sensibilisé l’abstrait.’” (Political Conflict)
“Man was the eye for which reality had been made visual: the clear objective eye, the focal point of Renaissance perspective. The human greatness of this eye lay in its ability to reflect and contain, like a mirror, what was.” (The Eye of Man)
“The difficulties were probably both intellectual and sentimental. The naturalist allusions seemed necessary in order to offer a measure for judging the transformation. If the subject could not be identified by a naturalistic clue, the picture became abstract. Subsequently most abstract art has failed to solve the same problem in reverse: without reference to specific experience it is very hard to create any sense of urgency.
Perhaps also the Cubists were reluctant to part with appearances because they suspected that in art they could never be the same again. The details are smuggled in and hidden as mementos. It is this which gives these Cubist works their unrepeatable poignancy.” (Pure Theory)
Week #2 Response:
Stiegler:
It’s strange to hear the tale of Prometheus and Epimetheus with opposing visuals; they don’t seem to match up until the end of the recollection – with the imagery of man taming fire.
Interesting to start technics/culture with the Greeks; as one could argue that the relationship with the two started far much earlier in terms of ‘technological ruptures’ – as from what I gather, his ruptures are rapid technological advancements that outpace the present culture and/or time period.
Traditional spheres are overturned with the introduction of the internet? How so? Have they not evolved with modernisation?
‘The world always remained the same’. Yes, for the poor. The rich saw technological and societal advances long before the 18th-19th centuries – but the ‘middle class’ is a relatively newer concept, and so therefore yes, most of the world remained the same as they simply had no other choice.
It also wasn’t always stable; wars were abundant, as well as colonization, and conquest. Suggesting that creates stability is naive.
The Brain:
Humans really are just smaller meat sacks piloting much larger meat sacks.
Interpretations of social interactions are also based heavily on conditioning from birth; groomed to act or react to unconscious cues.
All these interactive behaviours are assuming the brain healthy to begin with, and not mentally ill.
‘Curing’ aspergers with magnets? That seems sketchy.
Both the Botox responses should be a little more expected to begin with – it’s a neurotoxin, facial muscles or not, the small doses are still ending up in the bloodstream – and henceforth in the brain.
The concept of empathy in people is actually a relatively newer one; 18th – 19th century concept. I’m also not exactly sure if their use of empathy is correct; relating to fictional characters, people, or even narratives is not normally considered an empathic reaction. There are also different types of empathy; cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, and somatic empathy.
Fear mongering is powerful; a brain confronted with a loss of social power, or the fear of a loss of social hierarchy will react violently. Fear forces hive mind like brains among mass populations.
Week # 4 ? Assignment:
Visual Essay –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NAklb6t7l0
Week #4 Followup:
We were talking about loot crates/loot boxes at some point in the class (I don’t exactly remember how this came to be), but I’ll post some more info about the subject and its consequences.
Article:
https://kotaku.com/loot-boxes-are-designed-to-exploit-us-1819457592
…and for non-reading purposes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC8UEi3oI4o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu6pXCxiRxU (I’m not too fond of MatPat, but he does a decent job of the scientific explanations.)
Week # 5 Assignment:
Visual Essay #2 –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggbGHOuRpE0&t=5s
Week #6 Response:
Will The Future Be Human?:
So essentially giant corporations own us now because of our easily shared data, and will continue to do so in the future?
Machinery replaces land as most important asset? Land is limited – machinery less so. Now data replaces machinery? The method of obtaining power evolves, but those who hold it stays relatively the same. This also suggests that land and machinery is therefore now less valuable than it was previously – obviously this isn’t the case, as the prices attached to both still increase with every passing year.
Oh dear god machines figure out our sexuality for us that’s not terrifying at all.
Essentially there will be no self-discovery or self-understanding because a machine will ‘know’ right away from birth what our capabilities will be.
So our future’s gonna be some Blade Runner/Deus Ex-like aesthetic. Great – and by his observations, it sounds like this version of the future has already begun – it’s not the future, it’s the present.
The Net:
This film was previously assigned as a part of another one of your class readings in a previous year.
Incredibly interesting, but I will not have the chance to watch it again – it’s a movie length documentary.
Google’s Origins:
This seems more like a click bait article? Or a conspiracy envisioning of Google.
The intelligence community will turn anything into a tool for their use – so Google’s sudden shift into data gathering/mining is not at all surprising.
I mean, aren’t these claims already known in the underlying subconscious mind? I mean, how is any of this actually surprising?
China Credit System:
Sounds more like weaponized behavioural conditioning. It’s not about creating a culture of ‘sincerity’, it’s about enforcing hive-mind authority to create a culture of non-resistant being. Unified instead of individualized.
It doesn’t just sound like gaming – it sounds like the worst kind of gaming. Like the loot crate type of gaming that we spoke of earlier.
Yes, the west has had a monetary credit check system for decades now. You cannot suggest that these two systems are one in the same.