Cool! There is a skill obtained in traditional art made by hands (or by other body parts) and there is a skill of the second type, which is not completely a skill, made with the aid of the computer. Proximity to such works is offensive for the real artist.
It is implied that the computer “itself” sketches the picture, and man presses the buttons. And this opinion is very wide spread. I do not know if it is worthwhile to explain that the computer itself generally cannot make anything. It is simply a piece of iron and wires. Everything you see on it's screen is made by PEOPLE. But the further people are from the technology, the more they are convinced that the computer is a thinking machine which works by itself. The only thing it needs is to have the necessary button pushed. The question of who made this button it does not arise. Therefore, if the artist holds in his hand not a pencil but an electronic pen and he draws not on paper but the screen of a computer, then does he no longer art? Or is the work instead initiated and completed by the computer? Is art created by the computer? To me it does not seem worthwhile to comment on the absurdity of this assertion.
Thus, we observe the explicit discrimination of artists using digital technologies by art critics and curators of exhibitions. Moreover, this discrimination is based exclusively on the technique. The quality of the works themselves do not enter into the calculation.
[ 1 comment ] ( 32 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 242 )
Calendar
