#digiart2019

Bears experimentation practice

It always interests and calms to read from art textbooks. It is probably the intensity of the implications art has to offer: history of human existence, evolutions of thought, and of persecution, and of absolutely nothing at all. It’s the same call you get from remembering we’re all going to die someday, and nothing anybody can do will stop that; and we all live our lives anyway. From this chapter, I learned of the many facets of digital art and photography, the experiences attached to their technological origin, and that with each progression in tech(nology/nique) came a whole new existential realization.

I felt that the ways in which the different mediums connected either directly or metaphorically with the artists work was sort of natural, and I think more than anything I thought it interesting the different viewpoints each artist took; even though they had different feelings, the idea always surrounded the medium. I most appreciated was Jochem Hendricks, EYE (2001). I couldn’t stop looking at it. Because of its hyperrealistic context, and unbelievable content, EYE (2001) had a relatability drenched in a dream. As if I sat across from this women as she reads the newspaper, and outside the earth was upside down, and I believe the whole thing. The opposite, for me, would have to be Scott Griesbach’s, Dark Horses of Abstraction (1995). The use of medium to me seemed if anything ordinary considering the pieces which came before it, however, my greatest problem lies in the purpose, as the artists depicted (save Pollock) are seen to be chasing down and almost catching up the new era, when there are hundreds of artists (not white cis men) who have influenced art in as many ways as them, to have them become these signs of the apocalypse is certainly a stretch in terms of the top 4. I certainly didn’t understand the importance of highlighting the fact that these figures would chase down new forming technique as it would make them obscure.