Yes, I understand that all of the forms of art can be combined together and
this is part of the language of art. What concerns me is that these new forms
or languages are abstract and not physical. As one critical producer, I worry
that the experience of making such art forms is devoid of direct immediate
experience and devoid of an emotional, visceral connection that for me is such
a vital part of the art experience. Also, for the viewer it is devoid of those
things as well. It is awfully hard to really touch or hug a pixel. There is
no smell, there is no touch; everything is simulated. It is not "real" in a
physical sense. As one who initially embraced all these possibilities many
years ago, I find myself backing away from it somewhat and asking questions.
I have found that creating art solely on the computer leaves me cold. I am
looking for ways around the lack of physicality that I miss.
I have a dream that one day computer technology can become invisible and
somehow physical at the same time. Right now it is confined inside a box and
you have to know the way to use the box. There are rules that are unbreakable
that you must use to use the box. The tail is now wagging the dog. We need
to reverse that trend, so that humans can once again be in "control."
> 2 "The communicative language of the new technologies--sound, animation,
> music, drama, video, graphics, ext and voice--is also the languag of the
> arts. Thus, arts teachers are particularly well-positioned to help students
> develop skills as both critical producers and critical consumers of
> electronic media."
> These ideas helped me to get a new vision for my teaching.