"Those of you who know why this is being destroyed as you read this paper probably know why this is a saddening spectacle. You are witnessing the death of an icon of our own generation. We are the first to have grown up with this game, and that carries with it a special beauty.
I for one loved this game. It taught me to dream of fantastic things, of traveling far and wide. It taught me care and love for one's friends, and that no matter what I wanted to dream up, I could do it. It gave me courage to pursue my happiness, which is why I am here today next to you.
And now, it is dying. That cherished part of my childhood that inspired me to find adventure and chase my dreams will soon vanish. It is even possible that it is gone forever; the saddest part is I don't know when it will happen. However, if it is still alive, please, I invite you to share with me one last romp in the game that changed a generation and made many little dreams into big realities. Take this opportunity to become a child again and dream of catching them all, of traveling around the world in search of adventure and mystery, and of becoming the hero you've always wanted to be."
The first and second generation Pokemon Games recorded save data by a little battery in the cartridge keeping the game on at all times. The battery uses little power, but it of course must eventually die. The batteries tend to last about 14-15 years. Pokemon was launched in North America in 1998, so the hour of our pokemon's doom is close at hand.
I found it interesting that a necessary function of the game is the same thing that will eventually cause it's destruction. I bet the situationists would have loved it, seeing as it destroys itself, however slowly, by working properly.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Saturday, March 24, 2012
Sound Machine
When preparing this project I was truly restricted by time and resources. I originally wanted to go along the lines of a traditional machine which made audible sound, something with lots of twisted rubber bands and spinning wheel things. But since I was away all break I just couldn't make that happen, and I had to go a different route. What I came up with was something having to do with implied sound. That idea resonates with me because as a trumpet player I am constantly trying to hear what I play before I play it. That sound in my head is what I wanted the audience to experience.
I found it interesting that a few other people went the implied sound route. Especially interesting was Miles' project, where I thought his point was for us to imagine the sounds associated with the pictures, so I was focusing and intently trying to hear the sounds of lightning, snow, kittens, or whatever, when actually Miles wanted us to react as an audience. It really goes to show that no matter what your intention, the audience will probably do something unexpected with your work.
I found it interesting that a few other people went the implied sound route. Especially interesting was Miles' project, where I thought his point was for us to imagine the sounds associated with the pictures, so I was focusing and intently trying to hear the sounds of lightning, snow, kittens, or whatever, when actually Miles wanted us to react as an audience. It really goes to show that no matter what your intention, the audience will probably do something unexpected with your work.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Fluxus
I figured out what I wanted to do with this project as soon as I got the cards. I liked the idea of using whatever was at hand because it shows that art doesn't have to be something that can only be accessed or created by those with means. It reminded me of something the chancellor said at the first meeting of my freshman year. He was talking about how funding had been cut, and he said that we would do what artists across all the ages have done with little to no funding; we will make do with what we've got.
In that vein, I wanted to give my performers tasks that were either impossible, or monumentally hard to accomplish without specialized training. I wanted the performer to push themselves beyond what their body is actually capable of, like singing the lowest and highest c's on the piano, or destroying a chair with their bare hands, or holding a single hand handstand for 5 minutes.
Only the chair challenge was performed, and I was surprised at what happened. Instead of destroying one of the plastic chairs, the person made themselves a chair and then destroyed it. I found it very interesting that even though they didn't do what I expected and didn't really go beyond physical limitations, they did buy into the spirit of the project by making do with whatever was arond to accompish a seemingly difficult task.
In that vein, I wanted to give my performers tasks that were either impossible, or monumentally hard to accomplish without specialized training. I wanted the performer to push themselves beyond what their body is actually capable of, like singing the lowest and highest c's on the piano, or destroying a chair with their bare hands, or holding a single hand handstand for 5 minutes.
Only the chair challenge was performed, and I was surprised at what happened. Instead of destroying one of the plastic chairs, the person made themselves a chair and then destroyed it. I found it very interesting that even though they didn't do what I expected and didn't really go beyond physical limitations, they did buy into the spirit of the project by making do with whatever was arond to accompish a seemingly difficult task.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Surrealism Project
For this project I looked to Alice in Wonderland for inspiration. It seems to me that surrealism is all about humor, particularly ironic humor. The image of the hare smoking a blunt and saying 'fuck it' to his very important date seemed very funny to me, so I made a blunt that a rabbit would make if it could.
I did have some trouble figuring out how to hollow out the carrot without breaking it. However a good friend suggested using the inkwell of a pen, which worked fairly well, although I had to break a few carrots to become skilled, and still the carrots got split in the final product. That's ok, though. The hare would probably have been too coked out to care that his blunt had a crack in it.
I did have some trouble figuring out how to hollow out the carrot without breaking it. However a good friend suggested using the inkwell of a pen, which worked fairly well, although I had to break a few carrots to become skilled, and still the carrots got split in the final product. That's ok, though. The hare would probably have been too coked out to care that his blunt had a crack in it.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
The Psychology of Aesthetics
In my History of Psychology class we are currently reading a work by Steven Pinker titled "How the Mind Works." In chapter eight, Pinker examins the psychological basis for why humans pursue an activity which has absolutely no impact on the necessaries of survival; namely, art.
I thought it was very interesting that Pinker suggested that the reason we enjoy art is because it is a concentrated dose of the forms and images we encounter in everyday life. Basically, the idea is that when we are able to make sense of our surroundings, our pleasure centers activate. Thus, art, since it is purified and concentrated form, gives us a more concentrated dose of pleasure. This holds for visual art as well as music. Harmonious music is just like visual arts in that it concentrates the sensible sounds we hear every day and proceeds in a fashion that we can make sense of. The opposite of these things would be similar to looking through fog to try and make sense of one's environment or being in a room full of loud, indiscernable noise.
So the pursuit of art gives us pleasure because it confirms our beliefs about the world. We like it when we are able to see and understand the lines and shapes of our environment, because then we know how to use that environment to survive, and that pleasure/secure feeling transfers to art. So then, what is the appeal of so-called "dissonant art"?
It probably isn't that dissonant art confirms our conceptions of the world; indeed the point of dissonant art seems to be to destroy those conceptions. But why would people want to do that? Is it because there's nothing left to do?
I think it may be that we have reached a point in human evolution where there is less and less need for us to fully understand our environment in terms of optimal patterns and shapes so that we can use it to survive. We have reached a point where we can bend the environment to us; we no longer have to rely on exploiting our surroundings to survive, (e.g. understanding terrain to hide from and ambush a larger predator), we shape/dominate it to suit our needs. This means that natural forms give less and less pleasure, so it seems we turn to more unnatural, conceptual forms of art to stimulate those pleasure centers once reserved for bounded, pure-form art.
The book is called "How the Mind Works" by Steven Pinker,and the chapter is Ch. 8, "The Meaning of Life."
If anyone does in fact read these blogs, what are your thoughts. If I haven't illustrated Pinker's point clearly, tell me and I will try to clarify.
I thought it was very interesting that Pinker suggested that the reason we enjoy art is because it is a concentrated dose of the forms and images we encounter in everyday life. Basically, the idea is that when we are able to make sense of our surroundings, our pleasure centers activate. Thus, art, since it is purified and concentrated form, gives us a more concentrated dose of pleasure. This holds for visual art as well as music. Harmonious music is just like visual arts in that it concentrates the sensible sounds we hear every day and proceeds in a fashion that we can make sense of. The opposite of these things would be similar to looking through fog to try and make sense of one's environment or being in a room full of loud, indiscernable noise.
So the pursuit of art gives us pleasure because it confirms our beliefs about the world. We like it when we are able to see and understand the lines and shapes of our environment, because then we know how to use that environment to survive, and that pleasure/secure feeling transfers to art. So then, what is the appeal of so-called "dissonant art"?
It probably isn't that dissonant art confirms our conceptions of the world; indeed the point of dissonant art seems to be to destroy those conceptions. But why would people want to do that? Is it because there's nothing left to do?
I think it may be that we have reached a point in human evolution where there is less and less need for us to fully understand our environment in terms of optimal patterns and shapes so that we can use it to survive. We have reached a point where we can bend the environment to us; we no longer have to rely on exploiting our surroundings to survive, (e.g. understanding terrain to hide from and ambush a larger predator), we shape/dominate it to suit our needs. This means that natural forms give less and less pleasure, so it seems we turn to more unnatural, conceptual forms of art to stimulate those pleasure centers once reserved for bounded, pure-form art.
The book is called "How the Mind Works" by Steven Pinker,and the chapter is Ch. 8, "The Meaning of Life."
If anyone does in fact read these blogs, what are your thoughts. If I haven't illustrated Pinker's point clearly, tell me and I will try to clarify.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Simultaneity
I wanted to represent some of the different mathematical conceptions of time. Most of us subscribe to the linear version, where time goes from point a to point b and never goes back. This is the most common view, and Occam's razor would suggest that it is indeed true, but we all know that every once in a while the simplest explaination just doesn't cut it. The two non-conventional ideas of time I explored were randomizing time and loop, or cyclic, time.
I got the idea for randomizing time from quantum theory. The idea that at the tiniest level of existence there is complete randomness leads to the idea that time itself might also be merely a series of randomly occuring events, as if each moment were selected after shuffling the deck of possible moments, and that what seems like linear time is actually an illusion created by the randomness of those events.
My conception of cylic time comes from the theory of large numbers. Any event, given enough chances to occur, will occur. I took this to mean that our universe could operate on a cyclic basis, where in the history of all matter many big bangs have occured, each producing earths with humans, etc. Following this idea, it would seem that time is merely a loop, where it seems as though we are progressing through time and space, but really we are just drawing the same three cards over and over again.
I got the idea for randomizing time from quantum theory. The idea that at the tiniest level of existence there is complete randomness leads to the idea that time itself might also be merely a series of randomly occuring events, as if each moment were selected after shuffling the deck of possible moments, and that what seems like linear time is actually an illusion created by the randomness of those events.
My conception of cylic time comes from the theory of large numbers. Any event, given enough chances to occur, will occur. I took this to mean that our universe could operate on a cyclic basis, where in the history of all matter many big bangs have occured, each producing earths with humans, etc. Following this idea, it would seem that time is merely a loop, where it seems as though we are progressing through time and space, but really we are just drawing the same three cards over and over again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)