The four artistic works above vary in how old, real, and interesting they look. I chose these four specific images from The New Aesthetic Tumblr Blog not only because of the variation in styles but because of the one similarity they all share. None of these pieces are original paintings or pictures. The top right picture may lead you to believe that it is a 17th century Rembrandt, however it is a computer generated image that was successful in recreating some of the world's best artists work. The bottom two images were both done in photoshop. The highway piece is actually over one thousand images pieced together, and the one on the left is a flock of birds with their path stitched together to create a helix. An unnatural looking object in a very natural image of nature. With art being able to be recreated and manipulated by computer programs, it raises the question that is discussed in Walter Benjamin's essay “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”; whether or not said works should be considered "authentic", and if they carry the same "aura" an original piece does. To that I say it completely depends on the piece. Many famous pieces that are recreated and manipulated develop a whole new aura that may strike the viewer even more than the original piece. Whether or not they should be considered authentic to me is obvious; yes, they should be. Even the smallest changes made to an original piece should be respected as any other piece would. Although it doesn’t take as much talent as painting an original piece all new forms of art should be respected as individual pieces. While they aren’t the original piece they should be thought of as a compliment to the original. In specific, the top right piece that mimics a Rembrandt should be appreciated in the sense that we are able to generate images that a famous artist hundreds of years ago may have created. That to me should carry its own individual aura and appreciated, not criticized. While it’s important that artists keep creating completely original pieces, the mechanical reproduction and manipulation of art is only a plus to us, the viewers.
Tuesday, September 20, 2016
The New Aesthetic
The four artistic works above vary in how old, real, and interesting they look. I chose these four specific images from The New Aesthetic Tumblr Blog not only because of the variation in styles but because of the one similarity they all share. None of these pieces are original paintings or pictures. The top right picture may lead you to believe that it is a 17th century Rembrandt, however it is a computer generated image that was successful in recreating some of the world's best artists work. The bottom two images were both done in photoshop. The highway piece is actually over one thousand images pieced together, and the one on the left is a flock of birds with their path stitched together to create a helix. An unnatural looking object in a very natural image of nature. With art being able to be recreated and manipulated by computer programs, it raises the question that is discussed in Walter Benjamin's essay “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”; whether or not said works should be considered "authentic", and if they carry the same "aura" an original piece does. To that I say it completely depends on the piece. Many famous pieces that are recreated and manipulated develop a whole new aura that may strike the viewer even more than the original piece. Whether or not they should be considered authentic to me is obvious; yes, they should be. Even the smallest changes made to an original piece should be respected as any other piece would. Although it doesn’t take as much talent as painting an original piece all new forms of art should be respected as individual pieces. While they aren’t the original piece they should be thought of as a compliment to the original. In specific, the top right piece that mimics a Rembrandt should be appreciated in the sense that we are able to generate images that a famous artist hundreds of years ago may have created. That to me should carry its own individual aura and appreciated, not criticized. While it’s important that artists keep creating completely original pieces, the mechanical reproduction and manipulation of art is only a plus to us, the viewers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment