TAM Group B’s response: This is what Amsterdam challenged us
Perhaps this hypothetical performance was recorded for archival purposes, now the digital media (a derivative of medium) is the medium for a new host of spectators to receive the performance.
http://www.new.facebook.com/home.php#/video/video.php?v=5330092731&oid=20958116280
According to Plato words medium will make the performance a copy of copy, thus less than ideal and loses its original value. Walter Benjamin says that in this way it loses its ''aura". The digital media archive, while perhaps currently the best archival method for performance available, still does not do justice to capturing the initial "aura" of the live performance.
Our comments:
We think that technology does not automatically destroy art; it changes it, but that does not mean that there is a devaluation of art. Recordings or mechanical reproductions create an experience that may deviate from what the original offers. However, technologically-driven mediums are not empty. For example, archival materials can be distributed, reaching a wider audience of potential spectators, and can preserve events that would otherwise evaporate from memory. Digital media also presents performers with something new to work with and respond to.
It would be beneficial for us, in engaging with different types of media, to be conscious of their differences and not think that they are interchangeable with one another. Digital media does not replace live performance, nor does it dismantle it. Art adapts and our expectations have to adapt with it.
To end off, the discussion so far has focused on one particular definition of the word, but our group is aware of the other definitions and uses of the term and find those equally interesting, as well e.g "physical material or form used by artist, composer, etc." or "person claiming to communicate with the dead." Perhaps something for future discussions?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment