Art Terms]
[Philosophy Concepts]
[Art Concepts]
[Art Materials]
[Art Technique]
Art THINGS
The FLYING GALLOP
In the web page on Media Tetrads, ({Federman}, as author, i presume)
the following quote by Marshall McLuhan is given
"Our laws of media are intended to provide a ready
means of identifying the properties of and actions
exerted upon ourselves by our technologies and media
and artifacts. They do not rest on any concept or
theory, but are empirical, and form a practical means
of perceiving the action and effects of ordinary human
tools and services. They apply to all human artifacts,
whether hardware or software, whether bulldozers or
buttons, or poetic styles or philosophical systems."
Indeed, as {James W. Carry} makes clear
The question of the appeal of art is essentially a
question of taste, broadly of aesthetics. McLuhan
recognized, earlier than most that the new means
available for producing and reproducing art would
demand and create an entirely new aesthetic.
...
The media of communication affect society principally
by changing the dominant structures of taste and feeling,
by altering the desired forms of experience. [EMPH mine]
Thus, if the "media tetrad" is to have any use at all in the problem
of understanding art, then we must examine how it might manifest
itself in the usual vocabulary of art. This will not only involve
formal elements (space, negative space, line, volume, etc), but
the various ways in which we (as artists) view art history, movements,
and the artists as well -- to say nothing of the artworks themselves.
Art as an Evolutionary Process
It is a convenient fiction to presume that art is an historical
process and that it flows, connected from set of circumstances
to the next. And while this is clearly some-times *not* a
fiction, it is a probably over-used metaphor.
We "know" that de Stijl ?sp? was a direct result of action following
World War I (The Great War, the War to End all Wars) in that the
artists consciously were trying to build a fundamental vocabular
by which the barriers between various nations and cultures could
be disuaded. And at the same time, the "irrational" poetry and
writings of Eugenio Montale and other contributors to "CuttleFish
Bones" in Italy, and of course the Dadist movement, etc -- all
were responses in a strictly historical evolutionary sense. Or
at the very least in terms of stimulous/response.
It is at this point that i should make clear something which seems
to be lost on many artists, thinkers, etc. The idea of *movements*.
In once sense to demark a movement (eg, Fauvism: 1908-1913) or
some such non-sense makes sense if we are *trying* force art history
into some kind of convenient container, in much the same way that
we might list various reigns of kings or such. In reality, once an
*idea* is born and examined, it becomes simply a new tool on the
artist's palett.
Thus, while we might discuss that (for example) "minimalism" resulted
as a response to pop art or that perspective drawing "solved" the
problems of realism in art, etc. -- we are often better off to say
that many of the movements were the reaction of artists trying to
find solutions to problems. And that these problems were some-how
noticed by the artists and that they then began exploring THINGS
out-side the then existant practices.
Naturally, we must also consider the impact of out-side influences
on existing practice; eg, primitivism, Japanese printmaking, etc.
Refs
"Thinking with Things", by Esther Pasztory
LCCN N66.P37'2005.
Federman
[tetrads]
Content mirrored from the above page ref:
BEGIN BLOCK QUOTE
The Tetrads help us to understand both the "thing" itself
(be it a particular technology, business process, model
or concept) and our collective response to it. (For all
you left-brain types out there in the audience, Tetrads
help us understand both the supply-side and demand-side
of the equation.)
The Laws of Media Tetrads are comprised of four (are you
surprised?) questions, quoted here from McLuhan's Laws
of Media: The New Science. [the tetrad is comprised of
a 2x2 square matrix]
ENHANCE REVERSAL
RETRIEVAL OBSOLESCED
Enhance: "What does the artifact ENHANCE or intensify
or make possible or accelerate? This can be
asked concerning a wastebasket, a painting, a steamroller,
or a zipper, as well as about a proposition in Euclid or
a law of physics. It can be asked about any word or phrase
in any language."
Reversal: "When pushed to the limits of its potential
(another complementary action), the new form
will tend to reverse what had been its original
characteristics. What is the REVERSAL potential
of the new form?"
Retrieval: "What recurrence or RETRIEVAL of earlier
actions and services is brought into play
simultaneously by the new form? What older, previously
obsolesced ground is brought back and inheres in the
new form?"
Obsolesced: "If some aspect of a situation is enlarged
or enhanced, simultaneously the old condition
or unenhanced situation is displaced thereby. What is
pushed aside or OBSOLESCED by the new 'organ'?"
END BLOCK QUOTE
The way that i see these (stands nervously to the side of
his assertions) is as follows:
The "Enhance" verb contains within it the concept of describing
the THING. Now in terms of the *static* use of the "Enhance" verb,
it is *mere* description. But, in terms of a *dynamic* use, this
would appear to be a way re-interpreting an existing THING in terms
of a new idea, technology, or view point (POV).
The "Reversal" verb tends to remind me of Hegle's concept of the
evolution of things: Thesis, Antitheis - Synthesis. That is, if
an idea comes into existence (say capitalism) then it almost
automatically causes its opposite (say communism) to come into
existence. From the juxtapostion (struggle) between the two comes
a new synthesis that "solves" some of the problems created by each
system (say mercantile socialism).
However, when we examine the "Retrieval" and "Obscolesced" verbs,
then we are brought into the idea that "there is nothing new". That
is, once we begin to examine the new THING, then we "measure" it
against all of history. So, if the new thing is a car (or art movement)
then it obsoletes the horse and buggy. But, not entirely since they
become pastiche for the concept of nostalgia.
{Back to the TEXT}
James Carrey
[Carrey src]
BEGIN BLOCK QUOTE
[Marshall] McLuhan...argued that forms of communication such as
writing, speech, printing, and broadcasting should not be viewed
as neutral vessels carrying given and independently determined
meaning. Rather, he proposed that these forms be considered
technologies of the intellect, active participants in the
process by which the mind is formed and in turn forms ideas.
To put the matter differently, he argued that all technical
forms were extensions of mind and embodiments of meaning.
Technologies of communication were principally things to think
with, molders of mind, shapers of thought: the medium was the
message. In pressing this argument he opened a new avenue of
historical scholarship and rephrased a large set of questions
that had vexed scholars.
The second advance McLuhan pioneered and which set certain
constraints upon his critics grew directly out of his literary
studies. Students of the arts are likely to examine communication
with quite a different bias than that advanced by social scientists.
The question of the appeal of art is essentially a question of
taste, broadly of aesthetics. McLuhan recognized, earlier than
most that the new means available for producing and reproducing
art would demand and create an entirely new aesthetic. He sensed
that cultural forms operated not at the level of cognition or
information or even effect. The media of communication affect
society principally by changing the dominant structures of
taste and feeling, by altering the desired forms of experience.
-- James W. Carey
END BLOCK QUOTE
{Back to the TEXT}
</