If you look at pre-industrial design, you will notice an almost compulsive tendency towards ornamentation. It was taken for granted that if you created an artifact you made it beautiful and not only practical. You can also see that the ornamental motifs were almost systematically derived from nature. Pre-civilized people hardly needed ornamental references to nature. It was only after the onset of civilization that nature became objectified and turned into an artistic motif. ...
@kiviaavikko ... In the industrial era ornamentation began to decline. It didn't immediately lose its reference to nature but the forms became more stylized and less directly representational. The final blow came from the commercial rationalism of consumer mass culture. Ornamentation in architecture, for instance, disappeared entirely, or turned into crude geometrical forms derived from the techno-environment. Ornamental reference to nature and fantasy became taboo in professional design. ...
@kiviaavikko ... So as I see it, pre-civilized people had no use for extensive ornamentation. There was no need to represent or stylize that which was already directly lived. Pre-industrial civilization used ornamentation extensively, so much in fact that the line between art and decoration remained unclear for a very long time. The representation of nature in every detail shows that disconnection from nature was not complete, there was still a longing to the original unity with nature. ...
@kiviaavikko ... The industrial age brought about changes that in so many ways finalized the disconnection between culture and nature. Aesthetic theory began to reflect the new techno-environment and its growing demand for machine-like functionality, so much so that even stylized references to nature came to be regarded as ridiculous and decadent. The modern intolerance of ornamentation is not merely an issue of economic necessity but is part of the psychology of technological alienation.
Zerzan stresses that simple tools are not technology, they don't comprise complex systems that demand things from individuals. When he talks about technology he really means technological systems and the social forms that develop around them. Maybe we could approach the question of artistic expression in a similar way and draw a line between (1) stories/dance/play as non-alienated forms of expression and (2) institutionalized art.
People don't participate as much as they did before civilization. We listen to "artists" on mp3 players. We don't play the instruments with our friends and family as was done in hunter gather societies. The same can be made about sports some people our addicted to watching professionals play the sport, but rarely participate with other people in playing that sport in real life. Civilization divides people into different roles and classes reducing or destroying participation.
This is where I see some dangers too, any musician will tell you there is for sure an energy interaction that goes on with the crowd. but lots of people don't even buy music anymore, just rip it, there's no exchange going on unless you're very famous and have a big crowd. or in painting, it can be largely to do with money and status, interactive art is only aimed at specific niches to make money, other then music. where as true cultural interactive art is not likely to even make any money!!!
sorry, and I guess pottery and of course writing too :p
I mean in terms of how civilization will value these things in an interactive way, like pots and bands and books can get you money. but even books it's a niche thing to make money. So there's my question, how can we better value our interactive artists, who do it regardless of money cause they love it? in a way that they're not these super heros who don't have to care about anything, like equitable exchange as adam talks about.
Great video. I think there is a great disconnect with art in our society. Hollywood seems to have very little to do with my life or any other pop culture, (aside from art as practical applications (creativity in housing, construction,etc))
I think that's something that is missing in most art now is this connection, creation and participation in a mutual reality. I don't have the answer either.
As for the tortured artist, there is some truth in that, I feel, because pursuing any dream
He is basically saying how much of modernist art and post modern art is ugly. is artists obsessed with their own shit, and shunning beauty, and this is shown in architecture
Cool. I can see it again now, thanks ;))) Tell me what you think?
haha, really glad you did this video, because its inspired me to try to seek out this documentary I saw a few months ago i loved called Why Beauty Matters, AND your in luck its showing at youtube!
/watch?v=65YpzZrwKI4&feature=player_embedded
Like where you say how art can be ugly, wallowing in its own blood? Yes I have felt that too
If art is going to help us go beyond civilization. It will have to convey to shortcomings of our predicament and the benifits of our future. Instead of being a release valve it will have to help build the pressure inside of us so we want to walk away. That's how I see it.
we need exemplify the momentum and inertia of losing faith in social norms. we need to be reckless to the extent that our personal lives are thrown to the wolves.
If you look at pre-industrial design, you will notice an almost compulsive tendency towards ornamentation. It was taken for granted that if you created an artifact you made it beautiful and not only practical. You can also see that the ornamental motifs were almost systematically derived from nature. Pre-civilized people hardly needed ornamental references to nature. It was only after the onset of civilization that nature became objectified and turned into an artistic motif. ...
kiviaavikko 1 year ago
@kiviaavikko ... In the industrial era ornamentation began to decline. It didn't immediately lose its reference to nature but the forms became more stylized and less directly representational. The final blow came from the commercial rationalism of consumer mass culture. Ornamentation in architecture, for instance, disappeared entirely, or turned into crude geometrical forms derived from the techno-environment. Ornamental reference to nature and fantasy became taboo in professional design. ...
kiviaavikko 1 year ago
@kiviaavikko ... So as I see it, pre-civilized people had no use for extensive ornamentation. There was no need to represent or stylize that which was already directly lived. Pre-industrial civilization used ornamentation extensively, so much in fact that the line between art and decoration remained unclear for a very long time. The representation of nature in every detail shows that disconnection from nature was not complete, there was still a longing to the original unity with nature. ...
kiviaavikko 1 year ago
@kiviaavikko ... The industrial age brought about changes that in so many ways finalized the disconnection between culture and nature. Aesthetic theory began to reflect the new techno-environment and its growing demand for machine-like functionality, so much so that even stylized references to nature came to be regarded as ridiculous and decadent. The modern intolerance of ornamentation is not merely an issue of economic necessity but is part of the psychology of technological alienation.
kiviaavikko 1 year ago
Zerzan stresses that simple tools are not technology, they don't comprise complex systems that demand things from individuals. When he talks about technology he really means technological systems and the social forms that develop around them. Maybe we could approach the question of artistic expression in a similar way and draw a line between (1) stories/dance/play as non-alienated forms of expression and (2) institutionalized art.
kiviaavikko 1 year ago
Suddenly, my English literature degree shows its value like a candle in a cave.
REXMARX003 2 years ago
People don't participate as much as they did before civilization. We listen to "artists" on mp3 players. We don't play the instruments with our friends and family as was done in hunter gather societies. The same can be made about sports some people our addicted to watching professionals play the sport, but rarely participate with other people in playing that sport in real life. Civilization divides people into different roles and classes reducing or destroying participation.
Eldel15 2 years ago
This is where I see some dangers too, any musician will tell you there is for sure an energy interaction that goes on with the crowd. but lots of people don't even buy music anymore, just rip it, there's no exchange going on unless you're very famous and have a big crowd. or in painting, it can be largely to do with money and status, interactive art is only aimed at specific niches to make money, other then music. where as true cultural interactive art is not likely to even make any money!!!
Beardedyoungman 2 years ago
sorry, and I guess pottery and of course writing too :p
I mean in terms of how civilization will value these things in an interactive way, like pots and bands and books can get you money. but even books it's a niche thing to make money. So there's my question, how can we better value our interactive artists, who do it regardless of money cause they love it? in a way that they're not these super heros who don't have to care about anything, like equitable exchange as adam talks about.
Beardedyoungman 2 years ago
Great video. I think there is a great disconnect with art in our society. Hollywood seems to have very little to do with my life or any other pop culture, (aside from art as practical applications (creativity in housing, construction,etc))
I think that's something that is missing in most art now is this connection, creation and participation in a mutual reality. I don't have the answer either.
As for the tortured artist, there is some truth in that, I feel, because pursuing any dream
ozjthomas 2 years ago
with passion can lead to alienation and an artistic tendency is a sensitivity that if not managed well can lead to self destruction.
ozjthomas 2 years ago
He is basically saying how much of modernist art and post modern art is ugly. is artists obsessed with their own shit, and shunning beauty, and this is shown in architecture
Cool. I can see it again now, thanks ;))) Tell me what you think?
zezt 2 years ago
haha, really glad you did this video, because its inspired me to try to seek out this documentary I saw a few months ago i loved called Why Beauty Matters, AND your in luck its showing at youtube!
/watch?v=65YpzZrwKI4&feature=player_embedded
Like where you say how art can be ugly, wallowing in its own blood? Yes I have felt that too
zezt 2 years ago
the glass bead game
Barklord 2 years ago
If art is going to help us go beyond civilization. It will have to convey to shortcomings of our predicament and the benifits of our future. Instead of being a release valve it will have to help build the pressure inside of us so we want to walk away. That's how I see it.
AdamHintz 2 years ago
@AdamHintz
we need exemplify the momentum and inertia of losing faith in social norms. we need to be reckless to the extent that our personal lives are thrown to the wolves.
Barklord 2 years ago
really? I don't want to be eaten by wolves.
AdamHintz 2 years ago
@AdamHintz
read 'wolves' as social discomfort. books and poetry won't protect but they will sustain
Barklord 2 years ago
Yes social discomfort is something we'll have to endure.
AdamHintz 2 years ago
nah, i've decided to live the high life of wine, women and song while you guys change the world. thanks, btw.
Barklord 2 years ago
My daughters say thanks. :D
AdamHintz 2 years ago
I liked when you mentioned Jason. It's so comforting to have such familiar people around us.
AdamHintz 2 years ago