With the internet culture we live in today, there is single click access to almost anything you can think of. The advent of the internet formed a space for people to create, remix, and re-design elements of our culture. And that is exactly what people have done, but not without some controversy and issues with copyright.

The Grey Album, released by Danger Mouse in 2004 combined The Beatles White Album with Jay-Z’s Black Album and remixed the songs together to create new songs that ebbed and flowed. Although the album was free to view on YouTube, lawyers alike all complained that Danger Mouse was breaking copyright law by using other artists songs. Interestingly enough, neither artist featured on the album wished to sue but this brought to light the dangers of artists remixing. Danger Mouse had used his own creativity and artistry to take two different music types and combine them to make something completely new.

The strict copyright laws in place today prevent artists such as Danger Mouse from pursuing and sharing their remixed, mashed up works. This is not to say that all copyright is bad though. Of course, copyright is in place to protect peoples intellectual property and ensure that people receive their earnings from their work. Lawrence Lessig, who studies remix culture, authored the book Remix, where he discusses the two cultures that are alive in our society today, RO and RW. Read only culture (RO) is passive, it involves internet content being heavily monitored and fed to us by screens. Read/Write culture (RW) on the other hand, creates a conversation between the producer and consumer of the content and actively engages consumers in the material they view.  Lessig believes that in order for us to learn and create we must not only change the way that copyright laws are constructed and upheld but also the way we interact with the information we are given.  Continue reading →

In Beverly Jones’ article, “Computer Graphics: Effects of Origin,” Jones works to “establish  the relation of specific image, object, event, or environment to conceptual frames” (21). Overall,  Jones works to make a connection between art and technology and the role that computer graphics play within our society. One historical example supplied by Jones is the earliest computer graphics invented by Ben Lapofsky and Herbert Franke (22). The graphics were generated and displayed using oscilloscopes and the images appeared mobile and active, a new medium for art to be displayed on. Since the advent of graphics, computer generated images only grew to be more complex and widely used. Today, things like CGI’s  are common and apparent in everyday life as they are used to create animated movies and games. These new technologies have created a whole new category of art known as digital art.

One of the most interesting new technologies that can be applied to almost every discipline, including art, is 3D printing. From fashion to the medical industry, 3D printing has many applications making it an investment worthy technology. In Katherine Brooks’ article, “14 Ways 3D Printing Has Changed the Art World,” she displays 14 of the most intriguing works of art that include the use of a 3D printer. From everything to a model of Van Gogh’s ear to stop motions these images appear to be some of the most detailed digital images. One of the most awe-spiring of these 14 was an entirely 3D printed room created by designers Michael Hansmeyer and Benjamin Dillenburger. The room beautifully unites technology, architecture, and intensely intricate art work. The video below shows the process and craftsmanship that went into creating the room. The final product is an amazing piece of art work that was created by programming mathematical algorithms. The room demonstrates just one of the amazing applications that technology plays within art and how technology is  striving to evolve our perceptions of art.

To see all 14 examples in Brooks’ article click here.

Jones, B. J. (1990). Computer Graphics: Effects of Origins. Digital Image Digital Cinema Supplemental Issue, pp. 21-30.

Brooks, K. (2014). 14 Ways 3D Printing Has Changed the Art World. Huffington Post: HuffPost Arts & Culture. Retrieved March 1, 2015.

In Jane McGonigal’s TED Talk titled “Gaming can make a better world,” she discusses how virtual world video games can help people to solve problems in the real world. McGonigal describes 4 values that gamers attain from playing virtual games: urgent optimism, social fabric, blissful productivity, and epic meaning. Urgent optimism is the desire to tackle an obstacle knowing it is attainable, social fabric builds social bonds and trust between gamers, blissful productivity is the feelings of happiness attained from working hard, and epic meaning gives the gamers a sense of importance and success. Although I agree that games can be positive and creating more realistic problems within games could help inspire young people, I also believe games can bring on some negative side effects.

McGonigal admits that people use games as a means to escape reality but she does not go in depth to the issues this can cause. Although the 4 values she establishes are valid they can also set up unrealistic expectations for gamers. In a virtual world, all problems can be solved. There may be speed bumps and obstacles along the way but ultimately any problem and level can be solved. In the real world, this is not always true. Sometimes there are bigger obstacles that are so far outside of our reach that we cannot overcome them. Along with this, people can become so immersed in their virtual life that they no longer wish to work through problems in the real world because they are constantly experiencing disappointment.

Overall, I think McGonigal makes some very valid points that video games need to tackle more realistic world problems but she also negates the problems that can come from all video games. I do think when played in moderation video games can help people relax and enjoy feelings of success after a long day but people can forget that video games are just that, a game.

The topic of spirituality has always been a difficult one for me to grasp.  I believe the main focus of spirituality is to find connectedness or wholeness in your life, to find something larger than yourself and discover meaning.  Spirituality can take on so many forms and for some people it means attending church weekly and for others it might include being outside in nature. I think spirituality can help people get through difficult times and give them a sense of direction and purpose.

For a long time, I connected spirituality with religion and believed that devotion was an important part of being spiritual. I still think many people connect religion and spirituality and for some, they are the same thing. To me, religion is the belief in a higher power and a devotion to this higher being in the hopes of living a fulfilled life and having a pleasant afterlife. On the other hand, spirituality has to do with living in the moment, finding peace, and working towards personal growth.

Creativity can be sparked from anything around us. I think of creativity as finding inspiration and working to create something that’s original and has meaning. Everyone has some level of creativity and whether people choose to act on their inspiration is dictated based on the person. Although I generally associate creativity with artwork, it can take on many forms. My form of creativity includes documenting the places I go with my instax camera and keeping a journal with my thoughts.

I think creativity can be found in anything, anywhere, at any time. Creativity comes from within us and certain objects or ideas will speak to people a different way. For example, I might see an empty wine bottle and think to recycle it whereas an artist could think to turn it into drinking glasses or a vase. We utilize our imagination to see the potential of something and our creativity works to help us create something important.

“The Mission of Art,” a chapter in Art As A Spiritual Practice takes many different angles on the relationship between art and spirituality. The author, Alex Grey, paints interesting, geometric designs that strive to bind the idea of mind, body, and spirit. In my opinion, Grey writes in a way where he wants to encapsulate all pieces of art work but in some ways his views are limiting and he spends a vast majority of the time with descriptions that only apply to his work. When he describes art and the creative process he often refers to people being inspired by divinity and trying to portray a subject. But, not all art is trying to portray a subject or is inspired by some spirituality. For instance, Piet Mondrian’s “Composition with Red, Yellow, and Blue,” the famous oil painting of color blocked squares does not seem to portray a subject whether person, divine being, or a landscape. In this way I think Gray has limited his view of the creative process and by labeling and putting specific steps to the process is he in some way defeating one of the purposes of art? I do not think all art necessarily follows an outline of steps in it’s creation. There is not always some great spark of inspiration from taking DMT (as Grey did) or a long period of time where a subject, if there is one at all, must be observed.

When viewing components of spirituality within artwork Grey describes that, “Viewers appreciate art because they resonate with those states of being. No matter what state of being is expressed in a work of art, universal creative spirit is the prime mover behind all art media” (p. 79). There are many analyses that can come from this specific quote. Firstly, he uses the statement “all art media.” This statement is all encompassing and would include anything from street art to food to “Starry Night.” Is a universal creative spirit really every artists prime mover? Are there other things that can inspire and push artists to pursue a certain piece of art work? What even is this creative spirit Grey is referring to? I find difficulties with Grey’s description and cannot tell whether he refers to the creative spirit as a supreme being like God or Allah or rather if the creative spirit is something within us that binds all of mankind to one another?  Based off Grey’s liberal stances, admission to experimenting with DMT, and his studies of Hindu medicinal practices I believe it is the latter.

I find a lot of holes within Grey’s analysis of art and spirituality and feels as though he uses his own experiences with art and his own artwork to find reason and purpose. It may have been wiser of him to discuss his theory in relation to all works of art instead of his own or noted that his theory and most theories cannot always be all-encompassing.

Grey, A. (2001). Art as Spiritual Practice. The Mission of Art (1st ed., pp. 205-233). Boston & London: Shambhala.