lucia could not have appeared for me without years of work on computers. i consider them to be prosthetic machines that lead us into new possibilities of being human, which includes new ways of considering "art." maybe i am deriving from technology the same kind of re-presentation, or simulation, of things that baudrillard brought into view. computers used creatively allow representations that are otherwise impossible to make, and, more to the point, are iconically representative of our culture. software and code are media, like charcoal and oil, and it seems obvious to me that art finds its way into the machines that so define our time and place. what is art for?
i will go further and say that there is something tentatively "spiritual" (the feeling of being in relationship with a numinous quality or entity more complete or omniscient than my small i) in what the machines have to teach us. this is pure intuition that i cannot back up; nor am i able to let this feeling go.
you may disagree with much of this ... i speak only for myself, and make the influences clear. i am aware of the many critical dialogues about surveillance, the deadening everyday use of computers, and my possible projection of interior qualities onto machines.
i stand by the machine as my necessary collaborator. there is something in the electricity, the 0-1 architecture, and the light of a monitor that generate for me, physically and metaphorically, a state of mind that i continue to cultivate.
by the way, lucia time is not the same as clock time.
- ▼ 2009 (14)