"Zapanaz" <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl>
wrote in message
news:a_SdnQ52cLg6CkDanZ2dnUVZ_rqlnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>purple wrote:
>>> On Mar 16, 2:02 pm, "SODDI the Unclean" <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> The media IS art.
>>>
>>> "It is quite literally true that since printing it has been the poets
>>> and painters who have explored and predicted the various possibilities
>>> of print, of prints, of press, of telegraph, of photograph, movie,
>>> radio and television. In recent decades the arrival of several new
>>> media had led to prodigious experimentation in the arts. But, at
>>> present, the artists have yielded to the media themselves.
>>> Experimentation has passed from the control of the private artist to
>>> the groups in charge of the new technologies. That is to say, that
>>> whereas in the past the individual artist, manipulating private and
>>> inexpensive materials, was able to shape models of new experience
>>> years ahead of the public, today the artist works with expensive
>>> public technology, and artist and public merge in a single experience.
>>> The new media need the best artist talent and can pay for it. But the
>>> artist can no longer provide years of advance awareness of
>>> developments in the patterns of human experience which will inevitably
>>> emerge from new technological development." - H. Marshall McLuhan,
>>> Re****t on Project in Understanding New Media, Part VII(Exhibits), p.i,
>>> 1960.
>
> Nonsense. Artists all through history have been driven by the groups
> in charge of the media of expression. From the rejection by composers
> of the rules of composition imposed by the church to Beethoven's
> battles with his patrons to Shostakovich's battles with the Soviet
> system. Shakespeare wrote plays to suit the audience of the Globe
> theatre of the day, being sure to include plenty of swordfights and
> *** and a lot of his great dialog probably went unnoticed for decades
> or centuries.
>
> This is another of McLuhan's pseudo-mystical attempts to argue that
> the media of 1960 was somehow different from what had gone before.
> "Artist and public merge in a single experience". Feh. Like ooh wow,
> man. But what the hell is it actually supposed to mean?
>
> Perhaps McLuhan's ideas were, themselves, interesting enough to
> warrant reading. But copied and pasted blindly by a tiresome
> brain-dead idiot like you, purple, it's just more noise.
>
>>>
>>>
>>> "The new art form of our time is the media themselves, not painting,
>>> not movies, not drama, but the media themselves have become the new
>>> art forms.... I write cartoons.... I have wanted to write a play, for
>>> a long time, on the media. And the media themselves are the avant-
>>> garde area of our society. Avant-garde no longer exists in painting
>>> and music and poetry, it's in the media themselves. Not in the
>>> programs. Avante-garde is not in hockey, not in baseball or any of
>>> these entertainments. It's in the media themselves." - Marshall
>>> McLuhan, Forces Magazine, Hydro-Quebec, No.22, p.68, 1973.
>>>
>
> So again, he says that the medium is the message, and repeats himself,
> and then for good measure he repeats himself. The man made a career
> out of one cryptic wise-sounding quote.
>
> ***
>
> Hey purple, have you ever actually expressed an idea of your own? You
> seem to have the copy and paste thing down pat, maybe you should reach
> out for new horizons.
>
> But wow, like copying and pasting is the medium of today, like, that
> IS the message! Copy-paste! What a message!
>
> The message, apparently, is that you aren't capable of thinking for
> yourself. I guess McLuhan WAS right, the medium IS the message!
People like McLuhan and dean don't seem to actually like art very much at
all and any interest they feign is only when it sup****ts their ideological
stances.
A year or so back I caught the deanies yammering on and on about Marcel
Duchamp. It was apparent that not one of them had seen any of Duchamp's
art
in real life.
dean's little cut 'n paste above demonstrates exactly how intellectually
impoverished and aesthetically bankrupt McLuhan's whole philosophy was and
why it is of little worth to anyone except those who make a career out
McLuluology.
Even funnier than that, it's just WRONG. Totally ass-backwards.
|
