Dear Adam,
Yes, I agree that there is a certain level of aggravation between design and arts worlds that arises from the potential of art to just keep generating objects. I find oil painting and photography to be inherently compulsive in their processes: you can just keep doing this until your bum turns into a pumpkin. That is, I find some kinds of art practice to be more conducive to decisions that arise from disjunctions (this and/or that) rather than actions that arise from mere addition (one more photo). Lots of first year art students suffer from and-itis.
I am happy for the slippage to disrupt the Enlightenment project. I am happy that we have alternative approaches to knowledge construction. I am also happy for Francis Bacon to make art that puts us back into our bodies. And, I am happy to be interlinked and relational.
Still, design has to deal with material propositions (this is this way and not that) that are grounded by the laws of physics, biology and the codes of society. That is, design has the more complex task. Whether design offers more rewards to the "creative soul" is not of much importance in the world where puddings get eaten up.
So, I am not aggravated when I have finished my supper of boiled pud, cream and ice cream.
cheers
keith
>>> Adam Parker <[log in to unmask]> 12/01/10 10:43 AM >>>
Hi Keith, again!
Love the pudding. Nice relation to be drawn!
Could this cut-and-come-again aspect be the reason why some of us here are
so aggrieved about art's influence in design?
That the slippage it provides is strong evidence for the impracticality of
the Enlightenment project of comprehensive, cohesive knowledge? That it
provides a strong body of theory that approaches knowledge construction from
alternate directions?
As Deleuze points out in Francis Bacon, art can be understood as an powerful
exploration of the logic of sensation - how art affects the nervous system
broadly rather than simply the brain. Thus, that it points to the embodied
pre-cognitive ground of cognitive processes...?
Damn, now it all looks interlinked and relational! ;^)
Cheers,
Adam
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Keith Russell <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear fellow ludics
>
> In Australia we have a wonderful story about a magic pudding by Norman
> Lindsay (The Magic Pudding) :
>
> >>>>>>
> "You'll enjoy this Puddin'," said Bill, handing him a large slice.
> "This is a very rare Puddin'."
>
> "It's a cut-an'-come-again Puddin'," said Sam.
>
> "It's a Christmas steak and apple-dumpling Puddin'," said Bill.
>
> "It's a *. Shall I tell him?" he asked, looking at Bill. Bill nodded,
> and the Penguin leaned across to Bunyip Bluegum and said in a low voice,
> "It's a Magic Puddin'."
> >>>>>>
>
> Art, as practice, is like a magic pudding: you can just keep on arting
> slices off the magic endlessness of possibility. Such is true of life:
> one thing follows another in an endless sequence. Of course this is a
> illusion that we don't often bother to puff away with the seeds of
> weeds.
>
> So, life is primary and the history of life is a secondary activity
> that is also part of life and hence it is sometimes primary, as an
> experience of making, for historians; sometimes secondary, as the
> experience of readers of history. Though, sometimes, reading history is
> a making of another history and can thus be experienced as a primary
> awareness - an awareness of something as a thing that changes one like
> when we see a painting or a film that changes us.
>
> Some artists enjoy this slippage from a primary object (actual
> painting) to another primary object (subjective experience of a
> painting). Some resist the slip and attempt to hold on to something that
> might survive the critic or historian or stupid kid who thinks PoMo is
> crap.
>
> Whatever, history (as a mere sequence of events) was changed forever
> when humans started to tell stories about mere sequences of events. This
> change was a cognitive change not simply a trade union dispute between
> those who performed actions and those who reflected on actions performed
> (frequently the same person in a reflective society).
>
> One might suggest that the values given to certain social activities,
> like art, are only discernible in a reflective society. That is, without
> language about art there is no art, there is merely mucking about with
> paint and stuff. The fact that languages about art might also be
> embedded in works of art as derivable meanings is hardly surprising.
> Until we name a dive it is merely another way of falling from a tower.
>
> And, I suggest that there is quite an amount of rudeness inherent in
> such discussions. All of us make all of the time; some of us reflect on
> such makings in a developing critique of our lives. If we elect certain
> objects of our making to the status of refinement we might call art or
> design, it is because these objects can be seen to embody a range of
> values that we have derived from reflection on our makings and the
> makings of others, including our makings of conversation, discourse,
> theory, and criticism.
>
> Hey it's wet today
>
> cheers
>
> keith russell
> OZ Newcstle
>
>
>
--
Adam Parker
Senior Lecturer, Games Design (Melbourne)
Qantm College Pty Ltd (Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne)
235 Normanby Road
South Melbourne VIC 3205
Tel. +61 (03) 8632 3450
Fax. +61 (03) 8632 3401
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: http://melbourne.qantm.com
CRICOS Numbers: 02689A (QLD), 02852F (NSW), 02837E (VIC)
|
