I don't think Stirling is promoting new for new's sake in the
particular excerpt below. In the context of the essay, and given his
particular background, "mythos of phantoms" is his dis of the
gee-whiz, Artificial-Intelligence-chasing, anthropomorphization of
'puters. Sterling is right to observe that it is a dead-end to
apprach these "new" images as if "the machines" have their own kind
of aesthetic. The technical networks aren't "seeing" anything. We
humans are the ones seeing stuff.
Shutting down that early-'90s approach (may) lead toward the
neo-Heidegger / Harman / Bogost thing-being approach (not that
Sterling himself makes this connection). It is from this object
oriented philosophy perspective that "new aesthetics" might yield
something fruitful. Beyond categorical dismissals. Beyond spectacular
hype. Can we hang in there with it a bit more and see where might it
lead?
Curt
Bruce Sterling:
>"Modern creatives who want to work in good faith will have to fully
>disengage from the older generation's mythos of phantoms, and masterfully
>grasp the genuine nature of their own creative tools and platforms.
>Otherwise, they will lack comprehension and command of what they are doing
>and creating, and they will remain reduced to the freak-show position of
>most twentieth century tech art. That's what is at stake."
>
>Honor Harger:
> > This is clearly contentious, and I'm sure many here will disagree with
>> this call-to-action as a cultural strategy (and I can't comment on whether
>> this has anything particularly to bring to bear to/on The New Aesthetic).
>> But I am personally excited and intrigued by the idea that a different
>> group of people, some from different fields, some from different
>> generations, are earnestly exploring topics which are close to our heart
>> with a different sensibility.
>>
>Nick Lambert:
>No, the contentious bit is Sterling's disingenuous revisionism about the
>"older generation's mythos of phantoms." In a field where the wheel is
>constantly being reinvented, encouraging a new generation of artists and
>designers to boldly go where many have been before is not the way forward,
>in my opinion.
|