Nmherman on Thu, 2 May 2002 02:57:02 +0200 (CEST)
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Re: RHIZOME_RAW: GENERATION FLASH: Usability/Interaction
In a message dated 4/30/2002 12:31:35 PM Central Daylight Time, email@example.com writes:
...and really that comes down to thinking about the person at the end of
the line who will be experiencing the work...
Would any painter, honestly, not think about what people would see when they looked at his paintings? He was a priest for goodness sake, Van Gogh. The director sees out of both sides of the lens, you see that in the movie "Contempt." Perhaps the problem is the main axis of modernism, i.e., iconoclasm. Why are new ways of seeing iconoclastic of the old? We do not know. In spite of this risk, the poet or artist wants you to see what they see. They encourage you to change to their channel. It's the simple fact of recordive/accretive culture. You can't make the omelette without breaking some eggs.
Maybe artist is an outdated term for this sorta topic. I think that "the Seven Samurai" is one of the niftiest 2.5 hours to be had, for its graphic design. Why? Not because I'm a graphic designer, but because you actually see the samurai drawing charts, using documents and templates. It's part of the excitement of the film, I relish it.
But you are all too correct that realtime data transfer changes everything. We only notice the fact when there are rapid changes, like new inventions etc. It's not unique to the internet or even to the 20th century. John Klima said churches were the first internet, and I'm saying, museums were the second internet. As in, I think conceptually the museum is the jetztzeit equivalent of a shukkhot. Transience dressed in completeness.
I would like to base a god game on the idea of a ring, like the ring of the nibelungen, rather than on a globo-yinyang-spheric graphic any day to the week.
for architecture, see: