Response to 'On Media': Power vs. Responsibility

Power vs. Responsibility

When I heard the sentence “With great power, comes great responsibilities” from Stan Lee via spider man, I was inspired and felt a great sense of safety. Yes, having superpowers with responsibility, the animation world is happy and secured now. But, how about our real world?

Not as fortunate as the animation world, our real world is almost in the opposite direction. With the development of technology, human’s ability reaches to an unprecedented peak----a peak for technology, as well as a peak for manipulation. Nowadays, with a $200 PC, a normal man can cheat majority easily via Youtube; having some knowledge on nuclear, a small country can destroy the entire earth at will. The most familiar example of this fact may lie in journalism industry:

With hands on the controller of lens, one reporter now has the ability to ‘manipulate’ a ‘fact’, a preferred or desired ‘fact’. Common individuals have neither time/energy, nor enough professional knowledge to distinguish lies between truths. Telling lies from the overwhelming information is unpractical. As a result, lies are, literally, out of control.

However, I’m not saying the technology should not be developed and skills should not be made more advanced. What resonated in my brain is the perennial dilemma of development.

Initially, those great Greek philosophers noted that truth is “coverless”. That is, the less cover and medium there is, the closer we are to the truth.

Although nowadays we are far from that mysterious great Greek age, to clarify or build an easier path towards truth is still the pursue of our early technology pioneers. Compared to 19^th century, a ‘playback’ function is doubtlessly a breaking through; as well as recompose compared to ‘playback’ in the later century. The developments promise convenience and power, while nothing promises responsibility.

Some artists have replied to this phenomenon. Like the worry carried by movies like the Matrix (1999-2003), Blade runner (1982), Pacific Rim (2013), etc. that people’s failure or ignorance of maintaining the responsibility may backfire human being themselves---that the mainstream idea of science fiction. An animation EVA (Neon Genesis Evangelion 1994-?) made by Gainax goes deeper into the discussion of the religious punishment from ‘god’ because of the abuse of technology by human being, which is a favorite to me.

On*****Media and Power

                It is interesting to look at the evolution of media that G.H. Hovagimyan discusses in “On*****Media” in terms of power dynamics. As the world moves from technology to technology to technology, who is really the beneficiary? What are the impetuses behind these changes? I think that the evolution of forms of media is motivated, especially in modern times, less by a desire for a greater level of art, but rather as an effort of the political and economic elite to have a more powerful tool. If media is art and art is communicative, as Hovagimyan suggests, then innovation of that art means a novel (and thus potentially more persuasive) form of communication. As such, I think the crux of the issue, what is truly at play here, is not so much the physical transformation of media, but rather the manipulating of it in order to produce a new message.

Hovagimyan cites the radio’s role in politicizing the masses during World War II. The television played a similar albeit antithetical role during Vietnam. While FDR used the radio as a means for his brilliant oration to calm a nation, journalists provided TV viewers real moving images of the carnage of battle—an incredibly powerful example of the medium as the message. No longer could citizens allow themselves to believe the platitudinal claims of a commander in chief without acknowledging the realities on their TV screens. Although in this case the result was a resistance to the decisions of those in power, it was a more or less singular occurrence. Vietnam was the first and last war to have such broadcasting freedoms. The state and its corporate interests clamped down on media from then on, thus curbing their ability to communicate an oppositional message. Thus, TV and internet coverage went quite the same way as the war photograph: rather ineffectual at stopping wars.

This is not to say that all forms of media are facets of a self-serving authoritative influence. For example, the Bauhaus movement was particularly innovative in its transformation of architecture into art with a message of egalitarianism and utopianism. Dada and Duchamp made prefabricated objects into critiques of the bourgeois nature of art. Yet in these cases the message was too narrowly received and/or too radically perceived, and thus these forms did not have the overwhelming success that other, more corporatized media did.

On Media: Authenticity vs Art

Cassia Kuhn

The part of this reading that really grabbed me, of course, was the mention of music. From an academic standpoint, the debate on the authenticity of music has been raging on since the 1920s. To even play a record on the radio was considered a cheat and a lie; the audience expected every performance to be live. This of course changed, but the mentality of recordings and albums was still fairly underdeveloped into the early 1960s. To a listener and a musician the record was an artifact of what could be a live performance; a bit like an audition tape. It was simply an authentic run-through of a band's music that could hold a fan over until the next concert. These rock and pop albums had to sound like they were recorded in one take or the audience would feel cheated. And this wasn't difficult; most songs were still very simple and could easily be recorded without overdubs. Just about anything by Frank Sinatra is a great example of a song that can be recorded or performed live (although this one might be the best, but I'm a sucker for 1957 Sinatra).

Luckily some visionary artists changed that too. Bands like The Beatles and just about any other psychedelic group realized that some amazing sounds could only be produced in a recording studio and started to incorporate them into their records. It started with smaller effects that were added to otherwise simple tunes, like "Tapioca Tundra" by the Monkees; I've seen them perform this song live and you just can't reproduce the echoes, simple as they seem. Other bands went all out like The Beatles, adding so much to their music that there was no way they could perform live. 

People embraced this idea as popular bands changed their sound, and the idea of authenticity changed. Now instead of through the sounds on the disc, an artist had to prove that they were genuine with their message and appearance. An artist like Bruce Springsteen has to convince his fans that he really is just a regular, blue collar guy like you and me, and his music helps him convince them. This is still the case; message authenticity is more important than technology. Look at the fairly new artist, Lorde. She performed her single "Royals" at the Grammy Awards on Sunday. It was very stripped-down from the original version, but they still used some prerecorded vocals at the show. So it wasn't truly, 100% live, but Lorde is still trying to portray her image as an everyday teen and that is what upholds her authenticity.

On Media: The New & Improved Representation of the Native Mythos

Hovagimyan mentions, very early on, how the mechanical and industrial advancements of the past century have changed the way tribal mythos are expressed. Immediately, I think of A Tribe Called Red. More generally, I believe music to be the most consistent medium in relating cultures' stories, beliefs, and mindsets. However, there seems to be a discongruence as of late with mainstream music, at least here in the States. Cultural identity seems utterly lost in mainstream pop and rock music. But in hip hop and electronic music, ahhh, there is so much more expression. Now, I am entirely biased; being partial to these later music stylings I see them as generally more creative and thought provoking. Additionally, these are the chosen styles of the misrepresented and minorities, groups that are more likely to actively search for traditional cultural roots as well as create new ones in response to their disenfranchised status. 

The author brings up the abundant use of sampling in hip hop and electronica. From this method of music creation sprouts a music environment that readily mixes medias. Movies, speeches, and other songs are all fair game to be manipulated into new art. The very basis of these genres (hip hop and electronic) is the use of intermedia, and this quality allows for an unequaled amount of creativity when addressing political concerns. It also allows a meta-culture to flourish as these underrepresented communities speak out for recognition. Music, and in turn the entirety of their cultures, mix. 

A Tribe Called Red is very much an example of this evolving nature of identity through music. Members of the First Nations, they come from a culture that is currently dying. Music, language, dress; all victims to 300 years of a hostile invasion. In order to celebrate, and remember, their communal past, ATCR has enveloped many aspect of urban music to carry their people's heritage. This is not without a growth and acceptance of alternative narratives, however. Their name in and of itself is in tribute to A Tribe Called Quest, an extremely influential rap group from the mid 1990s. They not only mix hip hop culture, but reggae, moombahton, and dubstep to create modern powwow that represents them and their community. 

The video below is a live performance of ATCR. It address cultural appropriation, history, and representations of them by non aboriginals in mainstream culture. But even more amazing is the mix of cultures. The show revolves around a celebration of heritage. Dancing and art abound, from the traditional spirit dancing on stage and off, to the audiences representations of their own cultures through dress and other mediums.(I most enjoyed the kilt!) ATCR mixes this song live, so it is a living, transforming performance that responds to the audiences energy and perception. G. H. Hovagimyan states, "The new cultural mythos is mapping out of human society that is extended into its technology and in a sustained symbiosis with that technos," which the video below showcases in real time. And thats pretty awesome. 

Braves RMX by ATCR on Soundcloud

On Media

In this reading, I find the different relationships between media very interesting.  Over time, media has progressed and a medium usually isn't comprised of one thing.  For art, years ago a painting would have one copy and that was the only part of the medium.  Now, that same painting may be reproduced or printed, or could probably be seen all over the internet, in magazines, etc.  I think this communicative element that media has developed is very important.  The simple medium may no longer be the main focus.  The greater idea could be producing the medium in such a way that it reaches a large audience, above focusing on what the message or art actually is.  The depth of media is actually somewhat scary to think about, especially the ways in which media surrounds us and shapes our lives.  The increased nature of digitalizing media and using machines creates a whole other dimension that wasn't a factor in media a century ago.  For example, now reading a book on a Kindle or e-reader seems normal, and at first thought like a single medium.  But then you would have to consider the way in which the book was coded to be read on a screen and distributed more easily and efficiently to a lot more people.  These things are also media.  Thus, today, media has become more multi-dimensional and complicated, but it allows for certain media to become more widespread and reach a greater audience, which is often a critical goal of a medium.

This idea reminds me of something I saw recently posted on the Internet.  What seemed like a post for a website selling men "Push Up Muscle Shirts" turned into a completely different message.  In my own experience, I saw this first on Facebook, and then clicked on the link not expecting the second message.  Whoever else has seen this may have gone through various means to reach the final message of the main medium.

www.theflatteringman.com

On Media and the Alteration of Art

In the article, On Media, the author discusses the phenomenon of hybrid media, combining different types of media together to create a new type. Some examples were silent films with text on the screen and an orchestra playing music along with the movie. This type of art is important because every single new hybrid form breeds a new form of artwork. Media changes and evolves constantly, and if different types can be used together, the new form can become more convenient, perhaps easier, and perhaps more elegant in its design.  Now with the digital world, there are so many ways to produce new media and mix and match whatever one has available. This can be dangerous in some instances, such as photoshop being used to add, delete, and edit parts of true photographs, and claiming the edited photograph to be true. However, photoshop can also be used to enhance, add interesting effects, and create impossible but hilarious situations. Because of this, having a medium like photoshop is necessary for the progression of art and media. Another media that uses this manner of changing reality is film and the use of green screens. In fact, anything and any scene can be created and changed with the green screen, which can confuse our perception of what is real and not. This is extremely effective for films, however, because they do not need reality to be created, and can rely on a false reality made possible by the digital age.

http://vimeo.com/83910533

This video does a brilliant job of capturing different styles of art and putting them together to create something beautiful. The fact that we have the means to take an older style of painting and  digitize and make it move and change is incredibly powerful. The power of art and technology intertwined has come so far, and will continue expanding into the future.

On Media Reading Response

The constant progress of media advancement brings about a logical side-effect that certain aspects of culture (especially media culture) and societal influence by media are changing as well.  With advancement, ultimately comes the dis-use and discarding of old technology and old methods. The article names several instances of media advancement and what new benefits were brought and what “old” practices were cast aside.

With the invention and widespread implementation of photography, for example – the painting of certain scenes is no longer a celebrated art form. And this is, in my opinion, a bit sad. The article names battle paintings as something that has gone as a result of the photograph which just shows the blunt, bloody, and factual side of war instead of highlighting the glory and heroism of painted artwork. This is also an instance where mass production/printing has changed society’s interaction with such media. In the past, an artist would paint a mural or a painting depicting scenes of battle and great victories (perhaps glossing over the massive loss of life) and then people would gather to see one or maybe two reproductions of the painting – celebrating the battle and interacting with each other. Now, we can just pull up the images on websites or in newspapers without ever having to collectively honor and glorify the actual art of war.

The ongoing debate is whether or not these changes should be categorized as good or bad… or a bit of both? While one can always argue that the invention of new modes and methods and discarding the old is a travesty to history and we should stay with the traditional ideas – it is inevitably a consequence of “moving with the times”. Perhaps then, we are better off not confronting new ideas and methods with hostility and doubt, but rather embracing them and focusing on the future – while also maintaining the ways of old into our museums and historical archives, so that proceeding generations can learn where we came from and how we got to where we are today.