What is art and what isn’t? (Got this from the museum that I am interning for)
Looking at a book and consider it as a piece of art, it is kind of odd to me at first. But to think or look at everything as art, M.T. Anderson’s book as a literature piece is definitely a great one that is worth to look at and talk about. The very first moved that I liked about his literature is that he depicts Feed as a revelatory art without his actual voice. Instead, he illustrates other characters especially the old man to speak out his own perspective on digitalization. Perhaps, he noticed that it is difficult for someone to admit and realize their mistakes. Therefore, he did not choose to use a parental voice saying “computers are bad for you” directly to the readers but an adolescent’s voice as he is actually in your shoes sharing his experiences not mistakes. By doing this, the readers will not interact with the offensive voice directly like what most of the parents will do throughout the reading process. As trying to make the readers to realize something or to self criticize their own life, Tobin did a great job inviting the readers to fall into his trap deeply. He does not sound like he is blaming or insulting you, but using a teenager’s voice that shares the similar experience as the readers to make the others to realize or relate to. This is an excellent choice to make a revelatory art to set the readers to fall into a comfortable trap, and actually realize their mistakes. However, either the reader will make a difference in their life or not, it is another question. A revelatory art seems more like a mirror that reflects instead of a hammer that shapes it in this case.
The second moved that I like is that Tobin portrays the whole story as an allegory. By simplifying the complicated ideas and themes into a metaphor of something that is so simple to understand for most of the people, this book is even more resonant. Throughout the whole book, instead of describing the setting as home or a specific place, he called the moon and timed it as the future. He also called the digital representation devices the feed. All these terms that he continuously used in his piece of art has made his piece simple, but profound. It also created more space for the audience to imagine, to come up with personal experience to connect to the piece in anyway. Although this is a futuristic novel, the theme that it enhances is still relevant to our daily life now. This will draw the significance of this piece of art, because it expresses the theme that people from different time period could connect to. In this case, looking at Feed as an allegory perspective, it is consider the hammer because it shapes our thoughts and life in some way since he portrays the image of future. Knowing that no one can predict the future other than hypothesize based on current issues and data, Tobin demonstrates the problem in the book that is similar to people’s current life, then preview the image of future to convince the reader that’s the possibility that they will turn out to be - ignorant. Therefore, it shapes people’s thoughts in a way that is possible to lead them to see things differently. However, he never provide an solution to the problem that he is emphasizing, which I believe he did this on purpose for the audience to decide how they want to live their life.
Can a mirror be a hammer? My answer to this is no. I feel like one cannot be the other without either one. The mirror is suppose to reflect which provides the chance for the audience to see themselves in the art, then the hammer be able to shape it the way they wanted. I don’t think it is possible to shape someone before they actually see themselves as the art piece that they perceive. Additionally, whether the hammer is able to shape the world or not, it depends on how powerful that piece has affected the audience and how strong that piece brings out the theme behind it. Therefore, mirror could only be a mirror if the hammer exist, and vice versa. It could not be the other’s because they are responsible for different criteria as being a tool to draw the meaning of the piece.
Looking at a book and consider it as a piece of art, it is kind of odd to me at first. But to think or look at everything as art, M.T. Anderson’s book as a literature piece is definitely a great one that is worth to look at and talk about. The very first moved that I liked about his literature is that he depicts Feed as a revelatory art without his actual voice. Instead, he illustrates other characters especially the old man to speak out his own perspective on digitalization. Perhaps, he noticed that it is difficult for someone to admit and realize their mistakes. Therefore, he did not choose to use a parental voice saying “computers are bad for you” directly to the readers but an adolescent’s voice as he is actually in your shoes sharing his experiences not mistakes. By doing this, the readers will not interact with the offensive voice directly like what most of the parents will do throughout the reading process. As trying to make the readers to realize something or to self criticize their own life, Tobin did a great job inviting the readers to fall into his trap deeply. He does not sound like he is blaming or insulting you, but using a teenager’s voice that shares the similar experience as the readers to make the others to realize or relate to. This is an excellent choice to make a revelatory art to set the readers to fall into a comfortable trap, and actually realize their mistakes. However, either the reader will make a difference in their life or not, it is another question. A revelatory art seems more like a mirror that reflects instead of a hammer that shapes it in this case.
The second moved that I like is that Tobin portrays the whole story as an allegory. By simplifying the complicated ideas and themes into a metaphor of something that is so simple to understand for most of the people, this book is even more resonant. Throughout the whole book, instead of describing the setting as home or a specific place, he called the moon and timed it as the future. He also called the digital representation devices the feed. All these terms that he continuously used in his piece of art has made his piece simple, but profound. It also created more space for the audience to imagine, to come up with personal experience to connect to the piece in anyway. Although this is a futuristic novel, the theme that it enhances is still relevant to our daily life now. This will draw the significance of this piece of art, because it expresses the theme that people from different time period could connect to. In this case, looking at Feed as an allegory perspective, it is consider the hammer because it shapes our thoughts and life in some way since he portrays the image of future. Knowing that no one can predict the future other than hypothesize based on current issues and data, Tobin demonstrates the problem in the book that is similar to people’s current life, then preview the image of future to convince the reader that’s the possibility that they will turn out to be - ignorant. Therefore, it shapes people’s thoughts in a way that is possible to lead them to see things differently. However, he never provide an solution to the problem that he is emphasizing, which I believe he did this on purpose for the audience to decide how they want to live their life.
Can a mirror be a hammer? My answer to this is no. I feel like one cannot be the other without either one. The mirror is suppose to reflect which provides the chance for the audience to see themselves in the art, then the hammer be able to shape it the way they wanted. I don’t think it is possible to shape someone before they actually see themselves as the art piece that they perceive. Additionally, whether the hammer is able to shape the world or not, it depends on how powerful that piece has affected the audience and how strong that piece brings out the theme behind it. Therefore, mirror could only be a mirror if the hammer exist, and vice versa. It could not be the other’s because they are responsible for different criteria as being a tool to draw the meaning of the piece.
To Bao Lin:
ReplyDeleteThis post is great! I was able to identify your tone and your thoughts were very interesting. Also, your post is very organized and clear. After reading this particular post I came to learn more about your perspective on the teenage interaction with electronic devices. Because you looked at this picture as a work of art you were able to analyze it in a different way. This is why out of your post 10-14 I have chosen this post to comment on.
by looking at M.T. Anderson's work as a work of art you identified it as dedicated to the teenagers in our current society to teach them an important lesson. Instead of portraying this lesson as the typical `this is wrong and you shouldn't do it` Anderson made his work in a way to relate to the young readers in a way to make them SEE the consequences as opposed to predicting the consequences. This also causes the reader to feel more comfortable and to connect his own life with the character's for practically living in the same world. However, regardless of how well this peace of art may reflect one's life it may not cause any difference. And this is because art shows not shapes.
Similarly to you I have considered this book as an artistic reflection of ourselves. This could be because I was aware that Anderson's work was mean to be an allegory to our current world. However, it was not difficult to find a connection between this world and the one described in the book mainly because of the speaker's voice. Being a teenager who s experiencing a very similar situation to mine makes it possible for me to understand his world and relate to it.
Your post also reminds me of last year Kinory's class. We dedicated many classes into analyzing art and making connections. One of the paintings we studied was the one with all men walking up the subway escalator probably going to work. They were all facing the same direction and wearing the same clothes. It was as if they did not have a mind of their own and just doing what everyone else was doing, which is similar to feed. The characters in the book are not able to think for themselves and live life according to what they are told is best. By living this way no one is breaking the rules and going to the opposite direction of the subway escalator.
In order to expand your knowledge on this topic I recommend you to connect your ideas to more deeper examples we experience everyday. Such as seeing our surroundings also as a work of art. Specially when we are surrounded by different electronic devices and media. If you are able to identify this book as art then you should also be able to identify your life as it as well for being an allegory. And seeing it this way, we as the "creators" of our lives we could change how this image looks like. In other words we could shape our own reality as oppose to only viewing it as any other visitor in the tragic museum of life.
Also, referring back to your work, although Anderson may have done this in order for the audience to decide how to live our lives I still think that our options are very limited. Yes we may indeed be able to shape our lives after learning how these look like, but I do not think we have the tools necessary to do so. In other words, analyzing this book or analyzing our lives might actually not be enough to make a difference, which is similar to your hammer and mirror idea. I agree with you that it may not even be possible for a mirror to be a hammer, so what do you think we could do in order to change this tragic image of our lives? Should we simply accept the way things are and not do anything about it because we are simply too limited? Or do you think is just an excuse to remain the way we live because we actually like it?
After reading your post I began to consider art differently, specially paintings. I have studied art in the past and I have always found it interesting and communicative, but I have never actually seen how meaningful it is to the creator. As a viewer, if I do not find any relatedness to the painting I do not care about it, but If somehow I find it related to my own life then I find it interesting and meaningful, as if it was telling me something important I was not aware so far. I had the same experience with feed. However, regardless of what the painting may look or communicate it is still something important for someone else. That painting is just one part of a bigger one and it should be appreciated for representing something. But I am aware, even more after reading your post that, art is simply a reflection of something else for me. I do not think that beauty will be able to change anything due to the fact that I considered most things around me as beautiful. I may actually not know the definition of beauty but I do know where it lies, and still is not enough.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I would like to truly thank you for writing this post. I really like knowing what you think and I find it very interesting every time. You make me think about things I did not consider before, and although this may take me no where I still appreciate it. Great work!