I still feel silly calling Facebook by its new name, but Meta mostly ends up in the news for bad reasons these days, the same way it did before rebranding last year. Meta’s recent notoriety has mostly involved the company’s promotion of its metaverse vision: cartoonish trailers and demos along with awkward announcements like
Despite Steyerl's defense, I think there is still a case to be made for the pursuit of aesthetic excellence even in digital spaces; art is what is left over after all the utilitarian concerns are addressed, and there is something in the human psyche that craves beauty. To reduce the digital side of things to mere information flow is to concede to the rampant utilitarianism that pervades our current society; such a situation might be able to provide us with all the necessary data points but there will be something missing, the human element which speaks to our soul. Instagram might at first be seeming to stand against this "mere utility" ethos, but the company's aesthetic is merely pursuing utilitarianism from a different angle. I'm sure the crazy patterns evident on the clothing of the models in an Ingres or Klimt portrait would fail to serve the uses that Instagram requires. Oddly coincidental, that Instagram and the Metaverse are operated by the same company!
But the "hardware" we used to use included magazines, movie theaters and museums where collection and curation usually gave us the best of images and objects.
The quality vs mobility, flatness vs aesthetic concepts bring me to a thought I had the other day that of all the fine arts, sculpture may find itself to be the most AI resistent. Not completely: 3D models + printing = avenue for AI workflow... But the low sample number of available 3D renders of statues, the cost of fabricating in a material other than concrete or plastic, and adjustments required to keep the thing from falling down or apart etc etc means the very act of fabrication in meatworld terms of an art object pulls it away from its cyber world origin. Away from AI and back into fine art.
Despite Steyerl's defense, I think there is still a case to be made for the pursuit of aesthetic excellence even in digital spaces; art is what is left over after all the utilitarian concerns are addressed, and there is something in the human psyche that craves beauty. To reduce the digital side of things to mere information flow is to concede to the rampant utilitarianism that pervades our current society; such a situation might be able to provide us with all the necessary data points but there will be something missing, the human element which speaks to our soul. Instagram might at first be seeming to stand against this "mere utility" ethos, but the company's aesthetic is merely pursuing utilitarianism from a different angle. I'm sure the crazy patterns evident on the clothing of the models in an Ingres or Klimt portrait would fail to serve the uses that Instagram requires. Oddly coincidental, that Instagram and the Metaverse are operated by the same company!
What is needed are more "un-grammable hang zones," as described in this Blackbird Spyplane report. https://www.blackbirdspyplane.com/p/un-grammable-hang-zone-manifesto
But the "hardware" we used to use included magazines, movie theaters and museums where collection and curation usually gave us the best of images and objects.
More of the medium being the message, I guess.
The quality vs mobility, flatness vs aesthetic concepts bring me to a thought I had the other day that of all the fine arts, sculpture may find itself to be the most AI resistent. Not completely: 3D models + printing = avenue for AI workflow... But the low sample number of available 3D renders of statues, the cost of fabricating in a material other than concrete or plastic, and adjustments required to keep the thing from falling down or apart etc etc means the very act of fabrication in meatworld terms of an art object pulls it away from its cyber world origin. Away from AI and back into fine art.