[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [microsound] organic computers



> > > However, it's arguable that these are
> > > contributors to environmental problems.
> >
> > so the computer you typed this email on was constructed from
> all recycled,
> > organic, non-toxic materials?
>
> But the CD is a disposable item compared to computers
> and largely uneeded at this point to transfer sound
> so at least you could argue for less CDs and more use a generic
> computer device?
> just a thought
> hopefully we needn't always use autos

Alright, I definitely have to weigh in here.  Computers, IMHO, are certainly
considered disposable.  They become obselete with insane regularity, as
anyone can attest to all the 1996 and earlier computers piled up in thrift
stores across the nation.  But I don't think that is  too much different
from the rest of consumer technology.  In fact, it's rather a disturbing
matter that concerns me.

I think this is also the point you were trying to make with CDs, and it is
what I like about digital media *in concept* but not in practice.  The idea
that works have an immaterial nature, that they can be copied ad infinitum
offers some quite liberating options.  Text, music, images and video/film
all become unhinged from their materials and can theoretically be accessible
by all.  In practice, digital media requires a medium in which to tranfer
and store the immaterial materials, and those mediums are now in continuous
flux.  There was a relatively slow change over from vinyl to cassette to CD,
but consider how quickly your diskettes/zip disks/20MB hard drives are
becoming obsolete for the next newest thing.

It is strategically to the advantage of the record labels (and quite
disturbing to me) that the best thing to do is make CDs and mp3s obsolete.
An earlier poster said that mp3s are the free stereo format of the future,
that SuperCD or DVD audio should be pushed as the new, quality consumer
format.  Of course, there is always a risk that new formats will not be
accepted, but I think that if the labels suddently decided to release music
on DVDs and limit CD releases and availability, you could see a phase-out in
a very short time.  I don't necessarily think that it would be the end of
file sharing, but it would certainly make the format less desirable than is
currently is.  Most of the compressed formats offer reasonably close quality
to CDs for the general consumer, and accessibility is far greater,
especially if you're on the road or always at your PC (like many are at
work).  But to offer a format that is more difficult to copy, greater
quality, and likely results in far larger files than the typical mp3/wma/ogg
file, would be quite a kick in the teeth to file sharing.  The way I see it,
however, the industry is ham-handed.  They need to offer these highly
compressed video and audio formats to respond to a demand that they created;
a demand for immediate and personalized media marketing and targeted to
individuals.  Quite a dilemna for the film and music industries.

They can continue to offer the aura-laden, high-quality medium, but the real
money is to be made with the cheaper, more accessible media.  So digital
media offers us the promise of Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of
Mechanical Reproduction".  Paraphrasing Benjamin, that there are is no
longer such a thing as the "aura" of the original--all copies are identical
and therefore the original is indistiguishable from the rest.  So it seems
one of the catch-22s of the democratic/capitalist combination is that in
order to make the most money (hording), you cannot sustain production of the
high-quality "aura" product.  And it is cheap production and mass access
that makes it the big money maker for the labels (and, indeed, any
mass-produced product), but it is also those qualities that make it
difficult to hold on to a digital medium.  So technological obsolescence
must be built in to the system in order to move on to the next "stage" of
production.

What I had (and still have) hopes for in digital media is very close to what
Benjamin observes; that accessibility through copying allows everyone (okay,
not *everyone*) equal access to information.  As a visual artist I have
found the gallery/museum space has an elitist aspect to it that does not
invite people to learn and grow and explore, all the things that I believe
the best artists have to offer us.  Digital media and the internet *can* be
a huge, expansive library of the ideas and experiments of humankind.  It
allows us to not only observe art works in a presentation format, but to
take those very same works home with us at low or no cost and enjoy them
again at home.  There is something more to ownership than just owning and
coveting.  Having a personal library is a very personal thing, a record of a
train of thoughts and experiences that can, in some ways, reflect on the
very personal you.  Objects have functions other than monetary value, and
object fetish is one manifestation.  Objects contain dreams and memories,
turning points and happenings.  Another poster said it best by discussing
his experiences with purchasing records.  So there is some import in the
token, and when the token is also *the* thing, there is a kind of
equilibrium established.  In many ways, the dreams of a digital revolution
are dashed because of obsolescence practices and increased attention paid to
intellectual property rights.  I don't really understand how a free exchange
of ideas can happen under those terms; they appear to be in contradiction
with one another.

*Phew*.  I really should becomse a practicing buddhist.  Want not, want
not...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     Christopher Sorg
   Multimedia Artist/Instructor
 The School of the Art Institute of Chicago
   http://www.csorg.org
     csorg@xxxxxxxxx
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release