The Future of Our Fears

Artificial intelligence, time travel, aliens and the apocalypse. Fear of what the future holds is inherent in this age of technology. Age of the Spiritual Machine is a book written by Ray Kurszweil, who has been called the "restless genius" according to the Wall Street Journal, and the "ultimate thinking machine" by Forbes. In this book, Kurszweil outlines a future utopia he foresaw - one in which humans gained near immortality by becoming one with robotic technology.

Our most powerful 21st-century technologies continue to grow at an incredible rate. We as a society may be seeing the items on the following list coming true in our time:

• ·     New senses, telepathy
• ·     Brain transplants
• ·     Matter reformation
• ·     Weather control
• ·     Contact lens displays
• ·     Alter space and time
• ·     Life on other planets
• ·     Alien contact
• ·     Synthetic/eternal life
• ·     Intelligent machines
• ·     Cryogenic sleep
• ·     Cloning: extinct animals, ourselves
• ·     Bionic implants for strength
• ·     Creation of new organisms
• ·     Genes from other species implanted in us

At first glance, some of these topics seem farcical, perhaps even laughable. Technology is progressing at a rate that the public may not even realize, and for scientists on the cutting edge of technology, these subjects which were once laughable, are now becoming topics under serious scientific and philosophical scrutiny.

Many crucial topics to consider when thinking about the future of technology involve ideas of dependence, and power. For example, who is dependent on who? And from there, who has the power? In his book, Kurzweil discusses a society in which humans have become so dependent upon machines, that turning the off switch becomes equated with suicide.

 Common fears associated with technological advances include:

• · Advancing at immoderate rates to think of consequences, “blind progress”
• · “playing God”
• · creation of excessively powerful weapons
• · disproving God
• · disappearance of the human race, replaced by "cyborgs", bionic/human hybrids
• · cloning dead people and extinct animals could have unforeseen consequences

These advances in technology, and the inevitable ethical and moral issues involved intrigue me, it's as if technologic advancement is the new frontier. No longer is the world concerned with discoveries of the earth, but today, we are concerned with discoveries of the mind. When encountering these predictions about the future, the mind creates pictures and ideas about how it would look like if these predictions ever transpired. 

Drawing from these mental images, and their associated fears, I wanted to portray the future, and illustrate the negative results that technology may bring. 

Digital painting is an emerging art form in which traditional painting techniques such as watercolor, oils, impasto, etc. are applied using digital tools by means of a computer, a digitizing tablet and stylus, and software.

A graphics tablet (or digitizer, digitizing tablet, graphics pad, drawing tablet) is a computer input device that allows one to hand-draw images and graphics, similar to the way one draws images with a pencil and paper.

Using Photoshop CS2 (and yes, I know I'm behind the times with adobe software), and a Wacom graphics tablet, I hope to portray a frightening world in which technology, not us, possesses the power.

Here are some digital paintings from various artists online who have also focused on a nightmarish, menacing future:

The Medusa Fields by spyroteknik

Future Face 5 by biz02

Rusty Future by eWKn

Here's a short video explaining technological advancement within the next 50 years, covering various topics:

Here's another video from a Microsoft commercial, illustrating their vision of the future:



Here is the final digital painting, encompassing cloning of the dead, the apocalypse, and cyborgs:

Please click for full view! :)

They Are Not Artists

In New Media from Borges to HTML, Lev Manovich maintains that due to the innovations of people like Ted Nelson and Douglas Englebart, they should be hailed as artists. Manovich comes to this conclusion by initially exclaiming that because technology actualizes the ideas behind projects by artists, the technology becomes art in and of itself. He continues to say that the web is art, that Final Cut Pro and Aftereffects is art, and finally, those who invented these technologies are consequently artists.


I beg to differ. These men, who I consider to be extremely relevant, intelligent and etc., are not artists. They are inventors, and they are visionaries. Are the minds behind such things as a chair, a screwdriver, the printing press, the car- are they artists? Certainly not. An artist is someone who practices a creative art. An inventor is someone who creates a process or device. The key point here being that we should not misconstrue Caravaggio with Ted Nelson.

Caravaggio, Artist

Ted Nelson, Inventor

The idea that we can not define what New Media is was also troubling to me. If we can't define what it is, (basically a lack of objectivity) then how can we even identify what New Media is when we see it, or explain it? What is the point of having a textbook? It's like taking a really bad philosophy class and getting graded (objectively I might add) and then at the end of the term, say that because we can't define it we can't know anything?

Furthermore, if we are to associate rhizomes with the idea of New Media, then perhaps we can build a definition of New Media from the foundation of what a rhizome is. In A Thousand Plateaus by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, a rhizome is comprised of 6 principles:

• 1 and 2: Principles of connection and heterogeneity: any point of a rhizome can be connected to anything other, and must be
• 3. Principle of multiplicity: only when the multiple is effectively treated as a substantive, "multiplicity" that it ceases to have any relation to the One
• 4. Principle of asignifying rupture: a rhizome may be broken, but it will start up again on one of its old lines, or on new lines
• 5 and 6: Principle of cartography and decalcomania: a rhizome is not amenable to any structural or generative model; it is a "map and not a tracing"

More simply put, Deleuze once said that a rhizome can be thought of as "an image of thought". 

If we were to take this definition, then is the internet and new media the result or "image" of collective thoughts? 


Considering the idea of a rhizome and interconnectivity, when combined with technology, I thought of the novella written by Ayn Rand entitled Anthem. This story is set in the future, with a society that is so collectivized that the word "I" has vanished from the language.  In the story, technological advancements are planned, if they're allowed at all. 


I feel as though the idea of rhizomes and technology are very relevant to the world that Rand created in her story. One of the main points she makes is the idea of vanishing individualism, and how it wreaks havoc among civilization. Does technology, by creating global integration, contribute to decreasing individualism?


Here's an excerpt from Anthem.

The Rise and Rise of Lady Gaga

LADY GAGA

Lady Gaga is a phenomenon in and of herself. Her manipulation of a variety of digital media and technology plays an integral role in her ability to have direct contact with her fans, transform her identity, and to control her image. 

The various types of media in her technologic arsenal include but are not limited to social medias, her armada of musical outlets, and the invasion of television. Within all of these factions, Lady Gaga debuts technological outfits and props into her persona, not only on the stage, but in her every day activities. These range from iPOD LCD glasses, mechanical dresses, involvement in Polaroid company as creative director, and more.


Social Media:

• facebook
• blog
• website
• myspace
• transmission gagavision

Music:

• itunes
• cd's
• albums
• ipod application
• video games
• range of Gaga earbuds

Television

• interviews
• award shows
• tours
• music videos
• appearances

Lady Gaga and LCD glasses

Gaga and her earbuds

One of the most apparent uses of technology that Lady Gaga has mastered has been her ability to reinvent herself with every new type of media she uses, as if each format contains an independent part of the Lady Gaga persona.

·     "By creating a new fictional storyworld to play in, Lady Gaga has yet another tool in her media arsenal and by making sure that each platform iteration of her music is a significantly different package than any other, the audience isn’t getting bored."  -The Social Robot

Powerpoint demonstration to illustrate her manipulation of various media.

This project was quite enjoyable to create, as finding "scholarly" or academic articles on Lady Gaga were far and few between and was a challenge. In fact, some of the most interesting information came from tabloid media outlets, which offered the chance to take that information and turn it into a topic of scholarly context. I found many useful websites that proposed theories on Gaga concerning a wide range of topics, from gender to sociology, to economics to technological debates, to psychology. 

Whether we like it or not, or agree with her tactics, the persona that Stefani Germanotta has created to be Lady Gaga continues to escalate on a global scale. And the woman behind this rocketing pop-vehicle continues to prove to be calculating, and is very aware of her use of technology.

The Medium is the Message

Marshall McLuhan was, amongst his many endeavors, a professor of English literature whose work is widely considered to be a foundation for the study of media theory. In fact, his achievements won him the honor of being titled the "patron saint" of Wired magazine. In his book The Medium is the Massage, McLuhan aims to "consider the psychic and social consequences of the designs or patterns that amplify or accelerate existing processes". In simpler terms, McLuhan believes that the medium in which a message is conveyed through directly affects and influences how the message is perceived.

Marshall McLuhan by Monsteroftheid

Furthermore, McLuhan states that "It is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action. The content or uses of such media are as diverse as they are ineffectual in shaping the form of human association." He goes on to state  that cubism seizes on instant total awareness,  and therefor encapsulates the idea that the medium is the message.

McLuhan continually assures the reader that the message was once about "content", saying that people used to ask what a painting was about, but that in this electric age we should focus more upon the medium than the message, or content. I agree with McLuhan in that the medium definitely has a strong effect on the message that is trying to be conveyed, but I don't agree that the medium should take preeminence to the content. Perhaps being an artist who follows a more traditionalist view of painting has quite an effect on my opinion, but personally, I wouldn't be "doing" art if all I was focused upon was the medium in which I wanted to convey my ideas. I wouldn't want to cast away my ideas for the purposes McLuhan was trying to have us be attentive to, if he indeed wanted people to solely focus upon mediums instead of content. In fact, I would throw away my painters brush if I thought viewers of my art were only interested in seeing it due to the fact that its on a canvas and that I used oil paints, rather than the content of the painting.

I understood McLuhan's points about the fact that the medium affects the message, but I reject his idea that this concept is what we should be focusing on. It seemed as though he wants people to focus more on media theories and derivations and mediums rather than focusing upon the actual substances of subject matter. I don't think that we as a society would achieve anything if we focused upon the fact that a painting is on a canvas rather than what is actually portrayed IN the painting. And so while I understand McLuhan's assertions that mediums do have an inherent influence upon messages, I don't believe that they should require more attention than what is actually being conveyed by the message.

On a side note, I found this video of McLuhan discussing his term "the global village" highly relevant to what the world is experiencing today, with resources and online communities like Twitter and Facebook.



Furthermore, I thought it would be interesting to illustrate McLuhan's idea that the medium is the message by showing various "renditions" of the Mona Lisa, and seeing if the viewer really finds the medium more influential than the actual picture... so here goes the "experiement":

The Mona Lisa in chocolate

Mona Lisa jigsaw puzzle

Mona Lisa as toast

Mona Lisa as styrofoam bust

The true Mona Lisa, oil on poplar panel

Is the medium the message?

Evolution of Technology & Society

After reading The Technology & The Society by Raymond Williams, I wanted to create videos that involved the past, present and future of technology.  And incidently, each of my pieces seems to give different impressions on my opinion of technology, and as to whether I view it in a positive or negative light. The first to explain what technology is and how we use it today, then the evolution of technology, and finally where technology has brought us. These videos can be viewed directly from my Youtube channel here.

The first video is entitled Technology. I define technology as the creation or evolution of an object or process that brings about an easier or more efficient result. With this video, I aimed at highlighting the various ways technology has made our lives easier or more efficient. Additionally, I wanted to juxtapose the fact that while some places around the globe are becoming more and more technologically advanced, others continue to live their lives with technology that has become our past.



In the second video, entitled The Evolution of Technology I wanted to create a strong narrative and message without using dialogue. The video begins with peaceful music and footage depicting the beginnings of technology. Next, complicated machinery and artifacts from the industrial revolution came to become the newest technology. Then, I wanted to portray a sort of dark side of technology, and what our world could become. Personally, I believe that a sort of mindless technologic revolution could occur, one in which progress is made for the sake of pushing boundaries heedlessly and without thought. A world in which all we do is create without thought for consequences. I wanted to show this with one of the creepiest ideas I believe has come out of this technologic age, and that is the idea of robots or androids. My father was a robotic technician when I was a child, and he was always bringing home state of the art robots to show us. Back then it was exciting because these robots had purposes, such as cleaning the house or creating other machines. But when I see videos of androids whose only purpose is to be as human as possible, it makes me question the idea of aimless technology.



In my third video, The Evolution of Society I wanted to make a social critique of a negative side of technology. This footage is one minute long with no video or auditory edits, and shows an exhausted, out of shape man surrounded by technology. If one was ever to use the phrase "waste of space" this video would be the poster child.

I have some trepidation that in the near future people will become socially inept due to their increasing time spent with solitary technology. Not only will they become socially inept, but they will become physically ill due to stimulation without processing the technologic stimuli they are surrounded by, because they have no interaction with the people around them.



The influence of technology to the human mind:

Killed by Technology

On a lighter yet similar vein of thought, I have always loved this clip of Homer Simpson evolving through eons into a man, in order to sit on his couch and watch television:

Remix by Lawrence Lessig

The disjuncture between copyright laws and technology are explored in the book entitled Remix by Lawrence Lessig, and aims to repeal current copyright laws as he claims they are antiquated, or out of date.The major points brought up in this article involve the idea that nothing is new, and remixing old ideas is supposed to create something new, the various democratic differences to types of expression, and accepting the critics.

Lawrence Lessig

I loved Lessig's statement that "any qualified Hollywood lawyer would tell you there's a fundamental difference between quoting Hemingway and quoting Sam Wood's version of Hemingway." I had always wondered about what this fundamental difference was in my ascendence through the world of academia. I never needed to cite well known Shakespearean quotes, but needed to cite The Da Vinci Code.


Indeed, I thought Lessig raised some very concise and logical arguments for why copyright laws are basically in the medieval ages. The stories about Disney complaining about Mickey mouse painted on a wall at a kindergarten where absolutely repellent, and was a great extreme example of how out of touch current laws are.

Evil Mickey

Other arguments were made about the quality of democratized writing, such as blogs having the ability to be more accurate and weighty as The New York Times. Additionally, referring to the internet as an ecosystem was a very interesting way of defining the blogosphere, more in terms of its impact upon the producer of the content than the viewers. I had never put much thought into this idea, but realized that if my diary had the potential to be read and commentated upon by millions of readers, it's contents would change drastically. Lessig's reference to internet trolls was highly amusing, mostly because they reminded me of this video: Internet Bridge Troll


However, I found it admirable that he doesn't filter comments or delete them, all for the sake of growing as a writer and thinker. I think Lessig hit the nail on the head when he said to reward critics. In science, the only way to become right is to try and prove yourself wrong, which can also be called being contrastive. In this respect, if a someone has a thought or theory, and continually tries and proves it wrong and can't, then it can be said that with all the knowledge that they have, they are currently right in their beliefs.

Overall, Lessig gave a compelling argument for why we should include media into the ways in which we remix the rest of the areas of our lives, such as writing, conversations and thoughts. It  should be as he calls it, creativity supported by a new technology.