MPR – Response to Group Chat

[section_title title=On control, tools, and the role of the artist]

On tools, and the role of the artist

Sneja: ..we are unconsciencly very close to nature even if we use high tech and when we invent we still copy nature and animals, we use the tech as tools

Ben: if i was playing devils advocate – we’ve focussed a lot on the tech [in this conversation]

Jonathan Kearney: on tech and tools, Kiers is asking the question himself – ‘Where does the distinction between tool and art lie in this piece?’

Eduardo: i am thinking about [this] project more as a tool than art itself

Jonathan Kearney: ..does there have to be a either or decission about tech or nature, can there be a both? and is that what Kiers in exploring here? so [Justin’s] suggestion that the user may well be the paint is a good point.

One motivating idea from the very beginning of this project was to imagine nature in a non-exploitative way. I want to make a machine who’s purpose is to connect with Nature in a non-exploitative way – altho not in a pointless way.

My idea of this project as a tool is to bring purpose to the product of the machine – how can the garden artefact be used to improve the state of people. Either culturally in a gallery, educationally via a school, or emotionally through art therapy. These are areas that I don’t intend to touch upon until next year when the functional parts of the project are stable and developed.

FacebookEmailtumblrTwitterGoogle+

Leave a Reply