Before reading the articles, I did not know much about electronic literature, let alone that it was a medium of literature that was gaining popularity. I found one particular point in the "Principles of New Media" article interesting—digital language art is a collaboration between human creation and computer interface. It is an idea that should seemingly be common sense, but that I personally did not think about before.
Prosthesis was particularly interesting when thinking about the idea of human/computer collaboration to create art. Ian Hatcher sampled his own voice for his work but implemented the samples in a way that sounded computerized and artificial but still somehow human, as though it were in were in between the two. I feel like this concept highlights digital language art being partly human and partly digital, and how it can manipulate language in ways that traditional art like creative writing and oration cannot. "Long Rong Song," too, utilized coding to manipulate human language in interesting ways, incorporating visuals of language to accompany the words being said. The very fact that The Listeners is an interactive experience that mimics conversation is even more divergent from what I would think of as traditional art.
I do wonder, however, when a work is labelled "digital language art" and when a work is labelled "electronic literature." Though I can understand how these digitized art forms are in fact considered art, I do not know if they are considered literature, at least within the community of digital language arts. My preconceived notions of literature lead me to understand it as an art form that unveils a narrative, and I do not personally see how narrative is incorporated in the aforementioned works.
This article from the New York Times that explores the rise of sound art mentions a similar question, but more toward distinguishing sound art and music.
Prosthesis was particularly interesting when thinking about the idea of human/computer collaboration to create art. Ian Hatcher sampled his own voice for his work but implemented the samples in a way that sounded computerized and artificial but still somehow human, as though it were in were in between the two. I feel like this concept highlights digital language art being partly human and partly digital, and how it can manipulate language in ways that traditional art like creative writing and oration cannot. "Long Rong Song," too, utilized coding to manipulate human language in interesting ways, incorporating visuals of language to accompany the words being said. The very fact that The Listeners is an interactive experience that mimics conversation is even more divergent from what I would think of as traditional art.
I do wonder, however, when a work is labelled "digital language art" and when a work is labelled "electronic literature." Though I can understand how these digitized art forms are in fact considered art, I do not know if they are considered literature, at least within the community of digital language arts. My preconceived notions of literature lead me to understand it as an art form that unveils a narrative, and I do not personally see how narrative is incorporated in the aforementioned works.
This article from the New York Times that explores the rise of sound art mentions a similar question, but more toward distinguishing sound art and music.
Comments
Post a Comment