Reading Response: "The Vitality of Digital Creation" by Timothy Binkley

While I appreciate Binkley's reference to 'paint by number' as a 'derisive appellation' (p. 45), I wonder if this precludes it being used in a kitschy or ironic way. If it is used that way, does that prevent it from being art?

Binkley writes that "the look of computer art has evolved from austere to luscious and it is creating new roles for art as it also supplants some of the techniques employed in traditional art making" (p. 45). I'd argue that this type of evolution is always happening and has happened when any new technique or technology is used in art making. Perhaps sometimes it is in fits and starts, but it's always happening. Binkley's primary point is that digital art is different, in that it is encoded (differently) and can be manipulated in different ways. However, although photography and film are analog, they have many of the same characteristics, i.e. mass production and manipulation possibilities.

I really appreciate the interdisciplinary potential that Binkley focuses on in the piece. He writes that "The general holistic thrust of digital representation encompasses the barriers between art and science, which weaken as our art gets imbued with numbers and our science gets advanced by art" (p. 53). I find this incredibly encouraging, especially as someone who has a computer science background, but who wants to more deeply explore some of the issues facing our society and personal challenges like meaning, identity and purpose, all through an interdisciplinary arts approach. In my view, this means using a robust research process and data analysis but also digital art, traditional art, and lots of creative thinking.

When Binkley writes that "our sense of reality is determined in large measure by the scope of our representations" (p. 53), this takes me back again, to the best of my recollection, to John Berger's "Ways of Seeing," in which he talks about how technology influences how we think and see the world. It makes me wonder about comparisons of our 'reality' (tied strongly to representations) with those in animistic and tribal societies. 

Favorite quote: "We are constructing silicon bridges across time-honored mental abysses." This is an observation about how "digital technology challenges dualism" and how it takes advantages of "a cross-pollination of science and art" (p. 46).

Overall, I found this a bit of a difficult read. I'm sure it would be clearer with multiple readings and a dictionary close at hand.