Well I will be showing my age.
I had never heard of WIKIPEDIA unil my first day of uni. I was in my very first Youth and Society lecture what we were told to "remember that wikipidia as not something you can reference." Great I think something we can't do but I have no idea what it is. So what do I do? I google it.
I am looking up Social Darwinism and Credentialism so I can kill 2 birds with one stone and work on my Youth in Society Essays.
Social Darwinism
* Is this an accurate article? Yes it looks to be accurate and the references lead to journals found in the Griffith data base. A good start for ideas and references.
* Does it cover all the basic facts that you'd need to understand this topic? This is a subject I have looked at for a assignment and has a good cover of the general topic.
* Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines for useful articles? Yes
* Is this article fair and balanced, or is it biased towards a particular side or argument? Yes
Credentialism
* Is this an accurate article? Yes to a specific area of the subject.
* Does it cover all the basic facts that you'd need to understand this topic? Definitely not.
* Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines for useful articles? No
* Is this article fair and balanced, or is it biased towards a particular side or argument? No
From looking a these topics and searching other topics I understand why using Wikipedia as a brain storming tool and not a reference in a good idea.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Monday, April 7, 2008
Art in our modern world.
Some question to ask your self?
How do the ideas from Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" apply to contemporary digital media? Do digital "things" have an "aura" (in Benjamin's terms)?
How does technology effect the "aura" of art? This is an interesting question when you look at the parameters of art itself. I can see what is meant by "the aura" of piece of art whether it is a painting or a film. And granted a digital picture may not present this "aura" to some people but art is an individuals perception. The artist would like to convey a feeling or message with their work but they can't control how it will effect the appreciators of the piece. Beauty is still in the eye of the beholder. I wonder what he would have written if he had been born in one of the next few generation after experiencing concerts with light shows or that snap shot of a new born babies little feet.
There was a time when "Art" was made by artists who were skilled professionals. Now that anyone with a computer can create things digitally (music, images, videos, etc), what does that mean for "art"?
I think we will always have great artist but the definition of are grows with the emergence of new technologies. Creating art has become more available to the masses. The ability to create art for your own pleasure is something that this age of technology has created as well.
Is a photoshopped image "authentic"?
What is authentic? How may for the painting hanging on walls around the world are authentic?
How do the ideas from Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" apply to contemporary digital media? Do digital "things" have an "aura" (in Benjamin's terms)?
How does technology effect the "aura" of art? This is an interesting question when you look at the parameters of art itself. I can see what is meant by "the aura" of piece of art whether it is a painting or a film. And granted a digital picture may not present this "aura" to some people but art is an individuals perception. The artist would like to convey a feeling or message with their work but they can't control how it will effect the appreciators of the piece. Beauty is still in the eye of the beholder. I wonder what he would have written if he had been born in one of the next few generation after experiencing concerts with light shows or that snap shot of a new born babies little feet.
There was a time when "Art" was made by artists who were skilled professionals. Now that anyone with a computer can create things digitally (music, images, videos, etc), what does that mean for "art"?
I think we will always have great artist but the definition of are grows with the emergence of new technologies. Creating art has become more available to the masses. The ability to create art for your own pleasure is something that this age of technology has created as well.
Is a photoshopped image "authentic"?
What is authentic? How may for the painting hanging on walls around the world are authentic?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)