![]() Effortless, continuous focus and action characterize flow. ![]() Every action, movement, and thought follows inevitably from the previous one." Maybe it's easy to see how a pro football team can get into a state of flow and win the Super Bowl, but Csikszentmihalyi (chick-zent-me-hi-ee) developed the concept while watching students at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago similarly lose themselves in the creative process. Flow, he said in an interview in Wired magazine, is "Being completely involved in an activity for its own sake. The concept was most clearly described by Romanian-born American psychologist Milhaly Csikszentmihalyi. The activity is not difficult enough to provoke anxiety nor is it so easy that boredom sets in. The Cowboys got into a flow.Īt its most basic level, flow is what you feel when you are involved in an activity that is sufficiently engaging and goal-oriented that you forget yourself for awhile. The Dallas Cowboys did not exactly upstage Michael Jackson's halftime show that year, but in a post-game interview explaining the team's victory, winning coach Jimmy Johnson did introduce a concept to the world that had previously lived in psychological circles: Flow. Our first leap backward is to the 1993 Super Bowl game. Executive summary: even a Luddite can enjoy the New Ludics on view here. In contrast, a Luddite is a follower of the early 19th-century labor activist Ned Lud, who led rioting workers to destroy the cutting-edge, water-powered machinery that threatened their jobs as weavers. Ludics comes from the Latin ludere, to play. Note at the outset that ludics is not the same as Luddites it is rather the opposite. Discussing one work by each of the eleven creators in this show, I am going to make the case by examining them against three definitions of play, as we take three increasingly large leaps backward into history. All across this exhibition, these works engage in a certain kind of play that unites the viewer with the work in ways that I am calling the New Ludics. ![]() The second and more important way out is through the contents of the actual pieces. One way is through easy accessibility for display once you acquire these works that are created for the iPad, you can just carry them around with you. Well, this exhibition brings good news: It shows a twofold pathway out of digital art's marginal status. Now we usually express disinterest in more Seinfeld-schooled ways, such as the qualified "not that there's anything wrong with that." And digital art is still regarded as a separate category, rather like photography was in its earlier days, meaning that it has its own devoted galleries, museum departments, exhibitions, historians, etc. Maybe scorn is too strong a word how about "relegate," which means almost the same thing in this world. After the PC desktop revolution (the 1980s), artists still had to learn certain kinds of geeky "non-artistic" technical skills. In the early days (the 1960s) digital artists had to ingratiate themselves with the research labs of large corporations that were among the few owners of the bulky and expensive equipment. The art world has a history of scorning digital art, often because it has been seen as a product of a pact with the devil. The New Ludics in Today's Digital Art by Patrick Frank
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |