“We encode an idea into a piece that is then seen, her, or otherwise experienced by others. Unlike the traditional Communications model, which strips for perfect correlation between message and message out, artistic activists use their work to explode meaning. Think about what happens in a light prism. In a dispersive prism, singularity it's the end of a certain angle into a triangular chunk of glass. The white light is reflected by the angles of the glass and broken up into the spectral colors: creating a rainbow. Similarly, the artistic activist focuses their ideas and intentions into their work but what results from that piece is experienced by the people is not a singular distortion-free message, but rather, layers of meaning and ideas that can be interpreted and acted upon in a myriad of ways. we shine one light in but what comes out is a spectrum of aeffect– and this is something we can't entirely control for. artistic activists can control our input, and this must be strong and focused. if the light that hits a prism is weak and diffuse, nothing much happens: no vehicle rainbows. Similarly how my far intentions of artistic activists are people and if pieces are not carefully considered, then little will happen. This is why all the thinking and planning about affect and effect, tactics and campaigns, intent and measurements is so critical. not so we can predict and control exactly what happens, but so that we can make something ( and something beautiful) happen, and then, once we've determined what's happened, we focus our efforts.” (272)
I found the analogy of the prism to be a powerful one. Rather than aiming for a singular, clear message like in traditional communication models, they embrace the idea that their work will be refracted into a spectrum of meanings and interpretations when it reaches the audience. Oddly enough, I have had a recurring dream over the past few years that I would also describe using this analogy of the light and prism so this also stuck out to me, because in many ways these different interpretations are ultimately communications from different realities which is what artists also try to capture in their work as an attempt to merge these all existing in the same plane.
“Aesthetics and politics are intimately connected. The connections between the two range from the mundane to the profound and have all sorts of implications, but the one that concerns us here is simply that bad art makes bad activism. without the power to attract, move, and challenge audiences, artistic activism is useless. if it is an aesthetic failure, it will also fail to change people's parts and minds and those change the world. artistic activism that doesn't move us leaves us standing still.” (276)
Here the authors very tactfully warn the dangers of lack of quality in creating art, and if there is a lack of quality there can be nothing short of a lack of intention. Art needs an audience to keep it alive as much as it needs an artist to create it, and thus it must inspire or create a movement in people or risk not getting any point across at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment