Sunday, April 17, 2016

Week 3: Robotics + Art

In today's lecture, professor Vesna talked about robotics and art. It all started at 1439 when Johannes Gutenberg introduced printing press to the west and dramatically speeded up the transfer of knowledge. Many years later Industrial Revolution brought industrialization to the world. Indicating those who worked in the factory, the word "robot" first appeared in Rossum's Universal Robots, a science fiction theater play in 1920.

                                     



I believe many people like me were surprised that "robot" was first defined by a theater playwriter but not a scientist, let alone robotics was not only born from art but also brought to the world by it. Thousands of films and books try to depict the world where humans and robots live together, inspiring many robotics scientists. For example, a 1989 movie called The Terminator depicted a future that robots overruled people, which is still a common concern to robotics today as robots develop closer to those in the film. This movie was a huge success and greatly promoted the influence of robotics.

Despite the concern of powerful robots ruling over the earth, a more realistic concern was mentioned by Walter Benjamin. In his essay The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction, Benjamin wrote, "Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be." He pointed out that those reproductions of art by robots in the factory or machines did not possess the uniqueness and originality. Indeed, the replicas of the art can never have the aura that the original has. But does this really has a negative influence on art?


As we can see today, those nearly perfect replicas such as posters, postcards and photographs actually increase people's awareness of the original art which in the old times were always found out their beauty after the death of the artists. Moreover, in my point of view, industrialization and mechanization are not diminishing people's creativity but enhance it. It frees people from doing repeated work and enables them to focus more on the creation of new technology or art.
Robotics was born from art, new art was born form robotics and the cycle continues. They are bettering and depend on each other. They are inseparable.


Sources:

TheRecluseeee. "[The End of Mankind Tale] Rossum's Universal Robots (R.U.R.), SF Audiobook by Karel Čapek." YouTube. YouTube, 2014. Web. 17 Apr. 2016. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeOSlC_yvk0>.

 "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." Walter Benjamin. Web. 17 Apr. 2016. <http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm>. 

 Transfofa. "The Terminator Movie Trailer." YouTube. YouTube, 2006. Web. 17 Apr. 2016. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4Jo8QoOTQ4>. 

Vesna,Victoria. “Lectures Part 1.” Robotics + Art. 17 Apr. 2016. Lecture.

Vesna,Victoria. “Lectures Part 2.” Robotics + Art. 17 Apr. 2016. Lecture.

 "RUR Title Page." RUR Title Page. Web. 17 Apr. 2016. <http://www.umich.edu/~engb415/literature/pontee/RUR/RURsmry.html>. 

 "MONA LISA IS MISSING: A BOOM IN MONA LISA POSTCARDS." MONA LISA IS MISSING: A BOOM IN MONA LISA POSTCARDS. Web. 17 Apr. 2016. <http://monalisadocumentary.blogspot.com/2010/09/boom-in-mona-lisa-postcards.html>. 



2 comments:

  1. I, too, was shocked that the word "robot" was coined by a theatre director, since they are typically associated with science, not the arts. You mentioned Walter Benjamin's idea that copies of artworks don't hold the same "aura" as the original, and I agree with your opinion that these copies generate awareness of the original. However, as an artist (I love painting), I feel that the original truly does hold something magical about it that is impossible for machines to replicate. However, it is probably more obvious when it comes to paintings--details are more intricate, the wear-and-tear gives it character. This is part of the reason why original masterpieces are so sought after and expensive. There's something about just KNOWING that it's the original that makes it a total gamechanger. Copies seem to cheapen the image, but the aura of the original can't be touched.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with you that industrialization has increased people's awareness for uniqueness. Even though there is mass production of products with paintings like the Mona Lisa on it, I don't think it makes the painting any less unique. It is true that the replicas or reprints are nothing like the painting but I feel like it would make people appreciate the real painting more and maybe even interest them so much that they would like to go see the real thing.

    ReplyDelete