750 Word Blog Entry (Fiberoptics or Dial-up)

*WHO WE ARE SHAPES WHAT WE CREATE: In chapter 1 of Heller’s book, Dutch Social Anthropologist Dr. Geerte Hofstede speaks of human being’s mental inner-workings as being similar to computer software. Each individual person thinks slightly (or completely) different than the next, and this includes producing art slightly differently too (as part of “who we are” as individuals). What we create (in art, digital art, and elsewhere) is a lot of times a direct reflection of what’s inside us. Basically, I interpreted what the Dr. was saying as; there are a lot of parallels between the processes of human thought, and the processes of a computer program, mainly because humans created the software… however, there are other, less literal ways to look at it; drawing from a 3rd source; the article “Software ≠ Interactive” by Jason Aristofanis Tselentis, some people, as part of who they are, seem to be instructor dependent, and are set in their stubborn way of doing things. Others seem to be very self-reliant, open to suggestions and independent. If you’re set in your ways (as part of WHO you are), I think you could really be losing a lot of potential for variation, but on the other hand; if you have a very strong work ethic and positive attitude (as part of WHO you are) you could be open to endless life-changing opportunities. The concept of the “caliber of software” you’re mentally running seems to have a direct effect on whether you’re an independent or dependent person. Is it possible that some people could have more “advanced mental software” than others? Could certain people still be running Photoshop 7, while others have mentally installed the CS3 Suite? Are certain people still running “mental dial-up,” while others are running “mental fiber optics?” Could certain people be AS PREDICTABLE as certain software programs themselves, in some cases? Maybe some people’s “mental servers” are NOT EVEN CAPABLE of installing/running the “newer/smarter programs… and have no capacity for a “mental upgrade” due to any number of life’s obstacles? Are certain people stuck with slow software because of elements controlled by heredity (in other words; the base software they were born with), while others will effortlessly glide on to a successful career at the top of their class? And how much of these successful people were not blessed with really advanced software in the 1st place, but made large advancements by practicing, networking, and having an over-the-top amount of effort? Design is a very competitive field, so it pretty much comes down to: who can create the most appealing/appropriate designs consistently, using the most cutting edge software (or else mastering and figuring out new things to do with existing software). The designers who are able to create an artist identity for themselves will prevail as the professionals. Designers with well-known identities seem to really have a solid grasp on WHO THEY ARE, because their effort and love for what they do can be seen crystal clear in WHAT THEY MAKE. WHO WE ARE shapes: what we make, how we go about making it, and who we are directly effects the final product, after the raw data of design has been filtered through each person’s unique “mental software setup.”

*HOW YOU MAKE SOMETHING DETERMINES WHAT YOU MAKE: Our mental software leaves it’s mark on our design just like computer software does (Heller). It’s not only important to understand what something looks like, but also to understand the process that led to it’s creation. After a close inspection of an individual’s work, is it possible to retrace the artist’s steps to see how they came to certain conclusions? Such as; why they chose certain design elements, typefaces, certain paper, techniques, presentation, etc., and how this relates to the fact that people’s brains work in their own unique way. Even if that artist has recently tried to steer away from their old habits, some of this energy will undoubtedly still shine through in the final piece. How you make something determines the end quality. A fundamental knowledgebase of design, culture, and a vernacular of different eras or time periods can be extremely useful (if the technique used to make the piece is really advanced, then the piece is more likely to be superior). The manner in which the design is made (in a patient, thoughtful manner, or a rushed, anxious manner) is also important. HOW WELL YOU MAKE something (the effort, resources, skill, and dedication you put forth), as well HOW YOU MAKE something (physically, interactively) has a direct effect in the piece’s quality, consistency, uniqueness, as well as overall success.

~ by danmarcson on February 6, 2008.