Week 3 - Robotics and Art

Cutie C-3PO from Star Wars

In this week, I learned about the progression of robotics and art with time. Dr. Vesna mentioned that art often does not receive enough credit for the advancements in robotics when robots themselves were a product of artistic vision and reaction to the industrial revolution (Vesna 2018).

The time era that started the movement of bringing robotics into many lives is the industrial revolution and up to this date, there is the constant debate over uniqueness with mechanical production. As Walter Benjamin mentions in his book,

“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”(Benjamin 2005).

Through Walter’s artistic lens, he puts mechanical production in a negative light.

I’d like to comment that I do agree that the uniqueness of manufactured goods is put aside, but I think the compromise is a good one because it allows a greater population to have access to these good, which improves lifestyle and reduces the idea that only the upper class has access to art (Eikhof 2006). As we see in our modern world, many of the technology advances occur in our everyday products!

Automatic vacuum cleaner!

 We see this in Japan’s society, as Machiko Kusahara explained, prior to the industrial revolution, miniature mechanical dolls were only appreciated by royalty, but with the release to the greater population, the idea of modern machines was accepted quicker (Vesna & Kusahara 2018)

Although uniqueness is compromised, the process of making the mechanical infrastructure to mass produce is indeed art itself, and I like to believe it’s art for a greater good.

Douglas Davis discusses the issue of art in the age of digital reproduction, and the idea uniqueness is always in question. But in his text, deconstruction helps rearrange ‘primal elements’ of art which in its most basic form has a singular value, which overall allows many people to appreciate art for what it is (Davis 1995).

That belief strongly resonates with my value of equity in our society. Since individuals come from such diverse background, providing people with the tools and resources to access what others are important. But as Davis mentions, the primal elements may also act as a bridge to connecting ‘nonartists’ to art.

Sources:

Benjamin, Walter. “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” Walter Benjamin, Schocken/Random House, Feb. 2005, www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm.

Bullard, Theresa. “Industrial Revolution.” QLA Consulting, qlaconsulting.com/tag/industrial-revolution/.

Eikhof, Doris Ruth, and Axel Haunschild. "Lifestyle meets market: Bohemian entrepreneurs in creative industries." Creativity and innovation management 15.3 (2006): 234-241.

Ochs, Jessica. “How To Choose Best Robot Vacuum.” High Land Park City, highlandparkcity.us/2017/06/16/choose-best-robot-vacuum/.

Wold, Scott. “The 100 Greatest Movie Robots of All Time.” Pastemagazine.com, Paste Magazine, 2 Nov. 2015, www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2015/11/the-100-greatest-movie-robots-of-all-time.html?a=1.

Davis, Douglas. “The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction (An Evolving Thesis: 1991-1995).” Leonardo, vol. 28, no. 5, 1995, pp. 381–385., doi:10.2307/1576221.

Vesna, Victoria, and Machiko Kusahara. “Professor Machiko Kusahara on Japanese Robotics.” Robotics + Art. Desma 9, 17 Apr. 2018, Los Angeles, University of California, Los Angeles, www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQZ_sy-mdEU.

Vesna, Victoria. “Robotics Part 2.” Robotics + Art. Desma 9, 17 Apr. 2018, Los Angeles, University of California, Los Angeles, www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAZ8bo9T_Pk