Reproducible Art

4 09 2007

Art should be able to be felt, seen, and experience by people and in today’s time, it can be digitally done. This era allows for art to be easily and endlessly reproducible through technology. A main source that allows this is the internet. People can upload and share between millions of people. As art and its idea spreads through technology, it does not necessarily mean the original piece or the idea of it is diminished. If anything, the more that art is shared and people can experience it, the value and meaning of it goes up.

Should there not be any reproducible, people would have to travel all over to see paintings, sculptures, or listen to music. The fact that copies of art is made is saying that it is in demand and people wants to experience it. People can share and experience of art in the comfort of their own homes. Some people who are not as privileged and can’t travel to see the original piece can experience it as well. Art is one of a kind, but reproducible allow this to be shared without tampering with the original piece. Paintings have become fragile over time and with many people observing the pieces , things can happen. For example, the Mona Lisa, which is exhibited at the Louvre. A person has actually attacked it and damaged it. Reproducibles allow the arts to be enjoyed without the threat of something happening to it because the original is safe and sound. As time pass on, some of the art will or have disappeared. Architecture around the world is falling apart. As time and pollution attacks the sculptures and buildings, eventually nothing will be left. Digital reproducibles allow for the images to be shared and people can see what beauty these architecture once was.

With music it is unimaginable to think of how music would be heard if it wasn’t for technology. Technology allows more access to music through the computer, mp3 players, and compact discs. People are able to enjoy it without having to go to concerts, or waiting for it to come on the radio. This allows people to appreciate the art more as they can enjoy the music easily.

Reproducibles would not diminish the value of art, instead it allows for a greater amount of people to experience and share something. Just because there are copies out there, does not mean the original it worth anything less. A difference between the two is its authenticity. People can still enjoy and appreciate art even though it is not the original.

Sandy Phetsaenngam




2 responses

4 09 2007

Music, except for vocal music, requires technology (musical instruments are tech).

But as for copying technology: before MP3s there were CDs; before CDs, records and tapes; before records and tapes, player pianos; before player pianos, sheet music. And before sheet music, well, you had to be there.

And this copying has always been controversial: around 1900, sheet music publishers tried to get Congress to outlaw player pianos.

–dr t

5 09 2007

This is very confusing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: