Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Reading Two Discussion Questions

1. Are the claims made by several early film artists that mainstream television is only propaganda promoting status quo a theme that is still relevant today?

-I think so. In the reading we learned that in the 1970's and 80's many artists questioned television as a source of reliable information, touting it as a government controlled propaganda experiment. Because television was new to these generations it seemed to be hard for many people to accept. While today most people accept tv as a good source of information there are still other people such as myself who do believe that mainstream television is used as a tool for propaganda, in which companies who have more money are able to advertise and push their products more and therefore monopolize the consumer industry. With the ability to have their products endorsed by wealthy, beautiful actors and other celebrities, large companies are able to reach audiences on a social level, wherein people of a lower social class watching the advertisement, and desiring to be a part of a higher social class, feel the need to buy the products based on seeing the higher class using those products. I haven't had cable in seven years. I don't need anyone telling me what I need to buy. I'm smart enough to know that buying the same things celebrities have won't make me more like them. 

2. What are some strengths that video art has in promoting concepts that radio, live art, or gallery art (paintings, drawings, etc) lack?

- Video art has the ability to reach almost all senses at once. While radio only appeals to the ears and paintings only can be seen, video art's three dimensional quality makes the viewer feel that they are inside the art piece. It also greater impacts the viewer because of it's ability to be shown over and over again. You can listen to a radio show, but unless you take extensive notes or record, you can only carry away what you remember hearing. A video may be played over and over again,rewound, fast forwarded, and paused, while appealing to the senses of sound and vision, it is more interactive than radio and also painting. Probably the closest thing to video would be live art, but then again, you can only take away what you remember, unless you videotape it.    


1 comment: