Media, Technology and Society Essay

This essay will consist of two articles: McLuhan, M Understanding the Media: The Extensions of Man, pages 82-91 and Williams, R The Technology and the Society, pages 92-104. it will include contrasts and comparisons.

The technology and society article is about how technology had actually come about and how people believe it has come about. It talks a lot about how technology has made an impact in our world. During the article the writer presents that technology is "a technological accident, but it's significance lies in it's uses"  which portrays that technology has different uses to different sections of society for example a TV will be associated with and used for fun by the mass population, but a TV is seen as a little more then a billboard to corporations trying to sell their products.  However in Understanding Media: The Extension of Man is more about the message with in technology. It talks a lot about how a piece of technology can show a message to it's audience and each message can be different depending on what piece of medium (technology) it is. For example certain media outlets in America are notorious in supporting political parties and pushing their agendas to the audience.

Both articles present that technology can change our view on how we see things. Williams states "television has altered our world" which is showing the television has changed how we see life now a days compared to when there was no television. It has in a sense as before we would go to the theatre whereas as now you can stay at home and be entertained. As well as McLuhan says "Technology is the change of scale or pace or pattern that it introduces into human affairs" which presents a similar meaning to the Williams quote which is that technology has impacted how we see things and has changed our views on certain things. For example when the first movie was shown people were scared and they thought it was magic, whereas further on in technology when the first touch screen phone was created people were excited and understood more how technology works.

McLuhan say "It could be argued that these activities are in some way the "content" of the electric light, since they could not exist without the electric light" Which is meaning that certain activities could not exist without technology so nothing can replace electronics. This could mean that the electric light has opened a lot of doors technologically so the electric light has lead to many other inventions. However Williams says "If television had not been invented, this argument runs, we would still be mindlessly entertained." So Williams is trying to say that technology can be replaced by other things, which could be true as if the television wasn't invented we would still be going to theatre or puppet show for example.

Both articles are specific on what type of technology they use in their arguments e.g "the electric light" and "televisions". This could be because these best illustrate and justify their opinions, in some peoples opinions. It also makes their points more understandable to the audience.

To the audience Williams article seems more convincing as the write has broadened his opinions more with using various quotes/ sayings. It is also more convincing as he has explained his points much more so that the audience can understand where he is coming from. Whereas McLuhan's article is harder to understand his point that he is trying to get across due to him using the same example over and over again perhaps if he had use different quotes we may have understood him more and he may have been more convincing.

Quote collected from McLuhan, M Understanding the Media: Extensions of Man pages 82-91 and Williams, R The Technology and The Society, pages 92-104 on the 3rd of August 2013.

Blais, J and Ippolito, J At the Edge of Art Essay

This essay is a concise summary of Blais. J and Ippolito, J, At the Edge of Art, pages 7-13.

The first section portrays that pieces of art are being produced but the makers are not artists but entrepreneurs. "Though they may call themselves scientists, activists, or entrepreneurs rather than poets or artists, many of these visionaries are playing the roles of Dante or Da Vinci". This shows that although they are producing art,they do not like to be labelled an "artist".This could be to enable them to be taken more seriously and to distant themselves from the negative aspects generally associated with a stereotypical artist as seen from the average persons perspective (Struggling to sell their artworks, a painter etc...).

Throughout this first section, it describes the writers point of view towards the art world now a days. Art is changing and the writer wants to share his opinions on how he feels towards the new art. Art is becoming more digital and experimental "Far from the traditional epicentres of artistic production and distribution, creative people sitting at a computer keyboard are tearing apart and rebuilding their society's vision itself". This quote explains that artists are changing the world we once knew in completely new ways than before. The growth of the Internet allows artists and their work to reach a much wider audience than ever before, and help to change the way they think.

The book demonstrates that gallery shows and nineteenth century art have been represented as dying out. A more modernised art world is taking over through the birth of the Internet and more pieces of art being digital e.g video games. "D HTML or Web cams rather than a nineteenth-century palette and brush". As you can see tools that are being used to create art are also being replaced with the digital tools. Throughout the chapter, it shows that art is more Internet based. It also portrays the contrast between the way traditional art and digital art, are being shown to it's audiences from the past to now e.g galleries vs the Internet. 

However, in the next chapter you get a completely different opinion on what the Internet has done for the art world. There is evidence showing that the "distinction between art and non-art became irrelevant" which proves the Internet has expanded the meaning of art to encompass pretty much everything in assistance, although this opinion may not be held by all. The writer believes that the Internet isn't breaking the margin between what is art and isn't. He believes art may  be temporarily out of  place but we the audience still need it. Their is evidence of this in this quote "Because society needs art to survive". Digital art is depicted as an "antibody" as it presents information "often perverts codes" and is unforgettable. This may be an appropriate analogy as the quotes shown simply explain a video game for example, which is a type of digital art. It also describes the Internet well. As the Internet reveals information alongside a video game whilst you're interacting with them. Technology is viewed as a virus due to it "constantly mutating" like a virus does. "Information overload are diseases" This quote is also evidence towards technology being expressed as a virus. Technology could be seen as a virus injecting our mind with "information". 

The social body is responsible for art. However technology aren't accountable for. Art must be able to grab an audiences attention "recognition" which technology doesn't need in order to survive. Also art has the ability to be unforgettable. Some may say that technology is art as to move technology you need to experiment in a similar way you do with art. Technology shares many similarities with art, for example the intricate wiring on the motherboard on an electronic device is as complex as the strokes in an oil painting. An iconic look can make a product more desirable. An example of this is the iPod which Steve Jobs and the director of Apple's Industrial Design team Jonathan I've created the iconic look of which inspires the look of other competing devices to this day. So you may say that technology isn't art art but it can become a piece of art in order to sell it to it's audience. The edge of art is described as "traces a fine line between life and death" This shows that art needs to survive to "transfer cultural memory" which enables people to adapt through their own judgement's on the definition of art. 

This can get a little confusing, but it essentially means that art can adapt the way we think, feel and react to newer things, such as advances in technology and advances in cultural beliefs. This can be seen throughout the article by "Each culture must come up with it's own definitions of art's functions to ensure it's adaptability and survival". However this argument seems to be biased as it seems to be putting art on a peda-stool above technology rather than being balanced between both technology and art. The purpose of this text is to enable us to see as as something we not want but need in order to survive. It is certainly succeeding in making 

us feel that we do need art. It does this by comparing art to "antibodies". These allow us to survive by fending off bacteria and viruses that could lead to ill health. So overall this text is trying to persuade us to see art as something we need in our lives.