Art has been greatly influenced by the rapid development in digital technology and by the astounding progression in the introduction of new, more attractive and tougher materials the artists can work with. But don't you think that these options through new technologies sometimes may have dangerously negative effects? What I think is we can't ignore the fact that what we are able to do today in arts with technology. But these options now are offering the artist means of expression they never imagined were possible. Now, I want to pause here for a while and make a point on something. '... means of expression they never imagined were possible'. '... THEY NEVER IMAGINED WERE POSSIBLE. ' Wasn't it what artists do going beyond ordinary ways of thinking and doing things? Working at the edges of potentials? I don't think we can still call it 'art' when artists just simply regurgitate what exists. Faced with countless options thanks to technology, the artists may be overwhelmed, confused and puzzled. As a matter of course, these emotions may immediately be reflected in his works. His art work may become increasingly repetitive and devoid of imagination or spirit. This is the biggest obstacle in giving a free rein to human imagination and feelings. Isn't what we call art what we are inside? Isn't the art all that everything we can't dare to say? Isn't it in the word that escapes you when you think of something? Or in the joy of finding again after a long separation? What do you think we are going to call art when there is no more scope for innovation or human creativity and feelings to take flight? In truth, that what I think is happening right now. The flame of creativity is dying out and the inspirational revelation is falling back slowly. The building blocks of imagination is freezing at the bottom of the artist's mind. Because they are gradually transforming into a shallow, abstract crowd of enormous technological capabilities, devoid of any creative substance.
Overall, what I am trying to go on to argue is there is no way that we can deny the place of technology in our lives. But when it comes to the arts, that shouldn't be the same. If we depend on technology too much, it is going to devalue the relationship between human imagination, feelings and the arts. Because we are going to start underselling and underutilising our natural creative potential. Therefore, we are going to veer away from engaging minds to pander to expectations from technology. The problem is then technology in arts end up with nothing but repetition which is certainly useful to a degree. But we need to remember that action without innovation eventually becomes frivolous and unfulfilling. So we are just going to be alone with what we have created. Looking for our imagination is going to be like needle in a haystack and we are going to be a bit less human. Don't you think we have already had more than enough things going on around that remind us what human shouldn't be like? Don't you think we don't need any more things that make us feel a bit less human? The arts need to rely on human creativity, imagination and feelings rather than technology to remain as "arts".
What is your point of view?
From culture to art,technology is a powerful tool for the existence of today's life styles.Today,an artist/designer can be present anywhere around the world giving direction to artistic productivity.But i think the arts need to rely on human creativity.