- Last post
- 32 Responses
Not exactly new. but feel this should be a thread here. It is basically an art and design movement inspired by seeing the world like digital devices.
It started here.
then it got complicated
Then some more people joined in.
Wow. Give me a bit to sift through this all. Thanks.
I've only skimmed through this, but on a quick glance it seems nothing more than the usual need to make something out of nothing... writers with nothing better to do trying to make sense of (codify, identify, what-have-you) a torrent of non-related material .
Technology has enabled/emboldened many more people to "create" stuff, whether it has any artistic merit or not. Some people feel the ensuing tsunami of material needs sorting/classifying (though god knows why - who cares?) and "the new aesthetic" is the name they have come up with.
There is no "new aesthetic" - just new technology. Before instagram (for example), people made marks on paper, some good, some not so good. The thought process is the same, the technology has changed, that's all.
do you think the surrealists or impressionists just sat around in a french coffee shop and gave them selves a name. probably.. job done.
it's a little harder these days. where better to name an art movement than a tumblr account.
the surrealists, yes.
the impressionists, no. that name was given by the critics to that art movement, and with a negative conation at first.
and I would compare it the the cubisme, where picasso, gris and braque actually developed a new aesthetic based on african sculpture influence and technology (photography) at that moment in time.
but I didn't read the articles...will do when I have some time.
interesting link, thanks for sharing :)
So hold on, I've been neck deep in this movement for my whole emergent life and, in my mindless stupidity, never thought to come up with a label for it?
Ever one to miss a trick.
I just wish I knew exactly what it was I should've made a label for.
I've been following The New Aesthetic tumblr for a while and it has always been nothing more than posts on the new aesthetic (our current one), as hansglib said there has always been and there will always be a new aesthetic.
Now people are getting all Kony 2012 up on that shit.
Great PHD paper. Shelf life - a week
i retract the above statement - interesting
i retract the above statement - interesting
the new aesthetic is like the new ipad..
there will be a new one next year
As a newbie, my first impressions –
1) Annoying name
2) It says it's "NOT a movement" but an "investigation/tumblr looking at technologically-enabled novelty in the world". Is this just a high-brow FFFFound/Pinterest then?
3) The tumblr is actually quite interesting, maybe a visit-once-a-week bookmarker.
4) XVideos watercolours, come on, you can't dislike that
I'm skeptical that there will ever be another big overarching movement, things are just too fragmented these days. And people seem less willing to spend time listening to or reading other people's essays.
Having said that, how does Pic of the Day fit in?
So... it's tech-augmented or tech-referential (including glitches) design/art?
seems more like one guy getting excited about a new term he made up to categorize shit that's been rampant since the 90s
this guy makes some pretty good points. I'm not sure if i'd invite him to dinner though... the end of the essay is worth a read.
"Our hardware is changing our lives far more profoundly than anything that we ever did to ourselves intentionally. We should heed the obvious there, and get used to that situation. We should befriend one another, under that reality. We should try to see what that means.
People have tried such things before. The Surrealists once valorized the “imagination of the unconscious.” But, as the Situationists pointed out, a generation later: the imagination of the unconscious is impoverished.
Valorizing machine-generated imagery is like valorizing the unconscious mind. Like Surrealist imagery, it is cool, weird, provocative, suggestive, otherworldly, but it is also impoverished.
That’s the big problem, as I see it: the New Aesthetic is trying to hack a modern aesthetic, instead of thinking hard enough and working hard enough to build one. That’s the case so far, anyhow. No reason that the New Aesthetic has to stop where it stands at this moment, after such a promising start. I rather imagine it’s bound to do otherwise. Somebody somewhere will, anyhow."