OMG - The Creative Block podcast (with us drawing) is up! I'm too scared to listen/watch, but if you want to see it, here it is:
I had the most wonderful time at "Playgrounds - The Art Department" in Eindhoven last week!! All those amazing artists, awesome people, fascinating talks and the general love for art that made this event so marvellous left me super inspired and ready to create more! đ„°đ
Workers at the Creative Growth Art Center, a non-profit in Oakland, California that supports artists with disabilities, are forming a union. The Art Newspaper reports that the move was motivated by concerns over hiring practices, wages and benefits, an over-reliance on volunteer labor, and poor treatment of staff with disabilities. Story may be paywalled.
#Art #ArtsIndustry #WorkersRights #Unionization #California #ArtIndustry
The organising effort at the Creative Growth Art Center coincides with the organisationâs 50th anniversary and follows the launch of a high-profile partnership with SFMoMA
About using AI for art... I'm seeing a lot of attacks against AIs like DALLâąE by artists (which I think is good, as I will further elaborate) but they make it by arguing that AI "is bad because in reality it is stolen art" and thus claiming legitimation having their critiques backed by intellectual property regulations (which is awfully bad). So I wanted to make a few points here.
Why do I think that attacking AIs like DALLâąE is a good thing? I posted a couple of times my thoughts on the relation between capitalism and technology. Technology is not "just a tool" or "something neutral" that can just be taken over by one mode of production or the other. Historically, the first factories *were not* especially efficient at producing items and it is a myth that capitalism came to rule due to some kind of objective superiority and higher productivity than the Ancient Regime. But factories were indeed especially efficient at producing *commodities* as a social relation and reproducing hierarchies and domination thanks to the concentrarion of previously disseminated workers, the physical disposition of the space, constant surveillance and the submission of the worker under the constant rythms of the machine, becoming the worker, put in Marx's words "a living appendix of a dead machine" (or something like that, I don't remember the literal quote idc).
Therefore, technology is not just "a tool", but also a materialization of the modes of production. We should assume that, in a economy not based on domination, but rather on self-fulfillment and liberty, the technology deployed in production and community's necessary labours would be very different, as it would be embedded in completely different social relations. For this reason, we should also assume that an AI for the creation of art would look very different if it was developed *by the artists and the artistic community themselves*. That's why I don't like most of AIs used for art; my argument is not against AIs themselves (I don't know enough about the topic yet and I abstain from making mayor judgements), but against the functions they fulfull under capitalism and the social dynamics that they materialize. Would there be any art AIs under anarchy? I don't know, but if there were, they would be for sure very different. Capitalism is incredible at turning technical development that could potentially improve many people's lives into a tool of oppression and capital accumulation. And, as I pointed out, this aim toward capital accumulation *is constitutive* to the design of the tool itself. The modes of production are constitutive to the very essence of any tool.
These are just thoughts of mine and I wanted to share them because I'm seeing a lot of intellectual property legitimation as a quirk kind of "defense" for the precarious artists that feel threatened by the development of art AIs. Small artists must have it very clear that intellectual property *is not* the substract upon to build their critiques, but rather one more instrument for their oppression. STOP backing your claims with accusations of art robbery and copyright infringement because THAT IS DEFINETLY NOT the way to go.
#Technology #Capitalism #AI #Dall-E #OpenAI #Precarization #Art #ArtIndustry #CapitalAccumulation #Anarchism
Interesting things artists do beyond the Canvas, paints and brushes...
https://www.artpromotivate.com/2018/12/what-artists-find-interesting-art.html
#art #painting #artwork #canvas #artcreative #MGPatil_art #MGPatil #MGPatilArt #artist #artists #fineart #creative #VisualArtist #Creative_artist #ArtEducation #Art_instructor #learningoftheday #refresher #gyan #knowledgesharing #knowledgeispower #amazingfacts #artappreciation #artinspiration #artindustry #paintingart #paintings
https://archive.org/details/kw-ny
Kara WalkerâNo, Kara WalkerâYes, Kara Walkerâ? by Howardena Pindell; Najjar Abdul Musawwir; Camille Billops; Betty Blayton Taylor; Camille Ann Brewer; Kirsten Pai Buick; Gregory Coates; Bob Dillworth; Gloria Dulan-Wilson; Cay Fatina; Theodore A. Harris; Sonji Hunt; Rashidi Ismaili; F. Geoffrey Johnson; Ben Jones; Charlotte Ka; Karsten Kredel; Howard McCalebb; Dindga McCannon; Tad Mike; Helen Evans Ramsaran; Senghor Reid; Gilda Snowden; Ed Spriggs; Harry J. Weil; Clarence D. White; Shirley Woodson
Topics
#KaraWalker, #artcriticism, #critique, #art, #Blackart, #Blackartists, #Blackartcritics, #Blackartcriticism, #africanamerikanart, #afroamerikanart, #primitivism, #antiblackness, #minstrelry, #stereotyping, #arthistory, #artindustry, #artmarket
Introduction: Kara WalkerâNo/Yes/?
SECTION I: KARA WALKERâNO!
âą I-XXIX
SECTION II: KARA WALKERâYES
âą XXX-XXXI
SECTION III: KARA WALKERâ?
âą XXXII
XXIII. APPENDIX
About the Authors
Introduction: Kara WalkerâNo/Yes/?SECTION I: KARA WALKERâNO!âą I-XXIXSECTION II: KARA WALKERâYESâą XXX-XXXISECTION III: KARA WALKERâ?âą XXXIIXXIII....