|by Patrick||Saturday, July 28, 2007 [12:47 pm]|
I just went to this festival in Baltimore last weekend, called Whartscape (you can look it up and listen to the music of most of the acts on their myspace pages) and there was a distinct blurring of artist and audience.
Whatever the effect of art - education, edification, escapism, emancipation, erudite elation, ect. - the cause is always the same, a need to communicate with the social symbolic (thats a Lacan-ian term, but I think you can draw the same concept of people communicating with symbols because we feel a need to from a lot of other models).
Therefore, since art evolved out of language which evolved out of its utility in individual survival by the function of the group, art is in its primal genesis: interactive. The history of art is actually a bottleneck in the history of the development of both language and technology, and now, with games, that bottleneck is opening.
If I were a major consultant for the coal-based power industry in the 1950s, I would be a vocal opponent of the validity of nuclear power. By analogy, I think this is where Ebert is coming from.