arte multiple.htm

MULTIPLE ART.

A progressive dissapearance is taking place of the concept of the artist as a specialist inside and outside of the musical terrain. Without a doubt, there are reciprocal relations between such reality and paulatine incorporation of diverse languages to the artistic expression and before other aspects of communication. However, one should doubt whether the dissolution of the author in the moment of the audible context finds its equivalent in other arts or rather than in the "multimedia" context generated by sucessive exodii that the ìmonosensorialî creators have tried to reformulate a status that hadnít acquired such force since opera. Isn't it the path followed by many of the celebrated and "advanced" contemporary creators the production of new works, ocassionally under that same name, and the incorporation to them from the new audiovisual technologies? Nowadays itís necessary to ask oneself if the ìmultimediaî experience contains a sufficient dosis of all the stimuli that it intends to produce, or if it remains hierarchized in the same scale in which the senses are in daliy communication. Moreover, one should ask oneself if all of this has a purpose. The senses are the only mean we depend on to perceive our surroundings, thatís to say, to "receive" information. This contains the possibility to experience pleasure; therefore itís extremely important to obtain complete experiences through the senses.
The world is an extraordinary multimedia experience, on condition that weíre able to perceive it at the same time; and if we use selective perception, sense by sense, the world continues being an extraordinary experience, provided that we are in it. We donít expect from multiple art anything less than that holistic of perception, that each element may be differentiable or if one prefers, apreciable and containing the work. The ecstasy of the complete show, the drunkeness of the senses, are delivered on a daily basis via television, the olimpics or rock and roll. In many instances, the multimedia work remind us of mixed dishes that are sirved in bars, that usually consist simply in placing together what should be served separatly and with that excuse, place less quality and save the glass, with secondary effects such as, upon having everything in the same dish, whatever you may leave for yourself will be cold. Of course thereís multimedia art that defines itself as such due to being produced through systems that in and of themselves allow the interaction, simultaneous production, but we have already said that the unit of syncronicity is the human being; those systems are important, all of them, but letís not forget that multimedia are also ìmulti-meansî, and the means are not endings. Itís necessary to ask oneself if the image is truely useful to music, is it the music which is useful to the image, or if in reality they complement eachother, if they could exist separatly and, in any event, for what or whom are they of use.
Despite everything, what one calls nowadays "multimedia art", relies on an extensive past in all cultures, manifestations based in multisensorial stimuli (the ancient mysteries of Eleusis?), have always existed. "Multimedia art" is not a "new art", the tools it uses can be new, poorly intended the criticism that presents it as exceptional and new, but itís normal that in each historical moment contemporary forms of thought are linked to it and the art is related to it.


MULTIPLE ART. A progressive dissapearance is taking place of the concept of the artist as a specialist inside and outside of the musical terrain. Without a doubt, there are reciprocal relations between such reality and paulatine incorporation of diverse languages to the artistic expression and before other aspects of communication. However, one should doubt whether the dissolution of the author in the moment of the audible context finds its equivalent in other arts or rather than in the "multimedia" context generated by sucessive exodii that the ìmonosensorialî creators have tried to reformulate a status that hadnít acquired such force since opera. Isn't it the path followed by many of the celebrated and "advanced" contemporary creators the production of new works, ocassionally under that same name, and the incorporation to them from the new audiovisual technologies? Nowadays itís necessary to ask oneself if the ìmultimediaî experience contains a sufficient dosis of all the stimuli that it intends to produce, or if it remains hierarchized in the same scale in which the senses are in daliy communication. Moreover, one should ask oneself if all of this has a purpose. The senses are the only mean we depend on to perceive our surroundings, thatís to say, to "receive" information. This contains the possibility to experience pleasure; therefore itís extremely important to obtain complete experiences through the senses. The world is an extraordinary multimedia experience, on condition that weíre able to perceive it at the same time; and if we use selective perception, sense by sense, the world continues being an extraordinary experience, provided that we are in it. We donít expect from multiple art anything less than that holistic of perception, that each element may be differentiable or if one prefers, apreciable and containing the work. The ecstasy of the complete show, the drunkeness of the senses, are delivered on a daily basis via television, the olimpics or rock and roll. In many instances, the multimedia work remind us of mixed dishes that are sirved in bars, that usually consist simply in placing together what should be served separatly and with that excuse, place less quality and save the glass, with secondary effects such as, upon having everything in the same dish, whatever you may leave for yourself will be cold. Of course thereís multimedia art that defines itself as such due to being produced through systems that in and of themselves allow the interaction, simultaneous production, but we have already said that the unit of syncronicity is the human being; those systems are important, all of them, but letís not forget that multimedia are also ìmulti-meansî, and the means are not endings. Itís necessary to ask oneself if the image is truely useful to music, is it the music which is useful to the image, or if in reality they complement eachother, if they could exist separatly and, in any event, for what or whom are they of use. Despite everything, what one calls nowadays "multimedia art", relies on an extensive past in all cultures, manifestations based in multisensorial stimuli (the ancient mysteries of Eleusis?), have always existed. "Multimedia art" is not a "new art", the tools it uses can be new, poorly intended the criticism that presents it as exceptional and new, but itís normal that in each historical moment contemporary forms of thought are linked to it and the art is related to it.