At the Edge of Art

Blais, J. And Ippolito, J. (2006), At the Edge of Art, London, Thames and Hudson, Introduction, pages 7-13

In this task we will look at the main points given in the piece of text by Blais, J. And Ippolito, J.  ‘At the Edge of Art’ describes technology as a virus and art as an antibody. And argues how technology and new media is damaging the art world as well as the way people may view their own artistic rights.

Today the art word has become more digital this means people ‘who would never set foot in a gallery stumble across works of art’ would be able to view art but will not be able to fully appreciate its content because pieces of artwork have become more available and easier to find than ever before because of the endless websites and images sharing websites available at your fingertips. 

the argument also states that that artists no longer refer to them self as an “artist ““Though they may call themselves scientists, activists or entrepreneurs rather than poets or artists, many of these visionaries are playing the roles of Dante or Da Vinci”, this would mean anything can be subjected as Art and anyone can be compared to such great artists as Da Vinci

In this piece of text “technology is a virus” as the name suggests that the rise in technology and the internet can be compared as a virus that can not be stopped as is it always developing and changing. And father more it states that “art as antibody” it states that “Art may be temporally out of place, but society needs to make place for it because society needs art to survive’ 

In a manner of speaking when since is compared as an art as an antibody and technology a virus, does that suggest that Art is a virus as well, “I act as a virus against the commercial word. Art is a virus… Others resist me, I don’t resist them, A virus doesn’t have to defend itself, Art doesn’t have to defend itself”.  With is example in mind art can be compared as a virus just as technology is, since both are subject to changing and both will evolving to counteract this change. And will always be here in a digital form or in an art gallery both ways art is art and it can be seen anytime

 The whole meaning and purpose of this text is to demonstrate to the significance of art and science with technology being seen as a virus and if a “human” virus can be cured can a technical or digital virus be cured to. Or as demonstrated is art the only cure? 

*Please note that the above text  only covers two pieces of text from the book (technology is a virus and Art as an antibody). This is because I fully failed to understand and find any relevant information or valid points it was trying to give*