Bush and Benjamin

In his writing, As We May Think, Vannevar Bush speaks of the advantages to scientific developments beginning with the effects on our daily lives. He states that the basic needs of food, shelter, clothing have all been improved by the advancements of science and technology. I am challenged by this notion, as I observe in current time that there have been environmental and social deficits as a result of the overwhelming rise in technology. Later, Bush claims that "the effort to bridge between disciplines is correspondingly superficial." Here again, I struggle to see this perspective due to my interdisciplinary nature of working in the arts. Artist Mark Dion challenges the role of specialists in both the areas of art and science.

Bush also speaks about Leibnitz inventing a calculating machine. In this example, he discusses the economics of labor being against the invention before the arrival of mass production. In addition, he points out the unreliability of the object. This compares greatly to today. As we fight a war on oil, we still have yet to use technology to resolve related environmental problems by creating new ways for transportation.

I understand that the specialization of a field is also important, as in the case of the arts. Specifically, Bush foresees the accessibility of photography. Photography has become so widespread that everyone is a photographer who “takes pictures.” While I do not consider myself an elitist, I believe that photography, like all image-based media should be crafted. In this craft, both the skill and intent of the photographer is relevant. As I write this I think about camera phones and argue to myself that these picture can also be taken with intent and not much skill, which brings me back to the history of photography. Knowledge and understanding, or specialization of the medium is of significant importance. Going back to my original argument for interdisciplinary art, I want to note that in this practice I am working collaboratively with other specialists in other fields in order to gain a fuller vision, awareness and understanding for the subject of the work.

Many printmaking processes foreshadowed the production of lithography, which allowed for the recording of everyday images. Development of reproducible images has advanced through to photography and beyond. Like Bush, Benjamin has an early prediction of the power that technology would take in the everyday world. Both speak to visions of technological advancements that science will promote.

While I feel that these arguments in favor of scientific developments and industrial practices leave me with an appreciation for the tools of my craft, I am torn by the negative side effects. This includes the superficial connection that exists in technologically based societies, as well as the detrimental effects on the Earth. This reveals a strange exchange between the physical world and the 4-D (spatial) world. It seems that we are forfeiting and ignoring our physical needs as human beings, including the survival of our human population and the natural world of animals and plants.

In his A Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Benjamin claims, “Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be.” This coincides with the way of life that has occurred since the advancements of technology have dominated human life. Then he states, “The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity.” To further this idea I would like to propose that our current state of being needs to return to older traditions that reconnect us to the root of our existence, the Earth.