Hi fellow-focusers,
I had voted for this topic, so I feel obliged to
post an essay on it. Concerning my studies, which
is mechanical-engeneering, I deeply can feel, that
there is indeed a split between art and
technology. ‘t is this disappointment, that got me
in the first terms of my studies, telling me it is
anything else but fun and to see that it consists
mostly of dumb copying.
" This divorce of art from technology is
completely unnatural. It's just
that it's gone on so long you have to be an
archeologist to find out where
the two separated. Rotisserie assembly is actually
a long-lost branch of sculpture,
so divorced from its roots by centuries of
intellectual wrong turns that
just to associate the two sounds ludicrous."
ZAMM, chapter 14.
Seen in the light of MOQ, why are art and
technology divorced? What is their
role today? Is this divorce definitive?
In the world of the ancient greek world, the
concept of the word 'techne' included both, the
artistic manufacturing on the one hand side and
the technical manufacturing on the other hand
side.
Manufacturing - in this concept is included the
word 'manu' - latin for hands. So 'manufacturing'
implies the acting on objects with your hands (and
your mind). In the case of an creator of artistic
sculptures, he is forming (generally speaking) a
model of the sculpture, he had in his mind. But
manufacturing means also the creation of
everyday-applications. In nowadays world,
especially in rational, planned and structured
industries, the working with your hands, the
'manufacturing' is unfortunately often reduced to
the working on an object in which the
manufacturer, worker or craftman (although with
those it is different) is following mostly given,
more or less strict rules, leaving little space to
a more creative person.
Let me remind you of a famous person,a real
universal genius of the middle-ages, Leonardo da
Vinci. He is famous for his monumental paintings
and drawings, but he has been an great inventor of
different kinds of technical appliances as well.
He is presumably far more famous for his artistic
creations, but consider his inventions almost as
equal important. I once came across a small piece
of his work during my studies.
So about that time, he had lived from 1452 to 1519
(not far from Marcos hometown),
allow me that statement, the artistic and the
technical field had not yet divided. Surely da
Vinci had been an exceptional human being, no
doubt, but I dare say he represented the spirit of
his age concerning this encompassing way of
thinking. But he also had a strong tendency of
building up a system of methods, in effort to make
further development of technology more easier. One
can say, that this is a useful thing to do,
because it helps a less ingenious and intuitive
persons to take part in the process of
development. But in giving rules and methods, you
are building up a static system, while in the same
moment diminishing the pure intuitive and creative
part of human mind, i.e. diminishing dynamic
quality.
So in retrospective of the past centurys, since
Leonardo da Vinci (there may be others as well),
there had been an rapid increasing of the static
system, the methodical working on the field of
technology. As long as a person is applying these
methods freely, being aware of the fact that
invention, in general, comprises also the 'New',
he never gets in danger of considering theses
rules and methods as all there is. You never (or
seldom) can force an invention to come to life by
means of methods.
We have to be aware of the fact, that we have to
look for people, who carry out inventions and the
development of technology. What I was describing
above is merely a theoretical consideration of
that context. Let us assume, concerning this
context, that there are two kinds of people
(roughly speaking).
The one kind of people are the ones, acting more
effectively under non-ruled/non-structured
circumstances. They work fine, when there is the
metaphorical 'white sheet of paper'. The other
kind is far less being able to work intuitively,
keep sticking to the static system - to the
methods, the rules - which is called in my studies
'methods of construction' In the MoQ way you may
feel, just like me, a slight paradox feeling about
this term. Construction implies always invention.
Binding 'construction' to 'method', comes to me a
bit like rapture.
Comparing those two different kinds of people,
what can we say about them? Just to give them
names, I will call the first group the 'inventors'
and the second one the 'technocratics'.
Both of them construct machines and technical
appliances, but the way they do is much different.
The 'inventor' is described in uncounted novels,
comics etc. (the one from Walt Disneys Donald
Duck) as well, as he could be found in the history
of the technical development always in moments,
when it is said: 'XY invented machine Z'.
Indeed,many of them invented a large number of
machines on their own (Thomas A.Edison, Carl Benz,
James Watt, etc.). In the opinion of the majority
of the people, those are the 'good guys'. The
'technocratics' are making inventions as well, but
they do it by following a more strict, rational
way. Seldom there is a person mentioned by name,
who has been involved in the development of a new
construction. They work in big companys and are
being paid for what they do. Sometimes they even
dislike the way they do their work, too. We have
to imagine these companys with all their staff,
their rules and all those instruments of
measurement, as Pirsigs slow, but nevertheless
effective machinery, but this is somehow not the
nicest way to do it.
What makes technology so ugly is the fact, that
the 'technocratics' are dominating our world. A
free mind to be, is the longing of many of us; a
free mind is willing to let dynamic quality flow
in and is feeling supressed and ruled, when forced
to do his work in an overwhelming static way.
Alas, I believe, you can't turn back the clock. No
one can, nor wish to be back at times, when
inventioms or technical ideas has been the field
of a few weird inventors, where there is 'chance'
the reason for technical achievement.
Greetings,
and may DQ be with you
JoVo
PS.: It is a pity, that I'm late again, because
I'm rather interested what you think about my
ideas. Furthermore I would have liked to comment
on some of your posts; It has been a great
discussion. Sorry for my orthography, but time is
short now, so I had no time left to read it over.
I hope I can make it in time.
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:18 BST