Art by definition is "the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions".
When I think of the book Feed as a work of art I truly become to appreciate his novel. His words describe this setting inside of an inescapable frame. M.T. Anderson paints a tragic world surrounded by millions and millions of devices that control our lives. Perhaps because of his self-awareness of the world he decided to bring and arrange many different factors/elements together and create this book that would fit into the definition of art for being so appealing.
I understand that Anderson was going to for something tragic as he was writing his novel. This is because of the narrator's tone in the story and specific factors that are constantly mentioned throughout the book. Such as, Violet's feed not functioning well, Titus and his friends being so consumed by the feed, Titus' father not being aware of the seriousness of his son's situation or the situation overall, etc. These examples are just small pieces of Anderson's big picture. His work can be imagined as the dark image of our present and our future, but somehow that darkness is illuminated by all the the lights from electronic devices which makes the picture a much more comfortable image for the viewers and the characters in it. In other words, although we may be aware that our current world is a tragic place we avoid thinking about it by purposely become so easily distracted by all electronic devices and technology that surrounds us. It is easier to run away from this rather complicated reality that we have slowly developed, and the feed simply helps us on doing so.
Furthermore, Anderson does not mention the creators of the feed sufficiently to clearly understand his opinion on this matter. It is clear that on his painting we are all the users and therefore the subtle creators of the feed. However, the people who physically and psychologically created the feed does not appear on the painting. We are illustrated as followers but how could we possibly be following ourselves. We must have found something superior to us that made us follow it and be consumed by it. My main point on this argument is that I do not entirely understand the mentality of these people. With what purpose is the feed driving us to self destruction or suicide? Or is the feed more like the setting, and we are the ones who are slowly ending our lives, which sounds more accurate. It is not right to simply blame something or someone for what we have done. And considering the fact that most of us do not even blame someone is because a negative reason to do so was never originally found. In other words the feed is not something seen as wrong. It is seen as a life source that must be kept alive with the purpose of "development" and entertainment.
In this piece of art the problem of our society is clearly shown but not solution is given. I think this is because this is one of those situations where one must found the answer himself. But what if there is no answer or solution for this problem. What if these have grown too much that it is now part of our lives as opposed to an momentary encounter. There might not be a way of getting rid of all these technological devices for these being too available and present in our lives on a day to day basis.
In my opinion we all are surrounded by art, and this is because I interpret it as such. Perhaps M.T. Anderson also interpreted the current world as art and translated through his novel. imagining the world described in the book as a troubling future as opposed to a metaphor of our current world is less complicated. This rather image is mostly misunderstood by most viewers. And this is because it is too realistic.
I like how you define "art" in the beginning and the definition was a bit of art itself. I also liked how in your first paragraph, you envision art and described what you saw which i thought was very interesting to put in.
ReplyDeleteYou explained how Anderson painted art with settings and characterization like using a paintbrush. You imagined what Anderson what trying to paint and figured out what he has done well.
You can connect his artistic story to many of the other famous paintings made. I bet that each of them has their own unique story is the artist wrote it down, but it's a lot more interesting if we just imagined it.
Besides some very minor mistakes, you could have elaborated on these icons or symbols that Anderson tried to create and how it connects with today society because even we don't know who specifically made the internet and why it has been presented to society.
I always wonder how artists envisioned what to paint. You have given me a new perspective on how artists paint meaningful pictures and knowing that only increases the amount of question but at least helps me develop new ideas.
I thank you for sharing your thoughts and feelings about Anderson "painting" and hope that your next essay is just as creative.
Dinorah,
ReplyDeleteThroughout all your post from 10 – 14, # 13 is my favorite one. I find the way you define art is a very interesting, and I can see it definitely allows you see Feed as a different perspective of art through emotions. I appreciate this post a lot, and it did lead me to further thought. Great job!
From my understanding, you see the book Feed as a painting, and you describe how M.T. Anderson has paint the story as a tragic through the lens of setting. Additionally, you also see his piece through characterization to figure out the parallels of our lives compared to the ones in Feed. Lastly, you mentioned the shape of M.T. Anderson’s book that he did not offer an solution through his piece because he wants the reviewers to find out while looking at his piece.
When you said Feed is not something seen as wrong, but more as life source that helps us to develop. I find this very relevant to what we have discussed in class before that the book is a revelatory art. Feed did present the sense of realization to many of the people including ourselves who go through similar experiences as the characters in his piece. However, I do believe people see Feed as something that’s wrong, thus it awaken us from our mistakes.
Overall, I think your post is very well written. However, I think you should reread it, because there do have some sentences that does not make sense if you read aloud to yourself. Other than that, I think you should expand on the idea through the definition of art hat you stated in the beginning. You seem to provide readers what an art is, but you never seem to address whether Feed is a great piece through that definition of art.
After reading your post, it makes me reconsider my own life in general. Are there any solutions to the issues that M.T. Anderson point out? According to your post, you mentioned few possibilities such as “what if these have grown too much that it is now part of our lives as opposed to a momentary encounter.” Or it is really up to us to give the solution to it. I think in this case, we all have our own answers depending on how we choose to live our lives. However, your point about how the issues have grown too much is something that I never thought of. Perhaps, it is possible that problems can get stack up together, and we might have to face the big time.
Thanks for pushing me to think in another perspective. I am looking forward to see your response to my questions that I mentioned.
Bao Lin