The Application of Feminist Aesthetic Theory to Computer-Mediated Art

Abstract

Introduction With increasing frequency, today's computer technologies are incorporated into the artistic realm. The rapid development of digital technologies and their subsequent procurement by artists to produce work has created new genre of art, an that does not completely conform to conventional, (i.e., Western, European, European-American), aesthetic criteria. The merger of and technology serves to challenge many of our traditional beliefs regarding aesthetic value. As is true of much contemporary art, computer-mediated2 challenges not only the traditional modernist concepts of and art object, but also obscures the distinctions between fine art, commercial art, and other forms (Ettinger, 1988; Mitchell, 1992; Pinchbeck, 1994; Roberts, 1994). This paper is philosophical inquiry into evolving aesthetic criteria for computer-mediated art. I attempt to address some of the crucial aesthetic issues and concerns brought about by the advent of digital media. More specifically, I focus on feminist aesthetic theory as framework for reevaluating aesthetic concepts and aesthetic criteria with regard to new technologies. Aesthetics and Technologies Established aesthetic principles continue to be automatically applied to computer-mediated artwork because so much digital work aspires to simulate traditional media. A significant amount of research exists to support this observation (Cox, 1989; Jones, 1989; Linehan, 1985; Woodard, 1985). Granted, number of artists strive to make computer-mediated work that moves away from the mere imitation of traditional media (e.g., Roz Dimon, Carol Flax, Esther Parada, Christine Tamblyn, Noah Wardrip-Fruin). Virtual reality and telepresence artworks, for example, differ greatly from traditional works with regard to methods of process and production. However, many of the most prevalent commercial software packages, especially those used in classroom instruction, continue to be developed with the emulation of traditional artistic media as central focus, to make the software appear more user friendly. Therefore, it is still true that in many instances, particularly within the context of the classroom, computer-mediated yearns to look* like something else. This point is most clearly exemplified by popular computer software program such as MetaCreation's Painter. Painter is painting and drawing application that includes palette of tools modeled after traditional media. These tools consist of wide variety of standard brushes, pencils, chalks, and charcoals combined with large spectrum of color options. One can even select several specialized brushes to create custom that imitate particular artist or artistic period (e.g., Van Gogh, Seurat, the Impressionists). Painter, like many other software programs of its type on the market today, utilizes metaphors and familiar symbols consistent with traditional painting media. The software even comes packaged in can. I suggest that the metaphors are misleading. One cannot truly with computer software in the conventional sense. Freedman's and Relan's (1992) study of university undergraduates learning to software in computer graphics course convincingly illustrates this matter. The students in the study described the software as being poor simulation of paint and unhappy that they could not get certain visual effects (pp. 103-104). Obviously, the students were frustrated by their expectations of the computer software and their expectations were reified by the software manufacturer's of visual metaphors; symbols which imply that one can create similar to those achieved with traditional media. If the computer environment is patterned after traditional media, as Linehan (1985) notes, the of surrogate tools actually inhibits the artist, because with surrogate tools an artist is forced to work indirectly and such tools demand a second order of thinking for proper use (p. …