Technology to Advance the Spirit
Can technology help you connect with your spirituality?
Due to my access and interest in cinematography, the moving image and sound recording I instinctively decided to film the process, thinking it may be interesting to watch my painting come to life, hear the natural soundtrack created and to edit the short piece, constantly toying with the idea that this film could be my work as opposed to the painting by itself. Viewing the recorded images accompanied by the sounds of suburbia I realized how much my environment affects my condition and how without my camera, I wouldn’t have reached this spiritual regard for life. Postulating a wider view of the world, the sounds and images of the universe, connecting to my passion for filmmaking and technology, I reached a new level of my identity and spiritual nature.
The revolution of the digital world opens avenue of expression and accessibility, making the use of soundtracks a personal motif throughout the works of Agnes Varda, Jean-Luc Godard and Sally Potter (Goldmark, Daniel et al. California 2007). John Cage’s 4:33 or Stan Brakage’s Window Water Baby Moving are two examples of a highly stylized framing of sound and image that proceed to invade personal ideologies, transcending the artists through their work, therein gaining a purpose for themselves and their love for life (Vaaske, Herman New York 2002). I argue against the ideas of Daynor Missingham and David Sudmalis after watching their video installation, Die Eigenheit 2007, in which multiple images of a sonogram written over with the words “we do not have anything.”
Their argument behind the loss of humanity through the advancement of technology only serves to put fear in the audience and an ongoing paranoia that one-day nano technology or advanced robotics will take over the world. Other images of computer chip boards, data processing and the multiplying man, take away from the film in a sort of escapism in which humans have little choice against this revolution when in fact we are the pioneers of the movement. As everyone is entitled to their own opinion, the harsh representations of the video show a lack of human spirit altogether. Our human condition motions us to categorize and put all things in terms of binary opposition. Creating a sorting mechanism between good and evil, right and wrong is one characteristic of humanity that detracts from the spirit. Regarding technology as right or wrong is not the point, but finding a useful avenue to present the inventions of man, the advancement of someone’s work and using it to make something new secretes an everlasting breath that feeds the mind and body to continue living and being.
When it comes to spirituality, for me, the most important ideas come from the fellow man and the inventions he creates. Technology today allows for a profound interconnectivity between others. Providing connectivity through technology only works to drive for the spirit of an individual, seeing the possibilities and the opportunities to express, share and guide others. To have the strength to encourage others through film, to send a message through the technological thinking sphere, equals the pathway to my spirituality. By watching the film many factors take a role. My teacher YoAv Gabbye for showing me how to use oils, creating depth, my parents, Jim and Marge, for giving me my camera and to myself for coming to a new country if only to hear the cicadas riveting throughout the night. Carrying this film with me or showing it to people I meet will give others an insight into my life, the sounds and images of who I am and where I’ve been. I have worked for others to see something that will never happen again, in the same way, time or place, to share a story, to share a truth about myself, with a nod to technology and the spirit of mankind, whatever the truth may be.
Liked it


-
-
Post Commentcool runnin'
On January 14, 2008 at 3:27 am
Really interesting article!
David Sudmalis
On January 14, 2008 at 9:58 pm
As the creators of one of the works alluded to in this article (Die Eigenheit, MISSINGHAM | SUDMALIS, 2007) I suggest a more thorough investigation if the work is going to be “argued against”.
>
It is clear that only a precursory, surface level of analysis has been undertaken, therefore the work has been interpreted in only the most superficial way.
One of the underlying intentions – to provoke thoughts and action in an apathetic society by presenting one potential future – has been completely missed, for example. As artists we try not to tell people what to think, rather, we hope that the work provokes thought. Therefore surface level
analysis such as this really does miss the point.
>
> I suggest that you consider the work of Primo Levi (If this is a Man) and Douglas Hofstadter (I am a Strange Loop) as a frame within which to reconsider the two parts of the work you directly cite. Both these sources present the human spirit and its capacity as something transcendent and powerful – almost mystical…complex, sometimes flawed, yet imbued
with a power perhaps borne of its organic nature. You might also like to consider some work of Ray Kurweill, our back catalogue, the Wizard of Oz, and perhaps our own artist statement as it pertains to this work.
>
Furthermore, your complete misreading of the final frames of the work suggests that a reviewing of the work might be in order. It is also important to have an insight into where you may have experienced the work – were the conditions optimal? What role did the sound have on your experience (it is interesting that you have not mentioned the role of sound in this work, given that the involuntary psychological and physiological responses to sound is a key element in the sound design of the work).
>
>
We would have welcomed an opportunity to discuss aspects of the work with you, but no attempt at contact was made
on your part. Your citing of the work as a binary opposite to your own opinion (with which we have nothing but support for incidentally!) could be interpreted as rendering you guilty of the transgression with which you are so quick to
(erroneously) accuse us of.
>
Dave Sudmalis