Teachers in the arts and humanities should know about the risks and benefits of scientific tools even if they tend to ignore science itself. As a scientific tool, digitalization demonstrates the risks and benefits quite well because there are notable gains and losses that result when something is digitalized (i.e. represented by samples). On the one hand, the digital process opens up new avenues for creativity in art works such as films that are editable, endlessly repeatable and permanently available to a wide audience. But as a preservation technique, digitalization removes subtle characteristics from pre-existing art works that result in inaccurate reproductions (e.g., faulty recordings of player-piano keyboardists; loss of resolution in art history images, etc.). The inaccuracies seem small at first, but their implications for critical understanding and education are great. How can one accurately evaluate an art form that is lacking the full data needed to assess its impact? This paper explores how digitalization has produced gains and losses in the arts and humanities over the centuries with illustrations drawn from automatic musical instruments (e.g., carillons, player pianos and keyboard synthesizers), paintings and film-making machines (e.g., kinetoscopes and computer graphics). The examples cited in this paper suggest interesting implications about the strengths and weaknesses of information delivered in modern classrooms and how that distorted information can lead to critical misunderstandings about the history of the arts.
|Keywords:||Arts Criticism, Digitalization, Preservation, Online Education|
Professor of Humanities/Music History and Head Carillonneur, Humanities/Music, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Arkansas - Fort Smith, Fort Smith, Arkansas, USA
There are currently no reviews of this product.Write a Review