Comput. & Graphics, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 509-512, 1995 Copyright 8 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved 0097-8493/95 $9.50 + 0.00 00974493(95)ooo28-3 Computer Graphics Art AESTHETIC INTENTION, TECHNOLOGY AND THE ART PRAXIS MAUREEN NAPPI 229 W. 78th Street, #84, New York, NY 10024, U.S.A. THE HISTORICAL Art, or what we, at this moment in history, have come to name as art, outlines a cornucopia of aesthetic ideas and intentions. Throughout the history of art, art has endured and absorbed multiple ruptures of definition. The earliest work of art was made void of a reference to art and therefore was not then named as such. The original aesthetic intention of early cave paintings, for example, remains today, only speculation and cultural projection. Only later were these works “collected,” codified and embraced within an art historical framework. For instance, 19th century portraiture was commissioned in a manner which we would now refer to as “commer- cial” art not fine art. Concurrently, its aesthetic intentions were a result of its specific purpose. Through the passage of time and loss of cultural specificity, the work then is “replaced” and reposi- tioned in relation to its original aesthetic intention. Throughout art’s history, considering either work that we later “named” as art or work that was consciously created as art, art has served a multi- varied, and at times, a contradictory role in society. This role, prescribed by the social construction that it was embedded into, also effected the “intention” of the work. Whether the work was created in order to communicate a certain idea or passion, follow in line with or against a procession of ideas or techniques, it all perversely holds multiple variations of purpose and intent. How then we name this work, and its associative cultural meanings can be very different than the original aesthetic intention of the work. Although the “unique art object” in contemporary western art, is shaped by similar historical and cultural influences, today, perhaps more than ever, the art object is contaminated with issues of profit- ability and monetary value. Making art is as much about making money as it is about making art. In this historical progression, art criticism+ has served as a conspirator to the cornmodification of art, and estranged itself from the roots of artistic inspiration. + The function of criticism is to educate and inform a public that does not have direct access to the work. Bauledaire once sited three attributes of good criticism; they are the three P’s: it must be political, polemical and poetic. PRAXIS It then becomes the role of the contemporary artist to confront this perilous ambiguity by creating an intellectual context for the work to be viewed. This context forms a necessary component to praxis while protecting and supporting the initial aesthetic inten- tion of the work. The fundamental aesthetic purpose and the inten- tion becomes then the “urge” of expression. This artistic expression is a basic category of humanness, its essence is as a human endeavor. Regardless of the modes of representation to which the work adheres (symbolic, iconic or indexical), the work is a product of this artistic expression. At the same time that art is a product, it is more importantly a process. This procedure is process oriented by nature and is simultaneously connected to a biological, spiritual and/or intellectual need to communicate, while holding all the mysterious ingredients that have so enthralled us with art throughout the ages. Further, art does not end with the production of the object alone but continues to be completed by the viewer. This is an inherent attribute in the activity of art making ,that links the maker to the receiver through the object. Undoubtedly, art then becomes a phenomenological human activity both in the reading and the making. A challenging relationship can be seen between using new technological means, that is, fresh and uncharted formal methods to arrive at an uncharted terrain for processing and creating ideas that possibly have not been articulated before. In other words, the ability to use new tools for the realization of new ideas through new artistic praxis is available. Although the demands of working with new technology are never ending and require the user to constantly keep fluent with new procedural updates, an ever moving learning curve and a new paradig- matic view of thinking about what you are doing, the rewards are equally balanced. A constant sense of charting new territory becomes intrinsic to this new artistic praxis. TJXHNO AESTHETICS Throughout the history of art, artists have sought to constantly improve and perfect their tools in the service of what they have been trying to express and 509