I found this weeks reading on the Aesthetics of Errors to be particularly useful and enlightening for developing my own ideas for my final project. What stood out the most was Barker’s discussion on the artist’s role when it comes to glitching and creating error in a work of art. He mentions that the artist is not always 100 percent sure how the final outcome of a glitch will turn out but they do pave the way for what types of results can happen. This is to say that artists do have a certain degree of control when it comes to glitching but in reality the outcome is something that is unforeseen.
I found the discussion of Bruno Munari’s Useless Machines to be particularly interesting as it was an instance where the artist could not dictate the machine’s movements but he did fact set up the ability for movement itself. The artist paved the way for the machines movements and the interesting part here lies in the influence of nature and how it completes the work. This made me think critically about glitch art and my belief that it must depend largely on trial and error. This is to say that since the outcome come can differ, there can be several outcomes that may or may not work for the artist.
Thinking about Franz Walther’s piece about the water dripping on the paint and creating a new image was maybe the most striking for me. Coming into this class I believed that glitch was a completely new concept but this strategy shows that although it may not have been called glitch art, this type of work was still around. Taking this work into account, I want to think about ways that I can physically glitch art using similar techniques that might not necessarily depend on digital media to make my statement. I want to think about other unique strategies that I could take to glitch physical works of art and question of the amount of impact that this can have on said work.