Bryam Aguilar Blog Post #2

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.


2 thoughts on “Bryam Aguilar Blog Post #2

  1. I think it’s totally cool that you’re thinking about glitching outside of the context of digital media! Because really, what’s a glitch if not just an unplanned occurrence? It makes me think about why paint splatter was considered art back in the day during various movements. I mean, I get it. It’s aesthetically pleasing to look at. BUT IT’S JUST PAINT SPLATTERED ON A CANVAS. ANY DROP OF PAINT COULD HAVE JUST AS EASILY BEEN A MISTAKE. Is this too much of a stretch to compare it to glitch art?


  2. I find your example of Franz Walther’s piece about the water dripping on the paint and creating a new image as a form of glitch art to be intriguing. I remember having a debate with myself on whether manual, hand made glitch art is actually glitch art. After asking Professor Sakr she said that it could be considered an imitation of glitch. Whether she is right or wrong I guess is up to personal interpretation but I think that what you explain regarding that piece is intriguing. What can be and cannot be considered glitch art is something to be developed especially if, as your concluding statement states, we use these as examples to develop other strategies to glitch works and create art.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s