Week 5 - Topic 5 - Wikipedia

Lecture –

The lecturer this week talked about how much he doesn’t like Wikipedia as a site for information. He showed a site about Lee Cox which mentioned him, giving false information. While we were there, a girl raised her hand and mentioned that she had just altered a site about Audrey Hepburn, saying that she was Audrey’s childhood friend. This further proved the lecturers point that Wikipedia is extremely unreliable for valid information. He then moved on to virtual rationality, mentioning the Matrix and discussed the themes of the Matrix in relation to real life. It mentions that virtual reality is a form of reality, however it is not actually real. Such as the thrill of a virtual game like the Batman Ride at Movieworld. You are apart of something real, but the danger doesn’t exist, what you are seeing doesn’t really exist. Where does virtual reality stop and reality start? Or visa versa.

Reading –

I had a lot of trouble understanding this reading at first, but once I re-read it, I understood what it was saying and I actually found it interesting. In the beginning of the first article in the reading, the author tells of a dinner he had with an acquaintance in which they got into a discussion about mirrors. He mentions that it was late, probably implying that they were tired and that their minds had wandered. It was then that Casares had mentioned something he had heard about mirrors, bringing on a lengthy debate about the existence of country that the author had never heard of. Their interest is peaked as Casares brings over his copy of ‘Anglo-American Cyclopaedia’ and they discover 4 extra pages that shouldn’t be there that mention Uqbar. They then go off in pursuit of finding whether or not this place really exists. They have no luck. The place didn’t exist; it had been made up and included in the Cyclopaedia. The reading this week is showing how people have been deceived in the past by false information even in books. This relates to this weeks lecture topic as Wikipedia is the new form of ‘deception’.

Tutorial –

Walter Benjamin discusses in his article the authenticity of reproduced pieces of art, including photographs, paintings and pottery. Back before the invention of the copiers and digital media, an original painting was unique and impossible to copy exactly. However, nowadays, everything can be copied. In terms of his ideas in digital media, it can be said that nothing is authentic in this particular art form. As soon as you put a camera in-front of a person or an object, the object immediately alters. As this is going to happen any time you take a picture, I guess the real point is that there cannot be an ‘original printing’ of something as every time you print a photo or produce another copy of the video, it is exactly the same as the one before it. True art such as paintings are being replaced by airbrushing and digital creations. A photoshopped image cannot be considered authentic, although I am looking at it purely from a biased eye as I personally believe that real art is a painting. However, art is in the eye of the beholder – a cliché, I know. Some may say that photoshopping is an art form. Bejamin’s description is spot on to my beliefs about art work having an aura. The reproduction of a piece of art such as a painting like the Mona Lisa depreciates its individuality and uniqueness. You wouldn’t fly all the way to Paris to see a reproduction of the Mona Lisa or a Picasso; the feeling wouldn’t be the same. Although, some art should not be reproduced as it is bad enough to have the original.