Rafael Abreu-Canedo
Since 2007
Works in New York , New York United States of America

BIO
Brasilian born Rafael Abreu-Canedo immigrated to the United States in 1994. Through the use of various mediums, Rafael explores issues of language, social behavior, power relations, and identity, with focus on systems, the body, and space. He has exhibited and taught throughout the US, having his first exhibition in 2001. Since then, Rafael has worked with organizations such as Sprout Fund, M.T.V.’s Rock the Vote, No More Prisons, Books Not Bombs, the MOVE Organization, Oakland Unified School District, New York Department of Education, Root Division, the Queens Museum of Art, Queens Library, and countless artists, developing a commitment to communication through the arts; changing the future by working for a better today.

Discussions (2) Opportunities (0) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

FAIL and FAKE as AESTHETIC OF NEW MEDIA


Interesting poetics Steven. I enjoyed reading it...mostly the first 5 sentences. But there's something very real about emotions and feelings. In addition, there seems to also be something very real about the data we intake from our environment.

Is it important to communicate these things (sensory data, feelings and emotions) to others? That is, after all, how we build a communal conceptual map of our world, and by extention, build community. While I can agree with you, surely there's a role for mediums of communication that stand-in for reality.

If not for these primitive, yet gratifying attempts at representing the very real things you've mentioned, then what? Until we can practice effective alchemy on a galactic scale, keep having thoughts, and keep making music and paintings and books about your thoughts, feelings and emotions, so that we can further strengthen our bonds and networks toward whatever goal each of us may have in mind.

And Michael...very interesting. I wonder what is the boundary between the real and the fake. Is the real error the effect or the cause. Just because the instructions for the error effect are pre-coded to the set of instructions that your playback device is receiving from the media, does that make it fake? Unintentional scratches on a DVD, may or may not produce an error effect. And if it doesn't produce an error effect, is that then a fake scratch?

What I am trying to get at is that you seem to be talking about intentionality because the visual effects caused by damages to media can be employed as styles to be synthesized, without damage to the actual media. As to say, the error was intentional, whether by intentional damage to the media, or via coding. Which brings me to another question: is a tomato produced under laboratory conditions less real than a tomato grown in dirt, even though they have they manifest the same molecular structure? Sorry for the cheesy metapho

(Not that I'm for or against genetic engineering per say, but it's just that I'm curious to know where to draw the line between real and fake.)

-My best, Rafa
FWR

DISCUSSION

FAIL and FAKE as AESTHETIC OF NEW MEDIA


Interesting poetics Steven. I enjoyed reading it...mostly the first 5 sentences. But there's something very real about emotions and feelings. In addition, there seems to also be something very real about the data we intake from our environment.

Is it important to communicate these things (sensory data, feelings and emotions) to others? That is, after all, how we build a communal conceptual map of our world, and by extention, build community. While I can agree with you, surely there's a role for mediums of communication that stand-in for reality.

If not for these primitive, yet gratifying attempts at representing the very real things you've mentioned, then what? Until we can practice effective alchemy on a galactic scale, keep having thoughts, and keep making music and paintings and books about your thoughts, feelings and emotions, so that we can further strengthen our bonds and networks toward whatever goal each of us may have in mind.

And Michael...very interesting. I wonder what is the boundary between the real and the fake. Is the real error the effect or the cause. Just because the instructions for the error effect are pre-coded to the set of instructions that your playback device is receiving from the media, does that make it fake? Unintentional scratches on a DVD, may or may not produce an error effect. And if it doesn't produce an error effect, is that then a fake scratch?

What I am trying to get at is that you seem to be talking about intentionality because the visual effects caused by damages to media can be employed as styles to be synthesized, without damage to the actual media. As to say, the error was intentional, whether by intentional damage to the media, or via coding. Which brings me to another question: is a tomato produced under laboratory conditions less real than a tomato grown in dirt, even though they have they manifest the same molecular structure? Sorry for the cheesy metapho

(Not that I'm for or against genetic engineering per say, but it's just that I'm curious to know where to draw the line between real and fake.)

-My best, Rafa
FWR