Reading response 1

I remember reading this about a year ago not being into it. However, as I look back over what Gene Youngblood is attempting to accomplish I find it much more worthy of respect. I'll start by prefacing that today I heard a lot of talk about "mass production" of work, which I'm not totally sure that this was what he was attempting to get at with this writing and I would disagree with him if that was his aim. In fact, he actually talks about the decentralization of aimed work around globe and basically says that any sort of mass audience appeal is inherently problematic. What he seems to be getting at rather is that art has a purpose. In the case of this writing, he says "Life becomes art when there's no difference between what we are and what we do." I couldn't agree more, but what I beyond that, what I satisfies me about his writing is at least attempting to answer the questions of what art should be. I think that it is a question that we aren't asking ourselves enough. Whether it be expanded consciousness or inspiring revolts in the streets, we are at a crossroads where we need to really start answering these questions. Art has been co-opted by mass media companies and we have to be critical of what we are making. Everything is inherently political and we can't be neutral on this moving train that we call Planet Earth.