angelinahovanessian_desma9

When I think of “industrialization,” I think of Moore’s Law, which, according to Louisiana Tech University, states that “computing performance would double approximately every 18 months.” Industrialization brought upon more means to artistic expression than there ever were before. Film in particular changed the way we created art, and according to Walter Benjamin in his article "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" took away from yet gave to art. Art went from exhibits that were fixed in place to something that could be shared internationally. A director and a painter had different audiences that were captivated by their creation in different ways. Neither was not art, yet one changed what art could be. Douglas Davis, author of "The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction" elaborates more on this, saying that the new age of digital art changed the definition of art itself, and what it meant to be an artist. Davis’s approach focuses more on t...

     There is a science to art, an art to science, and, thus, a science behind why we find things beautiful. Consider one of the Seven Wonders of the World, the Taj Mahal. Absolutely stunning through and through, but it is more complex than that. Why is the Taj Mahal beautiful? The answer is simple: its architectural ratios are mathematically pleasing to the eye. Architecture Daily states that “it can be verified in several architectural works … [that] the width and height of the facade follow the golden proportion.” This not only applies to architecture, but also people. The people we think are the most beautiful boil down to numbers and statistics. According to ScienceNewsExplore’s Psychology column, we tend to find symmetry in faces to be beautiful. Symmetry all boils down to math, different percentages of matching features with others, placements and ratios, the Fibonacci sequence, and the likes of such.      Math doesn’t just dictate what makes thing...

Though we may look at art and science and see two different things that are unlikely to converge, up until recently, one always came with the other. Now it is evident that there is almost a great divide in the two worlds. In the article Professor Vesna wrote, called “Toward a Third Culture: Being in Between” it says “Being in between implies a discomfort with the border and a longing for a new synthesis.” This implies that for some reason, despite the connection the two cultures have had in the past, we are somehow uncomfortable with the divergence of the two in modern times. However, in this discomfort, Vesna calls for us to find inspiration, not to force a bridging of the two cultures, but to find a middl e ground where both of these cultures can coexist, creating a third culture in their wake. The same views are shared by C.P. Snow, author of “The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution.” In this article, Snow recognizes the divide between science and art, and finds it to almost ...