Month: January 2017
How far should artists be allowed to push boundaries?
One of the defining pieces of art of the 20th century is literally a toilet. Marcel Duchamp’s piece of “fountain” was simply a functioning toilet that he had bought from a store. The piece was displayed for just a day, before a cleaner threw it out, thinking it was trash. However, in it one day of existence, “fountain” managed to completely obliterate every single boundary governing the nature of art, instantaneously ignite a firestorm of controversy, and essentially spawn the entirety of the modern art movement, breathing new life into an art form many considered dead. Art is something that needs to evolve or die, and for art to evolve, artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as they want.
Some, however, would argue that artists should not be allowed to push boundaries too far, as they will inevitably push it into the realm of bad taste. These people argue that boundaries in art serve a clear purpose: to delineate acceptable moralities. To these people, for artists to push boundaries too far would constitute an act of moral deviancy and public indecency, and thus denigrate the very nature of art, which they believe to inspire and reflect good values. These are the people who will protest against films such as “Hostel” for its perceived excessive violence, artists such as H.R Giger for his hyper sexually art pieces, or bands like Iron Maiden for their “Satanic Imagery”. To these people, art, above all else, needs to be moral. Without proper morality, the entire piece of art is invalidated to them.
While it might be true that some artists do not reflect very good morals, I also believe that that is entirely irrelevant. Art, above all else, must seek to reflect life honestly. To inaccurately represent life due to boundaries concerning morals and taste is, I believe, a far more grievous sin then not reflecting appropriate morality. Life is hard and scary, and people sometimes are filled with violence and cruelty. These are not things we like to think about, and yet it is precisely why artists need to incorporate them into their work. To forget about the harsher facts of life is not just a failure on the part of the artist, it also does a disservice to the consumer who is no longer challenged and brought out of their comfort zones. This is precisely why we require filmmakers such as Harmony Korrine and Nicholas winding Refn, whose films push various boundaries and are eminently controversial. Without the ability to push boundaries as far as possible, art loses a great portion of its verisimilitude, and hence also its power to engage us. Thus, for art to reflect life honestly, artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as they want.
There is also another group that believes art should not push against political and religious boundaries. These people believe that political and religious beliefs are a private and personal thing, and thus art has no business attempting to influence the use and change our opinions. Art, while entertaining, should, in their eyes, remain apolitical as politics and religion are too controversial and messy to be discussed in such a manner. These are the people who decry filmmakers such as Oliver Stone, or Michael Moore, for making what they consider to be fundamentally biased and untruthful political films. To these people, politics is simply too dangerous a topic for art to tread upon, and thus they believe that artists should not push boundaries, but rather seek to entertain.
While it is true that politics and religion are deeply personal, I believe it is extremely important for art to discuss it, so as to start conversations about it. For us all to be better, more enlightened human beings, we need to be able to confront our biases and prejudices and learn to fully argue for our own personal beliefs. Art, in presenting its own views on politics and religion, creates conversation and forces us to examine our own ideas. This is present in films such as “Four Lions” which presents a harrowingly realistic depiction of how ordinary youths can be radicalized into terrorists, thus refuting the simple caricature many have of terrorists as evil religious fundamentalists. In this way, as we confront our own opinions, we can refine them and thus emerge as fuller people with more informed and cohesive thoughts. This visceral confrontation occurs also in games such as “This war of mine” which through placing the player in the role of a civilian in a warzone, invites one to think about the true cost of war. Art, by pushing boundaries, also causes people to start conversations about issues and thus move to fix them. This can be seen in how Kendrick Lamar’s 2015 album “To pimp a butterfly” intensified discussion of racism in America, and brought awareness to the issue. Thus, for art to challenge, artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as possible.
Fundamentally, artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as possible in order to evolve. What boundaries represent is a hard limit on what artists can think? To be able to consistently create new material and evolve, artists should and must push the boundaries and evolve their thinking. This has always been how art evolves, from the ’60s when the Beatles released their album Sergeant peppers and ushered in psychedelic rock, to James Joyce’s Ulysses which broke many taboos and define the modernist novel, to 1968’s Bonnie and Clyde, Which completely disregarded Hollywood’s codes of morality, and ushered in the modern filmmaking system. Art always requires pioneers to break the mould and push the boundaries. Only then will the rest follow and new things can be made. Artists thus should be allowed to push boundaries as far as possible or art will simply stagnate and die.
The art throughout history has always held a unique ability to challenge, excite, and entertain us. It has always been changing, yet the only constant is the ability of artists to push the boundaries. As Frank Zappa once said: Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. Thus artists should be allowed to push boundaries as far as possible, as that is how art stays relevant.
‘Artificial intelligence (AI) should be embraced, not feared.’ Do you agree?
Today, the idea that robots can take over the world one day as seen in dystopian movies does not seem too impossible. Can robots really take over the world? The advancements in technology have inevitably led to the rise of Artificial Intelligence, now commonly known as AI. Many are voicing concerns and fear that the development of AI may outpace the regulations that govern its implementation. AI also threatens job security all around the world. However, while these are understandable, Artificial Intelligence should not be feared but embraced.
Economies around the world today are restructuring. Many developed countries such as the United States, Japan, Singapore and many other large European economies are transitioning from labour-intensive to high-value added, knowledge-based industries. In fact, this transition has begun more than a decade ago. Not too long ago, automation has resulted in the loss of millions of jobs especially in low-skilled areas. Now with AI gradually easing its way not only into the manufacturing sector but also the services sector, the jobs of professionals, managers, executives and technicians are threatened as well. Hence, opponents of AI are frightened by the prospect that those with limited skills and education are going to be left behind.
There is no denying that being left behind in the future can become a reality for some. However, trade-offs have to be made for the progression of mankind. AI brings along undeniable benefits that can unquestionably boost economies, which will be discussed later. Returning to those threatened by AI, there is in fact a survival guide: Do not fight AI. Fight with it. Instead of protesting its inevitable integration into our lives, embrace it and understand it. By understanding it, we will no longer fear it. This is why governments are actively encouraging workers to upgrade their skill sets to stay relevant by equipping themselves with effective and useful skills and knowledge, and most importantly, to stay up to date. In Singapore, a country with an ambition to become the world’s first Smart Nation, a SkillsFuture Movement was launched less than a decade ago as a means through which citizens above the age of twenty-four can utilise incentives to sign up for courses. Some of these courses offered include computer classes that can help senior citizens to be technologically proficient. By upgrading ourselves, there is no doubt that automation and AI can help create new jobs that are higher-paying and of better quality, when AI takes over simpler ones. As such, there is certainly a case for fearing for our jobs when AI is slowly becoming prevalent. However, it is within our control to decide how AI will affect us. If we choose to remain relevant and fight alongside it instead of against it, we will be able to find better jobs and not be left behind.
Next, many developed countries such as Japan and Singapore are grappling with an ageing population today. AI can, therefore, be part of the panacea to deal with a manpower shortage. For instance, Singapore, a country with a small population, has embraced AI as seen in its services and transport industries. The country is rolling out a pilot programme for autonomous buses and has recently employed AI robots in two of its food courts where the robots, guided by sensors, can move around as a tray return station for diners. Hence, the food court is not only able to cut costs by reducing manpower, but diners are also able to enjoy greater convenience. In Japan, some stores no longer need to employ cleaners due to the availability of robotic vacuum cleaners that can roam freely on the floor with the ability to avoid collisions. These are a few of the many possible scenarios where AI benefits an economy and help countries cope with their problems. As such, AI should be embraced and not feared.
Moving on, one can also expect individual safety and national security to be enhanced with AI. Tesla, a tech giant and car manufacturer, has recently launched its autopilot feature in its cars. Such a feature means that the car itself has its own ability to recognise danger, for example, an imminent collision, and thus warn the driver beforehand to prevent an accident. With drink driving and human error some of the top causes of accidents on the roads today, AI can help reduce accident numbers. Furthermore, when such technology is extended to aircrafts and aeroplanes, the improvement in safety can be enormous. In the future, AI is also able to handle and make use of big data and analytics technology to track, predict and potentially prevent terrorist attacks. With terrorism on the rise, the ability to carry out facial recognition and behavioural matches in large crowds can undeniably enhance national security and thwart terrorist plans. This also extends to the threat of hostile nations especially in times of tensions and wars when AI can aid in espionage missions and track the enemies’ movements. Thus, AI should not be feared but embraced.
Finally, with a growing middle class globally, many of us are able to afford AI-equipped devices to improve our standard of living. With the advent of voice assistants such as Google Assistant, we are close to having our very own Jarvis. To switch on the air conditioner, all we have to do is simply ask, literally. There is no longer a need to lift a finger for simple tasks when all our appliances and lights are connected to a central AI-controlled home system. “Google-ing” on smartphones may also quickly become obsolete when we can ask our smartphones a question and have them read the answers aloud to us. Presented with such convenience, our quality of life is therefore enhanced tremendously. Tasks that were previously troublesome to perform can now be easily completed with AI. While some may view this as laziness, I believe this gives us the opportunity to put our efforts to better use instead.
Perhaps, fear may stem from the belief that AI might become too intelligent in the future and use its data and knowledge against us. Certainly, this remains a possibility. However, we are the inventors of AI. With regulations to ensure that algorithms used to create AI allow for transparent robots to be invented, the future of AI lies in our hands. We are more likely to design AI such that it benefits us rather than harm us.
To conclude, while there is reasonable fear for our jobs, threatened by AI, we can always choose to do something by upgrading ourselves and progressing with it instead of resisting it. AI brings us greater safety, convenience and productivity and for these, we should embrace it. Perhaps we can overcome our fear of AI by understanding how it functions and always keeping up with its latest development. In this way, AI will no longer seem foreign and intimidating when we are familiar with it.