Discussion Questions:My Responses

I think that 'art made politically' is subtle and isn't a direct assault on your senses meaning it's not right in your face, but that it's within the art work and the art work brings out that message that the viewer reads into. The Burrough's article is an article that seems to emphasize how to detourne the use of tape recorders to be efficient to better ourselves and having that advantage. Also we can be able to manipulate sounds when you can know what's behind the veil and thus your senses are sharper and you see things more clearly. I think the structure of the article makes me think of how a tape recorder is an input for recording sound and reading the article, the first time, made me have to read it again because the words seem to be a stream of words and reminded me of being bombarded by sounds. You can't hear each sound individually but rather have an overall sound that paints the picture. Even then when reading the article for the second time, I began to read it as if there were periods and stopping sometimes to give myself a break to think and reflect. I think in this way, I'm showing that I'm being efficient by my mind breaking down the article and working against it, I guess. This is similar to the idea that Burroughs says about us being duped by the manipulation of sounds and this article is telling us ways to deconstruct and for us to be the manipulator.

One characteristic is using the form of the artwork to interrogate the work and to make it speak in conveying the message rather than having the message be bluntly put out to the viewer and for the message to be immediately seen and perceived. I think that 'art made politically' gives the viewer more time to digest and to take in the art work overall.

I don't know how direct the art work has to be in order for it to be effective. The example of the art piece that was shown that was similar as an advertisement that had the word AIDS repetitively can show how it can be effective without being as direct or so implicit in its representation of language and aids being a virus and linking that to advertising. I think that it was more effective in this way because it made me look at the work more in detail to get the message and that there were more relationships being made in the piece, that you do need the time to reflect and to understand it. I also think that the words AIDS in its meaning and representation was more effective because it made me look at language in a different way such as language being a disease or a virus that can be contaminated which again can come in how advertising can manipulate the viewer by its slogan or phrase to buy into that commercial or product. If the work was more direct which can be maybe showing the disease or maybe words coming out of someone's mouth and filling up space and distorting it, as a visual that's provoking in its imagery and in your face, once you get the message, you move on.