|Title of host publication||Unknown Host Publication|
|Publication status||Published - Jul 2010|
Bibliographical noteThis paper was presented at the 5th International Conference of Arts in Society, hosted by Sydney College of the Arts (SCA), University of Sydney – Australia, in July 2010. Author's note: t is hoped that the research will contribute to the debate about whether the impact of digital technologies has enhanced or diminished our capacity to interact with original works of art. It is Devane’s contention that, the default point of interaction with artworks of all kinds will invariably occur through the internet and related digital technologies. It is not the author’s aim to make a judgement about that phenomenon, but simply to explore the implications of such a position by looking at the evidence as it can be seen in the production of artwork at the current time. It is hoped that this research will yield evidence of new knowledge – but it is too early to qualify such an aim. The artist/author’s own practice as painter is the ‘test bed’ situation for the ongoing research into the implications of making paintings which have been largely informed by primary exposure to original works of art.
The hugely significant impact of digital technologies on the ‘the language of art’ in terms of both its inception and reception is such that this research is ongoing . Devane has tested his assertions with groups of students as well as with the audience of the conference as above. The research although speculative by nature is predicated Devane’s own art practice. Whilst there is a great deal of extant critical research examining ‘authenticity’ and mediated imagery (eg. Baudrillard’s simulacrum -mirror and screen analogy)it is Devane’s view that there is an opportunity for original research predicated on approaches to painting since the advent of digital technologies. It is Devane’s position that painting might occupy a culturally compelling position in a contemporary discourse and if it is viewed as a discreet activity rather than the more orthodox position of considering the practice of painting as part of an’ expanded practice’.