Drowning In Tech

Shai rapoport
3 min readJan 24, 2021


As I am still struggling to put my finger on what is it in Computational Arts that invokes such an anxious feeling inside me, I went back
into trying to pin point some additional paradoxes and problems arousing from the discourse in this weeks lecture.

Paradox :until it is mastered it is already gone, irrelevant, archived. In the age of spiraling false information of fake news and the rise of the DIY culture, it is important to note how far fetched it is to expect a reaction of artists to these trends by exposing what is considered to them as “the truth” or “facts”. The reason for this wobbly strategy is that intervening with the hearts of tech objects, computers, algorithms and data information is not only alien to massive populations and exclusive, but is also time consuming to master- as in it forces critics, artists and whoever not who wants to interfere
and serve the truth- to excel in it. To become yet again, an expert, the one who is called out by the mob, dethroned. To get the skills of a true Hacker one has to dedicate him/herself to such deep learning, only to wake up to see how lost he/she is inside this endless digital abyss.


In this blend comprising of constantly emerging innovations and in order not to be carried away by the tsunami of productive futuristic fantasy, I mark the boundaries between practices to be a case for investigation. I am especially
interested in drawing the clear lines between design which inherently goes hand in hand with capitalism and consumerism, and art-
which in the last century developed a sense of vigilance, critical practices and reflection on reality as we experience and perceive it.
When in the Computational Arts field, I am experiencing an identity crisis of my definition as an artist in a computational time where
categories of creative practices are being sometimes overlooked; changed and eventually redefined, forced to keep up with the speed of and finally
being consumed by contemporary digital technologies at all costs. Design might be a great enemy of the art, and what lures it into being a commodity, a gadget, reclaimed by the system till it becomes completely bend, entertaining, “techy”.


Towards a queer computation: An inspirational concept that draw my attention while trying to find myself in this weeks texts, is this article by Jacoub Gaboury who tries to define what does it mean to apply queer theory on computational processes and objects.
Gaboury’s ideas draw on the concepts of rejecting norms, reanacting and performing (executing) failure as a means of progression and change (by
creating glitches), misusing and disrupting the progress of ultimate productivity of digital technologies (in serve of capitalism) and more.
However this critical practice is also subject to some serious challenged along the way, most of them are related to being consumed (as
I have mentioned before in this post when referring to artistic practices in general but mainly the field of design) by the market and progression
to “serve” the future.
Its struggle to uncover an unmediated truth is what makes queer computational practice an underpinning of this present day’s art. It
is unfortunately inevitable and futile to try to resist technology (“break the computer”), IF one wants to have an impact on the future. If goal is present day, apocalyptical almost, then solutions such as the slow-movement will probably suggest a better solution of slowly fading out of the
scene yet preserving whatever culture we have left from prior order.



Shai rapoport