Having just finished the first read-through of this article, I can safely say that it is a lot to take in. There are many nuggets of gold strewn throughout this soupy academic mire which have each been tiny eureka moments about my own work. In this article, the point is made that technology, and the obscured means of creating technological objects, are a form of enchantment and “it achieves its effect vie the enchantment cast by its technical means, the manner of its coming into being, or, rather, the idea which one forms of its coming into being”.

I”m starting (again, perhaps? I may have written a blog post on the matter before…) to view electronics as a form of strange ritualistic magic, in which the controllers of electricity place small objects in precise arrangements, invisibile forces act upon these objects, and a tangible effect is seen/felt/heard. Whilst also grappling with ideas about synthesis being perhaps a ‘done’ field, Gell’s ideas about the enchanting processes through which art is made having an effect on the viewer has made an impression.

I do disagree somewhat with his ideas – it seems Gell is saying that the technical proficiency of the artist and the mental difficulty that the viewer experiences trying to imagine themselves creating a particular art object are the primary sources of artistic merit. I may be mistaken on this front; the introduction, which seems to shed light on the exact framing of the argument, is full of lofty, inpenetrable sentements. It seems that Gell outlines his theory as a method through which anthropology can analyse art, but beyond that I am lost for now.

His describing of art “as a concrete product of human ingenuity”, amongst other similar descriptions, exudes a pleasing phrasology that appeals to my sensibilities as someone who dabbles with both art and technology to create my work. There is a feeling of awe around artistic objects as technologically advanced works, made only through countless hours of patient, quiet working. This is exactly how electronics projects come to fruition, and explains why his wording pleases me.

I will give this article another read-through at some point, and try to make more sense of the introduction. Perhaps this will help me frame the point of view better.