Response to "Paul"

While this article/abridgement is an expertly written exploration of the nascense and impact of digital art on artistic convention, the only thing that really caught my attention was the degree of attention the author lent to the "hyperreal". This is true for completely subjective reasons; I consider myself something of a disciple of Dada/Surrealism on the rare occasions that I sit down with easel and brush or Photoshop and mouse. I especially appreciated reading of digital art's tendency to bring to question the border between what is real and what is not in art in terms of spatial relations and object addition and subtraction.

Keeping the above in mind, digital art, after reading this article, seems to me to be the next natural evolution of art itself. As time passes and the secrets of the Earth become fewer and fewer through advancements in science, a stronger answer than what has been offered thus far seems to be the only appropriate choice for the world's artists; that is to say that these artists will use technology against itself, for in order to counteract any absolute reality, it would seem that one would require the tools to construct an absolute surreality for balance's sake. Riding high upon this tangent, I will be especially interested in the multifarious outcomes of our age's "new media", or digital, interactive storytelling. Will we one day tell ourselves histories stories? Will our children take on a soldier's role in the French Revolution? Will they as English doctors wade through plague wards, offering their hands and lives? As reality becomes more concrete, more bold will appear art's inversely proportional relationship with "what we know".