Week 2 Discussion Post (How does Digital Art remain Art?)

On the question of what defines art, we find ourselves making multiple abstractions that ultimately yield no concrete answer. However, often time when we think about what is art, we envision work by Old Master paintings. This is a misconception that somehow gatekeeps the true meaning of what art is, in all its abstractions. My question is, how does digital art (or art through digital means) remain art? In order to answer this question we must first recognize that Chicanx art "continue[s] the advocacy objectives of protesting injustice, improving education, cultural self-reflection, and solidarity with oppressed populations..." (Zapata, 130) I asked myself the same question considering what digital art implies, which is simply a shift in tools. Zapata makes it really clear that it is not the tools which make art impactful, but the message conveyed. This is the "cultural layer" Lev Manovich writes on (Zapata, 130) that Chicanx artists stay true to. Hence solidifying that art is not necessarily based on what materials are used, but what message is being conveyed. For example, Jacalyn Lopez Garcia better encapsulates this concept with her work with Glass Houses, where she leads the viewer through a guided tour of her personal history and journey through her three identities over time: Mexican, Mexican-American, and finally, Chicana. (Zapata, 136)This piece of art stood out to me because of how she used a relatively new medium and technology to artistically express herself through a new set of tools. However, a new medium does not warrant a complete erasure or avoidance of traditional imagery or topics. This is best exemplified by Gonzalez's Arte es Vida piece where he recreates/reimagines papel picado digitally (Zapata, 134). Digital art remains art because art is about how the artist interacts with their mediums, not just the mediums alone.