Week 2: Parra-McGlothin, Paloma

 In what ways does the incorporation of technology into Chicanx printmaking actually hinder the message against injustice and how is that either ceasing or advancing as technology advances? 

In many ways, we can no longer live without technology and as it becomes more ingrained in the actions of our everyday lives as it continues to become more advanced, complex, and pertinent. One of the main dangers of reliance on technology is the colonial patterns that limit certain forms of art and the messages the artists may be trying to convey and the ability of whoever controls it to determine what messages get distributed to the general public, in other words, the ones who could ultimately do something to stop the corruption within the technological institutions that run our media intake. Rupert Garcia viewed, with good reason, “digital strategies part of a commercial practice, [and] that it would corrupt the purity of fine art”. Which could be interpreted in so many ways from turning attention away from more traditional practices rooted in detail, to emphasizing the disparity in accessibility to digital media or technology in general, and creating an environment in which the artist is credited for their technological capabilities as opposed to their artistic abilities. Despite this thought, Garcia soon opened up to and embraced technology to the point where he abandoned handmade printing all together. This was instrumental in the history of digital media and was a wonderful way to include Garcia’s political messages in a newer form of representation, however, is the retelling of these messages in new forms of art really advancement? Despite new and refreshing forms of storytelling, such as Jesus Barraza’s work I am Alex Nieto and My Life Matters, the stories are the deep rooted damage that is difficult to express without somehow dehumanizing the victim by turning them into a temporary martyr or creating more trauma p*rn for people of color, technological advancements or not.