This is your brain on electricity

Would you put electronic currents through your head? Sounds like scary stuff, right? Not only does it sound painful, I have a hunch that if you did it the wrong way it would be like putting a super magnet up to a computer; with the flip of a switch your mind would be gone, leaving your head a blank slate and your body vegetative.

Yeah, I’d rather that didn’t happen.

But with futurists beginning to wonder if we need to augment our brains to become smarter, do we – the general public – need to worry that we might be falling behind? Or here’s another question: Would augmenting our brains make us less human? Like too many questions with futurism, this takes us back to the question or what it means to be human.

And the question of what it means to be human is tied in so many ways to the uncanny.

Neil Harbisson cyborg

Neil Harbisson is widely considered to be the world’s first officially recognized cyborg. Born with a rare form of color blindness, the antenna is implanted directly into his brain and allows him to hear visible and invisible colors as sound. It also has a Wi-Fi connection. Photo from Wired.

Read more ›

Posted in Online articles Tagged with: ,

Weird Simpsons VHS

Sometimes the uncanny can be fun, and even hilarious. “Weird Simpsons VHS” by Yoann Hervo hits all the marks. This recent work takes the familiar opening from The Simpsons and, according to Art of the Title, turns it into “something that is at once bizarre, funny, and deeply unpleasant.” One of America’s favorite cartoon families has been turned on its head, but just enough that it leaves us feeling a bit icky inside.

Read more ›

Posted in Animation Tagged with:

A Blog About the Uncanny

Hello there, and welcome to my blog. It’s going to get weird pretty quickly.

This certainly is not my first venture into blogging, and for quite some time I stopped blogging altogether. I used to blog a lot about movies, and though this blog will certainly cover movies quite a bit, I’ve stopped one big part of what I was doing before: criticizing. The more I watched documentaries and read stories about art from the perspective of artists, it occurred to me that the critic criticizes because the critic can’t do what the artist does. The critic (at least many of critics) dumps on art and artists to be recognized without having to create anything original, and because positive criticism places the critic in a vulnerable position where he has to defend the merits of that which he is praising. Negative criticism doesn’t require the critic to provide answers about what is right, merely answers about what is wrong. Negativity also lends itself better to humor, which many critics thrive on, as something has to be at the butt of the joke. Read more ›

Posted in About the blog