In 1939, a few years after the Dada and pop when the universe was still far in the horizon wrote Clement Greenberg his famous work "Avant-Garde and Kitsch." In that article, Greenberg was asked a question before us blush for its ingenuity: how can the same civilization produces "two things as different as a poem by TS Eliot and a Tin Pan Alley song, or a painting by Braque and a cover Saturday Evening Post . " To summarize: what surprised him the good Greenberg is how it was that something that came directly from the world of capitalism, ie visual production (bourgeoisie) of mass culture, is beginning to intrude on everyday life and acquire a larger role than the true culture (the avant-garde). Yes our eyes may seem elitist vision of Greenberg, but what happens is starting to display the following: if the mass culture, under the faith of the image, like the aesthetic and expressive effects of art (but not their processes) may occur in the future wish to acquire the art effects of mass culture, ie the capitalist uses distribution, merchandising and promotion of what other philosophers of the time they started calling the "Hollywoodization of art. And it was. But that would be another story. Artists have need of these distribution mechanisms I or management of the artistic subject. The list is too long. However, with few exceptions, it seemed that literature (especially poetry) remained outside this process of visualization. And so, perhaps, Greenberg cited a greater number of visual artists writers in the text. Can literature "sold" the same way? Interestingly, more than seventy years later, the question is reversed, can be a writer without the effects of mass culture? Literature needs urgently the image, but not just any image. The age of the world picture , Heidegger would say, requires an efficient and effective image, where the technology they support. Patrick spoke precisely this Pron in a recent article in the "cultural ABC" entitled "Promotion, renew or die." An article, no doubt, required reading. In the article in question are two distinct parts. The first, somewhat superficial in the way of narrating a recount as many artists seem to have discovered to do things beyond cool books, and a second part where deep and very suggestive reflects more concern about the problems that entails. To summarize this first part can be understood as a catalog of ways to compare these two texts:
a) " In tavern scene of a striking, colorful things and crowded there are several fantastic figures and quirky read their poems and shout. People around us are shouting, laughing and gesticulating. Our replies are sighs of love, strings of hiccups, poems, moos, meows. While someone reads his poems others paint. And others with masks background music and shouting their texts "
b) " Someone calls on stage, someone moans, two people read their texts while on their Face images are projected road, someone ordered the heads of pork and cook another person pretending to perform surgery. "
Apparently similar texts. The problem (if a problem, I do not think) is that the text to written in 1916 by Hugo Ball and b Pron by Patricio in 2011. Nearly a hundred years separate text from another. But as stated before this does not diminish the interest or suggestion of the text of Pron, on the contrary. The radical difference between to and the text b text is in the commercial effect of the visual , which is what Greenberg and talked about what we put on notice about Pron . In the second part of the text goes into this dispute. In Dada captained nihilism as any action as there was a specific purpose, while at present, as well visualized Greenberg, the author seeks to effect the effect the specific purpose of becoming visible. And it portrays him perfectly Pron "in a context in which the writers seem to be interested in things other than literature, and writing is seen in some cases as an obstacle to obtaining public visibility [...] the writers have diversified their activities not only result the perception that literature has lost his fight against audiovisual culture imagery, but also because they have internalized the rules of late capitalism. " Promotional videos, performances, events, etc., Like a hurricane go through the agenda of many writers in need of this parallel universe. As pointed out Pron, "is not the book that allows the existence of the writer, but this is what makes possible the books, the writer has begun to operate in the manner of some factories that periodically need to market a new appliance or a new car for not devaluing its "brand value". " And finally, proposes a question Pron key: if it be that this web of actions is not clear demonstration of the capitulation of the literature, "the uncritical acceptance by some of the supposed triumph of the footage on the legal culture." The question, in any case, is in the air, and perhaps insoluble. However, the obvious, to this flood of visual actions of promotion by the writer, not an answer that says this is good or this is bad. It is actually far more complex. But ... I really like and give the answer back in the eighties Lyotard: "the secret of artistic success, like that of a commercial success lies in a dosage between surprising and "well known" among the information and code. This is innovation in the arts, takes up formulas confirmed by previous successes, they are unbalanced through combinations with other formulas in principle and inconsistent amalgam of appointments, decorations, pastiches. [...] Thus, it is believed to express the spirit of the time, when not only reflects the market. The sublime is no longer art, but on speculation about art. "
[CODA]
Good. It may be true. But this has the paradoxical problem seen from the other side, the side of the visual arts. Curiously, in the visual arts the problem lies in the excessive literaturización artists. That is, now all want to be artists or writers also use the word. There are juicy and interesting examples such as the ubiquitous Peter G. Romero and many others. Without going any further in the same supplement in which Pron marked the victory of the footage on the legal culture, a few pages later in the section on art, we read what was happening on the other side of the pitch. And there we found what Ernest B. Gilman called "imperialism of language" that are subject to the visual arts. Take examples. Pron If the text occupies pages 18 and 19 of the supplement, on page 27 we can approach the interview with Bledsoe and Rosa for their participation in the Biennale of Arts of Cairo. Here we encounter phrases like "But here we have sought that reading times are evident. We can read the images. [...] We want the viewer use their imagination to read the image. " Read. Read. Read. On page 31, Fernando Castro Flórez talks about the work of Ivan Navarro currently outlined in the Madrid gallery District 4. Are in first place influence of a philosopher of language, Wittgenstein, and cites as critical, Ivan Navarro says this about his work: "My purpose in working with texts written in neon is to investigate an aspect of language that is often not consciously perceived by those who read . This is also to understand the text as image. " And Castro Florez said, "Well done with bricks also bewitch us with their simple words:" Ear, "" ELBOW "," FINGER "." Wittgenstein, text, reading, words.
Yes, it's funny, but paradox is irresolvable as good. Or not.
0 comments:
Post a Comment