Daniel Silva: 'NOSTALGIAS OUTSIDE' Marta Cervera Gallery
: 01/11/1911 to 02/12/1911
If something can be said that we is saturated with history. No longer just for the drive schizoid to the file you want to negotiate with the charm of the fleeting moment since Baudelaire praised , but because the abuse of history to which we are accustomed to contemporary art produced a surfeit, a hypertrophy of historical memory that it is not, most of the time, more than a fetish or beautification of the history without any other grace that serve the dish warm melancholic and nostalgic. So, ready to eat, the story is presented adorned with hedonism and good intentions, not knowing that, as Adorno argued , "all hedonism is false in a false world."
If for the whole aesthetics of Frankfurt was built on a philosophy of history whose central theme was the role of art in the historical process, today, when the art functionality has been fixed in 'political function', the story has become the thing that brought hand to, from and against it as valid to all types of speech. So, sitting in the idioticia of recurrence for a political speech made from the body-art, the story is the substrate that make all sorts of excesses.
But is that in the current state of affairs, when every act of resistance is to advance the art in its infinite wisdom, the effects are so innocent, so candid prevailing laws of cause and effect, that everything has bitter taste of it too well. If Benjamin said that "a form of art can never be determined with regard to the effects it produces, with the current recurrence of historical memory, the art is so badly that, generally, are the typical effects of anger or guilt as it arrives.
In this sense, Rancière points out that the problem of political art, although described to him all art is inherently political, "lies more in the same approach in the budget of a sensible continuum between the production of images, gestures or words and the perception of a situation that involves the thoughts, feelings and actions of the audience. " That is, between what could and what occurred there and away: the effects are to be, because ... for something is political art!
But maybe not all the fault of art: postmodernism being as a time of crisis for the notion of progress, normal then never guess another way of thinking the world is not out of nostalgia.
The problem, we think, is that this recollection is left in the game stores in the 'look back', without further dialectical interplay between the different tempos. The artistic image, dialectic itself to be understood, Benjamin , "as the new in the context of what was always there", is cut off from all its temporalities resolved in express commodification of memory and history. Daniel
Silvo is not at all immune to this problem. So much so I do not hesitate to say that what the exhibition has until next February 12 is shown in Marta Cervera Gallery is "a series of works that make a fetish of socialist and revolutionary memory, looking backward and aestheticized uncritically. "
: 01/11/1911 to 02/12/1911
If something can be said that we is saturated with history. No longer just for the drive schizoid to the file you want to negotiate with the charm of the fleeting moment since Baudelaire praised , but because the abuse of history to which we are accustomed to contemporary art produced a surfeit, a hypertrophy of historical memory that it is not, most of the time, more than a fetish or beautification of the history without any other grace that serve the dish warm melancholic and nostalgic. So, ready to eat, the story is presented adorned with hedonism and good intentions, not knowing that, as Adorno argued , "all hedonism is false in a false world."
If for the whole aesthetics of Frankfurt was built on a philosophy of history whose central theme was the role of art in the historical process, today, when the art functionality has been fixed in 'political function', the story has become the thing that brought hand to, from and against it as valid to all types of speech. So, sitting in the idioticia of recurrence for a political speech made from the body-art, the story is the substrate that make all sorts of excesses.
But is that in the current state of affairs, when every act of resistance is to advance the art in its infinite wisdom, the effects are so innocent, so candid prevailing laws of cause and effect, that everything has bitter taste of it too well. If Benjamin said that "a form of art can never be determined with regard to the effects it produces, with the current recurrence of historical memory, the art is so badly that, generally, are the typical effects of anger or guilt as it arrives.
In this sense, Rancière points out that the problem of political art, although described to him all art is inherently political, "lies more in the same approach in the budget of a sensible continuum between the production of images, gestures or words and the perception of a situation that involves the thoughts, feelings and actions of the audience. " That is, between what could and what occurred there and away: the effects are to be, because ... for something is political art!
But maybe not all the fault of art: postmodernism being as a time of crisis for the notion of progress, normal then never guess another way of thinking the world is not out of nostalgia.
The problem, we think, is that this recollection is left in the game stores in the 'look back', without further dialectical interplay between the different tempos. The artistic image, dialectic itself to be understood, Benjamin , "as the new in the context of what was always there", is cut off from all its temporalities resolved in express commodification of memory and history. Daniel
Silvo is not at all immune to this problem. So much so I do not hesitate to say that what the exhibition has until next February 12 is shown in Marta Cervera Gallery is "a series of works that make a fetish of socialist and revolutionary memory, looking backward and aestheticized uncritically. "
from such budgets, right there where the majority of the works returned to the band of failure on their heads, a gesture, on the edge, denoting that the same artist's deep concern by the need to address these issues from another perspective, leaves little room for the emergence of other political experience, an experience that opens, as he says, "a space for politics in aesthetics." Tan
leaves little room, we think, not wanting to be that achieves its intention to implement it. And is that policy aestheticize thanks to a melancholic and aestheticized into the past, reify the utopian potential assumed by certain ideologies, is not at all create a disconnect in the policy-art network that will enable some kind of disagreement between the two, ie that breaks with the continuum to which we referred earlier.
not, and that if we are with him, he does an art who opts for an "immediate political effect through art." Because the effect can not be, or at least should not be a calculable transmission between artistic shock sensitive, intellectual awareness and political mobilization: the power of merchandise, reified and fetishized memory, turns against itself and plays with the same undecidability of their device.
But leaving things in ellipsis, go back in time with an uncritical eye and reified, not supposed to create optimal conditions for the emergence of any experience of rupture and dissent to reorganize the distance between art and politics. And if the aesthetic experience falls squarely within politics is, as Rancière says, "because it is also defined as an experience of dissent, as opposed to mimetic adaptation or ethics of artistic production for social purposes," which will "redefine what is visible, which can say it and what patients are able to do "
Therefore, we think, despite being well marked an attempt to Daniel Silvo to create a disconnect in the recurrent effects pursued by the continuum of boring and political art, art must operate a deep disconnect that is not satisfied with the suspension through beautification of the story, but a dare real disconnect.
0 comments:
Post a Comment