Although the notion of the sublime refers to the problematic contradictions that might exist between aesthetics and ethics in the sense of responding to it is legitimate for the human misery cause aesthetic pleasure (Moritz ) moved later to the nature (Kant ) - today, once the domain of nature for the art has become almost complete, the question arises whether the category of the sublime not have to apply more in relation to this hipertecnificación rather than the overwhelming feeling that could cause us infinite nature.
If the experience of the sublime comes to be, from Kant , an internal force of our minds why, while we have the experience of being threatened, it also gives us, in return, the feeling that we can resist , that are superior to nature, today, the impression of the sublime is active there that the threat of technical limitations imposed on us not just where it is respected.
Put another way: if the sublime therefore suggests that beyond any relationship between imagination and reason thanks to which we feel powerless and fearful at the same time, through the development of moral ideas in us, we resolve in our humanity due to being able to judge as independent beings in nature, today, when the whole nature has been modernized, the sublime refers to a specific relationship of fear that causes us to be growing preponderance of the technique against which our little or no freedom can do but, yes, expect the unexpected. Thus
, and to go ahead, it will then be sublime postmodern fascination with the accident. If the sublime refers to short-circuit occurs in the free play of imagination and enter the reason (Kant ), if it points to the representation of the unrepresentable (Lyotard ), no doubt it would become postmodern sublime that horror horror provides us with almost absolute power of the technique.
The unexpected, the tragic, the accident: the sublime has been condensed through the story impossible to put a stop to the field of aesthetic experience including it as independent and autonomous field. That the separation between art and ethics is inherently weak points is where the concept of sublime. And the sublime is located right there, between good and ethical category and between beauty as an aesthetic category, to stress the contradictions of autonomy as an aesthetic absolute limit which aims to have no end.
aesthetics of horror and ethical challenge will then hand to achieve deeper judgments as that of Rilke asserting that "beauty is only the beginning of terror, still barely endure, and we admire him so much because, serene disdains destroy us. " That is precisely what is awake hipertecnologizada nature: a paralyzing fear, a fear exorbitant to know ourselves as puppets in the hands of the technique.
If the experience of the sublime comes to be, from Kant , an internal force of our minds why, while we have the experience of being threatened, it also gives us, in return, the feeling that we can resist , that are superior to nature, today, the impression of the sublime is active there that the threat of technical limitations imposed on us not just where it is respected.
Put another way: if the sublime therefore suggests that beyond any relationship between imagination and reason thanks to which we feel powerless and fearful at the same time, through the development of moral ideas in us, we resolve in our humanity due to being able to judge as independent beings in nature, today, when the whole nature has been modernized, the sublime refers to a specific relationship of fear that causes us to be growing preponderance of the technique against which our little or no freedom can do but, yes, expect the unexpected. Thus
, and to go ahead, it will then be sublime postmodern fascination with the accident. If the sublime refers to short-circuit occurs in the free play of imagination and enter the reason (Kant ), if it points to the representation of the unrepresentable (Lyotard ), no doubt it would become postmodern sublime that horror horror provides us with almost absolute power of the technique.
The unexpected, the tragic, the accident: the sublime has been condensed through the story impossible to put a stop to the field of aesthetic experience including it as independent and autonomous field. That the separation between art and ethics is inherently weak points is where the concept of sublime. And the sublime is located right there, between good and ethical category and between beauty as an aesthetic category, to stress the contradictions of autonomy as an aesthetic absolute limit which aims to have no end.
aesthetics of horror and ethical challenge will then hand to achieve deeper judgments as that of Rilke asserting that "beauty is only the beginning of terror, still barely endure, and we admire him so much because, serene disdains destroy us. " That is precisely what is awake hipertecnologizada nature: a paralyzing fear, a fear exorbitant to know ourselves as puppets in the hands of the technique.
But is that their domain is so broad, so calm the astonishment of his power, even that rise above ourselves to pointing Kant and supported for us to unveil our quality of free and separate from nature, it is today without doubt bracketed due to the fact that our subjectivity, our 'being subject', is based on the technologies themselves. Thus so evil, the power of technology, the fear that cause has no counterpart in any sense of rationality overbidding free. The man, in his own being-subject to the technique, has no room to maneuver from which to reaffirm their ethics. The subject does not fit all: the aesthetic experience is that make sure, to be covered in a power that exceeds a way that can destroy you at any time and in which it is impossible to find any fault, no point of fracture which a filter emancipatory potential.
Both, therefore, is its power, the future, hints of desire, is not even conceived as possible ( Jameson), it is their power that, without the anchor posed the sublime to the autonomy art, art itself is going extinct in a world increasingly dominated by technology (Heidegger ) So finally, is his power, with a sublime concept that asks nothing of the subject, is deleted the demarcation line regarding what is called culture industry (Adorno ).
postmodern sublime, and away from work as a boundary from which to operate the free play between understanding and imagination that standing on the issue of an aesthetic view, within the logic of capitalism weaves a web of possible / impossible that they administered a field ideological desiring founded on notions of wealth, happiness and success.
In this process, if ever there has been accelerating dynamic progressive detaching from the anthropological dimension of the concept of sublime left everything hipertecnificación side of nature, that has been initiated by the retailer. The sublimity of the goods have been undoubtedly the catalyst through which the modern experiences have expanded the field to an alienation from all human activities, clearing and releasing the drive topology for the establishment of the ideology's own capital.
His procedure is as simple as sophisticated its results: if the sublime aesthetic mediation appears there where imagination / understanding is unable to account a certain overwhelming experience, the sublime of the commodity appears as structural effect, there where the supposed satisfaction of the goods is unable to give an account of desire.
If the sublime is beyond all experience, while appealing directly to the subject, the commodity appears then, in its dual appear as the ultimate abstraction and corporeality-high commodity as "something substantially supersensible" (Marx ) - as the preferred instance to account for the appalling destruction to the sublime subject to subject. The fascination that operates at the heart of the good is that the person knows it Sublime merchandise -The constant and perpetual mismatch between desire and joy-could end up destroying him.
maximized in the perfection that has become the capital movement speed limit, get the goods on the subliminal movement never give what is asked, anesthetize the area of \u200b\u200bgreatest extent possible, all of it, make in virtuality. Thus, the sublime monopolizes the entire field of virtual and otherwise, being a substitute for a reality turned into mere appearance, topology becomes instinctual libidinal and where the image is unable to imagine the real and, in fact, it is itself the real (Baudrillard ).
In this sense, the show as an affirmation of appearance gets overwhelming subvert the dialectical relationship of history so that now "the true is a moment of falsehood", whereas, correcting Hegel, all reality is show and every show is real ( Debord ).
Thus, the sublime of the good works constantly sliding symbolic dominance of the absence on a profusion of images that, in its brutal immediacy, become reality. In this sense, the postmodern sublime coincide in the limit of the total cancellation of reality by the libidinal field created by the goods, with the implosion of the real, on the edge of the instantaneous a world whose time has come, with the crack of the images (Virilio ).
is, the sublime match, and finally, with the possibility of impossibility, with decibilidad what is impossible to say with the accident, with time-zero of all experience.
This paradoxical nature of the Sublime borrows many of the qualities of the Real (Lacan ). The Real is that empty place completely beyond us, the Real is the noumenon which we can not reach because to do so, but we would not see the true face of terror. Similarly, the libidinal game of the goods would not be targeted but also to fill the empty place of the Real that we de-subject: by promising impossible jouissence a plus, run like crazy after the supreme joy impossible: something that relieves us in our continuing to be sent to an outside, a little more beyond us.
In conclusion, if before it was nature that caused our fear today is that this hipertecnologización, and even impossible for us to have a normalized relationship with reality. If reality has accelerated and is already at the limit of its virtuality, the sublime is so close to us that in his match with the virtual, we can almost say that our fundamental ethos is now the fear and terror.
sublime in its making dam against the awesomeness, subject in its call to go beyond itself to autofundamentarse ethically serve in his will in the elucidation of the foundational paradoxes about ethics may have the autonomy of art, has been increasingly shifting its borders to abut and in the media implosion in the vicinity of the accident telematics, with what now has become our reality: a frightening phantasmagoria sustained in a game of appearances caused by the implosion of goods, images speed limit.
therefore, no way out: the aesthetics, it may surrender deal with the sublime, is to go for an art to rehearse the accident, and shouting, unable as possible, a final difference, a final play to facilitate a more calm, a little more humanity. In this sense, an aesthetic of resistance for a category of sublime that has finally dedicated the field drive can only be understood as an aesthetic that violates the system, that even simulate the impossible: that the crash is here.
Therefore, and arrived at this point, what strategies are to be taken for himself an art that conceals their needs and dares to fully launch after radical sublime accident?
Aesthetics
blindness: disturbing look, apply another scopic regime hipervisible opposite of what and who applies and resistance. Scopic nihility: hide from view what 'should' be there. Aesthetics of Resistance as a siniestralización of view. Remove from view what should be present. Thus, while it resists against hipervisible, systemic risk is evidenced as collective blindness and disorientation of our relationship with reality.
Aesthetics of disappearance: against automation of perception and the industrialization of vision. Apology infralight what, that something is there this but at the same time, the vision is unable to see. What infralight (inframince of Duchamp ) refers to the optical unconscious Benjamin. Unthought, unsaid, what is not done, also what is left of what was said and done, the impossible to delimit: the reflection and the surface, shade and soil, the track and field
aesthetics / politics of identity: art change the perception. With the technique, the function of art ceases to be a mimesis of nature to take a political role (Benjamin ). Looking policies, policies of view as a priori of a new division of the sensible (Rancière ). What gives us to see?, What image is unbearable?
Aesthetics of disappointment event has already happened, the goods have been consumed. Aesthetics of trash, recycling. Kitsch as what appears to us as we consumed ( Eco )
Aesthetics / seduction of the accident: inserted into the production machine to play with the accident, to try an escape, a break. Microcaos. Enter perhaps the aberrant within the entire system, altering the space libidinal "to reflect the impossibility of any utopia. From utopia to heterotopia (Vattimo ).
trauma Aesthetics: if the sublime is equated with the Real, this would refer to an art aesthetic that attempts to be within the Real to check the depletion that occurs, to simulate or face-to-face with the traumatic existence. Thus, excessive abject art, trauma, obscene.
sinister Aesthetics: associated with the first, the sinister indicates that the subject is too close to the Real. A point to reach the accident, the Real, is chosen by an output exhaust. Anxiety, alienation, unheimlicht Freudian. Staging of the trauma to stay here a little more or a little further. The perfect simulation.
Aesthetics (in) Memory: big mistake: reify memory. Because, how much memory is one able to withstand? Better to play the anticipation / recollection: are we able to imagine the not-always-been? Effect Larssen, "the excessive proximity of the event and broadcast in real time creates uncertainty, a virtual event that deprives its historical dimension d and subtract to the memory" (Baudrillard )
ephemeral Aesthetics: a final gesture: to collect potentially destroy the present time. If the aura is a particular pattern of space-time, is that destruction is also auratic. New digital image ontology: their time, now is the real-time: is there room for a and -utopia? ( Brea )
Aesthetics of suspicion: definitely on the other side there is nothing. Under the support there is nothing. The Acccidente, although the (im) possible, always leave their mark ... will never happen!
0 comments:
Post a Comment