[-empyre-] 2 r é ponses

[Aliette <aliette@criticalsecret.org>]

Réponse à Sean, puis Réponse à Marc et à Isabelle
(pour éviter de multiples emails)
_______________________
Réponse à Sean

As determination of heroism the eternal recurrence of Nietzsche does not
regard the depressive conception of the time of Hegel...

The eternal recurrence Zarathoustra can be linked such as the high level of
Ethic in Nietzsche philosophy as a proper representation of the life as
returning circles; it is not faith, not more a real system (even we can
found several sources), but a challenge: may be the metaphor as a stool
being the sublime scene raising the man with the idea of what in
consciousness at every moment of his life he can do or not do by the way he
can imagine possible the recurrence of his same existence as destiny.  That
would say all the contrary of the reminiscence or of the "remanence" but the
projection, not the " remord " (regret or reproach) nor melancholia, but the
desire of the future...

as vital transcendence.

It is an abstract conception that does not tell of the forms if they will
change or not - in fact they change even and but the cycle (in Marx theory
the change coming by the revolution). Here is an opposite to Christian
concept of progress, that is not cycle but unidirectional innovation to the
"best" ( God or Utopia being the unreachable and inimitable example ).

As for the conception of the cycle ( that any French analyst consider more
coming from Vico -whose certain consider the innovator of the modern
historicist materialism* and accepting the barbarian come back after the
equality between human societies, in which Marx could have thought his own
concept of decay of the State- than directly from Pythagore or Platon, or
stoics; more the notion of return of history at Hegel becoming the
repetition of History at Marx from which front of the repression of the
Commune de Paris he imagined how to prevent the next one, thanks the
proletariat dictatorship... As there was possible to thought of the decay of
the State, so the dictatorship would not be eternal... )

But from the Hegelian vision can be the repetition of Art -no revolution.
Can be Chinese artists work to caricatured forms of modernity that we have
transmitted. But may be not.

I have still noticed of how the negation is the only way of saying what we
feel but don't know. Thus we say " it is not " as "no" in mathematics of
ensemble... So using negation is not necessarily negative.

Note
* http://www.marxists.org/francais/lafargue/works/1909/00/laf_19090000c.htm
La Méthode historique de Karl Marx/ 3
Lois historiques de Vico
(Paul Lafargue, anarchist becoming marxist and activist of the Commune,
husband of Lara -Marx's daugther)


On 14/03/06 20:08, "sean@flatlife.net" <sean@flatlife.net> probably wrote:

> Nietzsche's idea of an Eternal Recurrence comes to mind in relation to GH's
> comments about the Chinese contemporary video artist.
> 
> The thought as I understand it is that all has happened in an eternity
> past...given this notion I rest in the idea that everything is antiquity or
> "familiar"...how liberating really...
> 
> I think the notion of modern or new or fresh or unknown comes from a desire to
> represent a distinguishing characteristic within the totality of
> existence...to achieve the intended result (becoming distinguished), much
> negativity needs to occur...the subjugation of those who conduct similar
> practices for starters...a claiming of expressive characteristics as
> support...
> 
> I do not feel that particular forms are what give an expression it's vitality
> or edge...to me, it is the life within the form to which I respond...
> 
> Maybe this too simplistic, but I do see it...
> 
> Best, 
> 
> Ripple, Sean
> 
> www.FlatLife.net
> www.myspace.com/flalife
> www.Incurve.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> gh comments: 
> 
> I think the question is who defines what art is? And also who defines
> what an artist is? Antonin Artaud talks about that is his essay, No
> More Masterpieces from the book Theatre and its' Double. Maybe
> someone on the list has the exact quote but I'll paraphrase,...."each
> generation has the right to define in their own terms in their own
> way what is means to love, hate, feel loss and so on. Let the plays
> of the past dwell in the past. No more masterpieces." There is
> another dynamic at work in the topic for the Documenta proposed by
> Beurgel, that is the learnedness and the weight of history that
> people in the art world work with.
> I went to the DIVA (NYC) this weekend and saw a lot of video art.
> One piece that struck me was a video of a young Chinese man's face.
> The video was him doing a series of video-performance works. On piece
> was of him putting elastic bands all over his head to distort the
> skin. He then slowly cut them off. The elastic bands left the
> inevitable crisscross trails on his face. This piece was exactly
> like the work of a 1970's Austrian artist whose name escapes me. He
> used to do the same thing and photograph the results. He called them
> Farce Faces. The work of course come from what children do when they
> are playing with elastic (rubber) bands and their parents aren't
> looking. I've encountered this with Mainland Chinese Contemporary
> Art. They are doing work that is 1970's process/ body/ conceptual
> art. So my question is, is this a cultural colonialism? Is this the
> Chinese playing catch-up with Western Modernism? Does Artaud's
> dictum apply here?
> What I suspect is that the art world would rather deal with an art
> form that is familiar such as video or conceptual art than try to
> seriously integrate digital art forms into the discourse. Simply put
> most curators are not trained to deal with computers.
> In any case I said in my first post that performance art was perhaps
> the most promising thread of discourse to come out of modernism.
> Perhaps that is what is happening with the Chinese. It is interesting
> to come back around to the initial question "Is Modernity our
> Antiquity?" and wonder what the "our" means.
> My original art algorithm is an art work made specifically for this
> venue (on line discussion). It has no value in the greater art
> world. It has no use value. It doesn't exist for any other than the
> few people that read about it here. It is, however, art.
> 
> http://nujus.net/gh/
> http://post.thing.net/gh/
> http://spaghetti.nujus.net/rantapod
> http://spaghetti.nujus.net/artDirt
> 

////////////////////////////
Réponse à Marc et à Isabelle

Je suis "à peu près" d'accord avec ce que dit Marc.

Je ne suis "pas tout à fait d'accord" avec ce que dit Isabelle.

Penser depuis 0 c'est le cas dans tous les grands schismes. Peut-être est-il
raisonnable de penser que la crise iconoclaste que nous traversons ne soit
pas qu'un effet de mode mais en effet l'émergence d'un schisme profond ?

Penser depuis 0 -dans un environnement en tous cas ? oui c'est le cas limite
de Monsieur Teste de Paul Valéry, qui anticipe notre époque alors qu'il n'a
que 23 ans pour une parution en 1876 -le premier texte de Monsieur Teste,
est paru je crois à cette date. A cause de ce livre radical ? plusieurs
carnets? Valéry a été considéré comme l'initiateur de la modernité radicale
littéraire, en France.
http://agora.qc.ca/mot.nsf/Dossiers/Paul_Valery

Pas du tout un communiste néanmoins un poète radical non collaborateur.
C'est lui qui a répondu au discours de réception du maréchal Pétain à
l'académie française en 1931, dans un contre-discours qui poliment prévenait
du pire ;  il fut démis de son poste d¹administrateur du centre
universitaire méditerranéen de Nice par le gouvernement de Vichy en 1941.

US/English (original site)
http://www.paulvalery.org/
http://www.newcriterion.com/archive/21/mar03/valery2.htm
FR
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/paulvalery/valery-francais.htm

Agamben, Giorgio. L'io, l'occhio, la voce. In Paul Valéry, Libero Salaroli
(Translation). Monsieur Teste. Il Saggiatore. Milan, 1980, pp. 9-24.

Il y a certainement des livres anglophones contemporains qui l'expriment
aussi.

Pour ce qui me concerne, je ne fais pas de théorie, je réfléchis à travers
mon activité sur les cas de la perte de nos droits de décision et de
conscience, non pas d'experts mais de libres citoyens (artistes, éditeurs,
amateurs)... Notamment aussi sur le sens de la liberté de créer des oeuvres.
Et je pense que le cas de la fusion des sciences et des arts en un lieu de
la vérité par la preuve de la reproductibilité des faits, puisque là est ce
qui caractérise les sciences, est un point périlleux pour les arts, à moins
que les arts ne contaminent les sciences?

En fait ce pourraient bien n'être que les technosciences, non les sciences,
qui travaillent avec les arts ; les hybrides composites en Art moderne
c''est une idée qui remonte à la fin du XIXè siècle, au moment de l'"Art
nouveau" organique - voir la tortue incrustée de pierres précieuses dans "À
rebours" de Huysmans
http://cage.rug.ac.be/~dc/Literature/ARebours/
(l'ouvrage intégral en sources libres)
Les hybrides bienvenus au MIT oui et pourquoi pas pourvu que ça ne modifie
pas biologiquement l'environnement-voyez le CAE;-)

De toutes façons, si on confond "penser" et expression d'une pensée, avec
faire de la théorie, ou théorie, on est mal partis pour continuer à avoir le
droit de réfléchir...

Avant-hier, un de nos camarades, bluescreen
http://www.b-l-u-e-s-c-r-e-e-n.com/
http://www.b-l-u-e-s-c-r-e-e-n.net/
a été arrêté par la police à Marseille, en France, et ses ordinateurs
saisis, pour complicité en tant que développeur dans une oeuvre "incitant au
suicide de la jeunesse" - s'agissant en fait de l'oeuvre de l'artiste
Mouchette inspirée par le film de Robert bresson "Mouchette"!
http://mouchette.org/
http://mouchette.net/index.html

Il est en prison depuis ; de nouveau son site est en ligne et il sortira
apparemment ce matin, mais il aura un procès. Nous attendons la suite.

Je n'imagine pas un seul instant que la réflexion critique sur l'art et la
modernité contemporaine, en regard de notre tradition de la modernité comme
antiquité, puisse un seul instant aujourd'hui se désemparer de la réflexion
politique.

Les artistes, les poètes et les psychanalystes en tant qu'ils entretiennent
une relation avec la folie, seraient peut-être bien les derniers demiurges
avec les "Sans Domiciles Fixes" de la société d'aujourd'hui, du moins
doivent-ils le revendiquer.

Tout n'est pas lisible ni descriptible.
 
>> On 14/03/06 13:10, "iarvers@free.fr" <iarvers@free.fr> probably wrote:
>> 
>>> Re: Moore N = c (G.H. Hovagimyan)
>>> i think that we touch thepoint, what is funny is that at the same time on
>> the
>>> list spectre, an artists decided to quit the list because of some too
>>> theoritical posts, and he said i quit : it is too much theory fro me!
>> 
>> Oh oh ! You are not so informed that you would not know that he has come
>> back right now in Spectre. More we have change personal emails;)
>> 
>> Please to correct it...
>> 
>>> 
>>> why can't we think from zero? is it really impossible? every mode of
>> thinking
>>> is
>>> a reaction to another, isn't it possible to think from the ground, without
>>> quoting any ancestors or precient thinker? it seems that it is not
>> possible.
>>> At
>>> school, our brains are transformed into computational machines, you are
>> never
>>> asked to say what you are thinking about a particular point, the only think
>>> you
>>> have to do is to compute and repeat the informations given by somebody who
>>> knows!!!
>>> 
>>> "Nobody is interested in what you think, beginn first by learning the
>>> classics!"
>>> 
>>> In the art world, that's the same, right now in France, there is a debate
>>> about
>>> critics who don't want to use philosophy or theory to write, it is
>> denounced
>>> by
>>> all the critic world. "It is impossible to have a critical discourse
>> without
>>> having the theorical tools!!"
>>> 
>>> And if you try, good luck! that's possible but, still difficult
>>> and you fall in an other problem you were mentioning before, you quote
>> without
>>> knowing it other artworks, because what you did was already done before. It
>>> also happened in the Palais de Tokyo at the exhibition "Notre Histoire"
>> sic!!
>>> with a big skelett sculpture that is a replic of another sculpture
>> presented
>>> 15
>>> years before somewhere else in France.
>>> 
>>> So it seems that even without knowing what happends before that we repeat
>> it?
>>> Would it depends on our way of thinking, is it natural or cultural? i am
>> still
>>> hoping that it is possible remembering an idea i really loved in philosophy
>>> with aristote, saying that in each operson, there is a capacity to produce
>>> knowledge,
>>> 
>>> isabelle arvers
>>> www;isabelle-arvers.com