Neiither point, neither flat nor polite
20
Nov
Contemporary art expressed in the digital world, extrapolates the human senses
being synesthesia, multisensory and multidimensional; not only as the plane because it is not its starting point but mainly in the way of establishing connections between bodies going beyond spoken and painted, to the projected and multi sensitized.
The starting point is then the fractal, where there are no 0 (dot), 1, 2 or 3 (three-dimensional) dimensions, and the critique of the plane starts there but goes from on-off devices, through the senses until arriving at augmented reality and projected reality: the holographic and the virtual.
The analysis made by Jacques Rancière in The Destiny of Images, which starts from the idea that word and painting are inverted where: “the power of words is no longer the model that representation must have as a norm” (Rancière, 2003, p. )
Taking up the classic analyzes of Hegel “pioneering in this work of redescription that, in front of the works of Gerard Dou, Teniers and Adrian Brouwer, as of the works of Rubens and Rembrandt, throughout all the romantic period, elaborated a visibility of a painting” flat ” (emphasis added), of an ‘autono- mous’ painting … the real pictures despised by Hegel, is not what we see at first. “(Rancière, 2003, p.87), which provides the” rupture of the representation ‘that linked the reproduction of a repetitive model of life “and would add” idealist “(RANCIÉRE, 2003, idem).
But there will be the opposite movement and “Greenberg opposes the naivety of Kandinsky’s antirepresentative program to the idea that it is not the abandonment of figuration but the conquest of the surface that is important” (Rancière, 2003, ibid.).
What the French Henri Matisse (1869-1954) and the Russian Wassily Kandinsky (1866-1944) explored are more than colors, shapes and new surfaces (like the fractals) there is something of the “spiritual” blend in Composition VII and the Caracol of Matisse (in the figures).
Of course this is not a digital art directly, but an epiphany of rupture with form.
being synesthesia, multisensory and multidimensional; not only as the plane because it is not its starting point but mainly in the way of establishing connections between bodies going beyond spoken and painted, to the projected and multi sensitized.The starting point is then the fractal, where there are no 0 (dot), 1, 2 or 3 (three-dimensional) dimensions, and the critique of the plane starts there but goes from on-off devices, through the senses until arriving at augmented reality and projected reality: the holographic and the virtual.
The analysis made by Jacques Rancière in The Destiny of Images, which starts from the idea that word and painting are inverted where: “the power of words is no longer the model that representation must have as a norm” (Rancière, 2003, p. )
Taking up the classic analyzes of Hegel “pioneering in this work of redescription that, in front of the works of Gerard Dou, Teniers and Adrian Brouwer, as of the works of Rubens and Rembrandt, throughout all the romantic period, elaborated a visibility of a painting” flat ” (emphasis added), of an ‘autono- mous’ painting … the real pictures despised by Hegel, is not what we see at first. “(Rancière, 2003, p.87), which provides the” rupture of the representation ‘that linked the reproduction of a repetitive model of life “and would add” idealist “(RANCIÉRE, 2003, idem).
But there will be the opposite movement and “Greenberg opposes the naivety of Kandinsky’s antirepresentative program to the idea that it is not the abandonment of figuration but the conquest of the surface that is important” (Rancière, 2003, ibid.).
What the French Henri Matisse (1869-1954) and the Russian Wassily Kandinsky (1866-1944) explored are more than colors, shapes and new surfaces (like the fractals) there is something of the “spiritual” blend in Composition VII and the Caracol of Matisse (in the figures).
Of course this is not a digital art directly, but an epiphany of rupture with form.
RANCIÈRE, J. O destino das imagens. Trad. . Rio de Janeiro: Contraponto, 2003.
