BORIS GROYS: The Topology of Contemporary Art PART 2: MULTIPLE MODERNITIES. 5. MONICA AMOR: On the Contingency of. Contemporary Art in Time” considers some examples, and conse- quences, of .. Cf. Boris Groys, “The Topology of Contemporary Art,” in Antinomies of Art. Synopsis: To understand the qualitative properties of “Contemporary Art”, the Author examines the interplay between Modern & Post-modern.
|Country:||Central African Republic|
|Published (Last):||11 August 2008|
|PDF File Size:||8.15 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.88 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
More important the installation is in itself, as it was already said, a space of decision making — and first of grots of decisions concerning the differentiation between old and new, traditional and innovative.
You are commenting using your WordPress. Is it enough that the public simply goes by the assumption that an original exists somewhere, hidden away and protected, unless its aforementioned destruction does take place and is purposely made known? That does not mean, however, that the installation is somehow “immaterial.
That shows very clearly that a film is radically, essentially changed by being put under the conditions of an installation visit — being a same copy the film becomes a different original. By adt to use this website, you agree to their use.
Leave a Reply Cancel reply Enter your comment here The topology of today’s networks of communication, of generation, translation and distribution of images is extremely heterogeneous.
These images contemporaru objects present themselves in a contwmporary immediate way. Further, this implies for Kierkegaard that Christ is really new and not merely recognizably different-and that Christianity is a manifestation of difference beyond difference. The mere fact that a modernist artwork is still recognizable as an artwork means namely that this artwork reproduces the general conditions of recognizability of an artwork as artwork — even if a form of this artwork seems to be quite original.
By closure the installation creates its outside and opens itself to this outside.
The metaphoric use of the notion of “generation” as it practiced now in a context of technology is very revealing. The artwork that is conceived as a machine of infinite expansion and inclusion is not an open artwork but an artistic counterpart of an imperial hybris. And that is the main problem of Benjamin’s contejporary On a seperate note, I have a hard time commenting on the blog. There are no eternal copies as there are no eternal originals. And to transmit an information from one generation of hardware and software to a next generation means to transform it in a significant way.
Is it the same copy of the same copy of the same original?
The iconoclastic gesture that produces the modernist artwork functions of course not simply as a manifestation of an artistic subjectivity understood as pure negativity. Under the conditions of Post -Modernity art becomes a lie that manifests itself as a lie — finding its truth in a classical paradox of a liar confessing to be a liar.
In contrast to Modernism, the post-modern project recognizes the transformative nature of time and space, while utilizing mechanical and technological reproduction to re-contextualize objects.
The installation is, as it was already said, a finite space of presence where different images and objects are arranged and exhibited. The otpology accent on the loss of the aura is, on one hand, totally legitimate, and certainly in tune with the overall intention of Benjamin’s text. Being often enough characterized as “formalistic” Modernist art can hardly be defined in formal terms: Since then, the concept of aura has made an bboris philosophical carrier, yet largely as part topolohy the famous formula of the “loss of the aura” characterizing the fate of the original in the modern age.
That is why contemporary art is less production of individual artworks than it is manifestation of an individual decision to include or to exclude things and images that circulate anonymously in our world- to give them a new context or to deny it to them: The iconoclastic and the new can only be recognized by the art historically informed, museum-trained gaze.
Postmodernist art gives up the claim to truth that Modernism has raised. And more than that: Contemporary art is working on ot level of context, framework, background, or of a new theoretical interpretation.
The Topology of Contemporary Art: Boris Groys | alfredcrucible
The images are all the time transformed, rewritten, reedited, reprogrammed on their way through these networks — and become also to be visually different by every such a step. That is, it emerges precisely at the very moment it is getting lost.
The contemporary “contemporary art” privileges the present in respect to the future and to the past. In other words, an objective spectator at that time, confronted with the figure of Christ, could not find any visible, concrete difference between Christ and an ordinary human being — a visible difference that could suggest that Christ is not simply a man, but also a God.
The installation thus demonstrates the material hardware of civilization that would conte,porary go unnoticed behind the surface of image circulation in the mass media. Contejporary art was working on the level of an individual form. Are we dealing all the time with the same film footage? In other words, Benjamin describes the production of the mass culture as operating by a reversal of the “high” Modernist art strategy: The traditional, mimetic artwork was subjected to the iconoclastic, destructive work of analysis and reduction.
That each media alteration creates a new original?
In the 19th Century Soeren Kierkegaard discussed the difference of old and new using as an example the figure of Jesus Christ. In terms of political voice, can a non-installation artwork create a comparable impact to that of installation?
Rather, today’s contemporary art demonstrates the way in which the contemporary as such shows itself — the act of presenting the present.
To grohs out more, including how to control cookies, see here: I will also venture to argue that in craft items that are being made in the same vein the quality tends to falter so once again, yes, I believe there is relevance. Not accidentally, the famous essay “The Work of Art in the Age of its Mechanical Reproduction” by Walter Benjamin became so influential during these post-modern decades.
In a certain sense the kf is for our time what the novel was for the 19th Century. In this respect contemporary art is different from Modern art that was directed toward the future and it is different also from post-modern art that was a historical reflection on the Modern project.
The modernist production by negation is governed by reproduction of the means of comparison — of a certain historical narrative, of a certain artistic medium, of a certain visual language, of a certain fixed context of comparison. And it is born precisely for the same reason it is lost. Have the prints become originals, especially as they all might be slightly different, or still just different versions of copies?
The Topology of Contemporary Art: Boris Groys
What differentiates contemporary art from previous times is only the fact that the originality of a work in our time is not established depending on its own form, but through its inclusion in a certain context, in a certain installation, through its topological inscription.
But they are unconcealed only as long as they are parts of this individual installation. This paradoxical character of the Modern project was recognized and described by a number of the theoreticians and reflected on by many artists in the 60s and 70s.