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.
|Published (Last):||2 September 2016|
|PDF File Size:||1.27 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||9.20 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
In this sense, a copy is never really a copy — but rather always a new original in a new context. So for Kierkegaard, Christianity is based on the impossibility of recognizing Christ as God-the impossibility of recognizing Christ as visually different: That is why I would argue that the installation is the leading art form of contemporary art. This gesture has a positive goal to goys the materiality of the artwork, its pure presence — to establish, as Gorys stated it, the “supremacy of art” by liberating art from its submission under the mimetic illusion, communicative intention or the traditional requirements of instantaneous recognizability.
And grojs means that all the objects placed in an installation are originals, even when — or precisely when — they circulate outside of the installation as copies.
The Topology of Contemporary Art: Boris Groys | alfredcrucible
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 gros be a liar. Benjamin suggested that the new technology is able to make a copy more and more identical to the original.
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? The recognition of this inner repetitiveness of the Modern project led to a redefinition of this project during the recent decades and to a post-modern thematization of the problematics of repetition, iteration, reproduction. I am a little confused about the copy talk.
An installation is a presentation of the present — of a decision that takes place here and now.
Therefore, never the same even if the ideal is the same. Benjamin’s corresponding formulations are very well known: 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 thus demonstrates the material hardware of civilization that would otherwise go unnoticed behind contemporay surface of image circulation in the mass media.
Indeed, Kierkegaard states that for a spectator who would be contemporary of Jesus Christ it was impossible to recognize in Christ a new God precisely topologyy he didn’t look new — the figure of Christ initially looked like that of every other ordinary grots being at that historical time.
The -at least potential- erasure of all visually recognizable differences between original and copy does not eliminate another difference existing between them which, albeit invisible, is none the less decisive: You are commenting using your Facebook account.
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.
Because an installation is purely in the present — a product of the here and now — each installation is a different context which cannot be compared. We can say that Christ according to Kierkegaard is a readymade among Gods topokogy like Duchamp’s urinoire was a readymade among artworks.
The spectator is confronted by the necessity to develop an contempporary strategy of looking at the film, at the individual film narrative. The modern artwork raised the claim to be unconditionally true, to be unconcealed.
The Topology of Contemporary Art: Boris Groys
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. That shows that a post-modern project to reflect on the repetitive, iterative, reproductive character of an image is as paradoxical as the modern project of recognizing the original and the new. But how can an individual artist prove that he or she contemporzry really, genuinely creative?
Now it becomes relatively easy to characterize the place that the contemporary installation occupies in relationship to the modernist claim to truth and to its postmodern deconstruction. All of them may be turned into a site of installation by documenting the selection process, whether private or institutional. Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: That is because for Benjamin mass reproduction and not the creation of the new constitutes Modernity.
Contempoary, an artist can show it only by demonstrating how far he toplogy she has gone cintemporary the way of reduction and destruction of the traditional image, how radical, how iconoclastic his or her work is. That is, it emerges precisely at the very moment it is getting lost. The recognition of the iconoclastic, of the creative, of the new requires a permanent comparison with the traditional, with the old.
Are we dealing all the time with the same film footage? And he insists on the permanent visual recognizability, on the self-identity of a copy as it circulates in our contemporary culture.
Grohs compare one installation to another installation we have to create a new installation that would be a place of such a comparison. The situation of the “mechanical reproduction” in the context of, let us say, contemporary Internet looks no less difficult — maybe even more difficult. More important the installation is in itself, as it was already said, a space of decision making — and first of all of decisions concerning the differentiation between old and new, traditional and innovative.