FleshFactor FleshFactor
logo; AEC FORUM

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

FleshFactor: RE: Human body as ultimate original?



---------------------------------------------------------
A E C  F O R U M - "F L E S H F A C T O R"
(http://www.aec.at/fleshfactor/arch/)
---------------------------------------------------------


WAIT!!!!!

(read mark weiser's post with great interest) & when I read it
I thought:  this is like walter benjamin's rant about the Art In The Age Of
Reproductive Technology (maybe I screwed up the title, I can never
remember it properly) [The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical
Reproduction] where he talks about aura, etc. (aura being that
quality in the original that cannot be reproduced),
so I am thinking now: 

mark, does the human have an aura like benjamin suggested???

The duchamp thing:  well yeah if you take the standard definition of what
an artist is supposed to do, then yeah I guess it makes no sense, but I
always thought that the cool part of duchamp was the way in which he
redefined what an artist was doing.  I read not too long ago in the new
york review of books a review of a couple of new biographies of duchamp
and they seemed to highlight that aspect of his work (a view of his work I
picked up talking to visual arts guys while drinking beer with some of
them) (and it was a view that I taught since it made sense to me). 

furthermore yet still, I would argue against the argument mark is making
about history.  There is a very cool book called "the past is a foreign
country" published in 1983 or so which I found once while I was trolling
the library.  And the argument of the book (and it is an argument that I
agree with) was that history is basically invented by whoever doesn't get
killed in the making of it.  Also I would recommend another book by Hayden
White called MetaHistory wherein he shows quite elegantly (he's a very
very fine and eloquent writer of a type of academic prose that in less
polished hands could be used as a tool with which to execute the death
penalty) the ways in which history can be arranged and re-arranged in
terms of its existence as a literary form.  and then, also, I would point
you to the writings of Jorge Luis Borges; a genius at alternate histories. 

What I am saying is that I don't think we can look at a record of a past,
call it history and name it as an absolute in the same way that one would
look at an axiom or something.  PoMo people jump up and down about this
all the time... 

Then too there's the issue of being permeable--
but that's another day...


humdog

in earthspace:
carmen hermosillo
seagate software corporation
carmen.hermosillo@seagatesoftware.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------
to (un)subscribe  the Forum just mail to
fleshfactor-request@aec.at (message text 'subscribe'/'unsubscribe')
send messages to fleshfactor@aec.at
--------------------------------------------------------------------


[FleshFactor] [subscribe]