Hi all
!
Sorry
for the delay in sending these notes ! I should have written this message the
day we had our meeting before I got caught up in everything else !
So
here are my thoughts :
I
first thought of the tangible as a way to try to take a step back from all the theoretical frenzy surrounding the virtual or the cyberspace and maybe arouse original perspectives on it. To
me, this theme also opens the door to ways of thinking about culture that could
challenge the postmodernist stance and question the repudiation of our faith in
perception and our constant focus on discourse as a way to analyze culture and
society (see, below, the references to Belting and Jay).
In
art, the tangible can evoke themes such as realism or still lives (it can be
interesting to reflect on maybe some actualizations of these themes); modernist
issues such as materiality, found objects, waste or trash; or more contemporary
practices related to questions as actual as ecology in an era of global warming
or, from a more technical point of view, practices that make use of gigantic, architectural or oppressing
materiality (think of the Monumenta event in Paris or of the work of Serra,
Kapoor, Eliasson, Christo to name
a few artists that are interested in scale and matter).
The
tangible might also raises issues related to the spectator's experience and the
impact of new technologies on it. I remember, for instance, how this guy
working at DHC described people's reaction to the recent exhibition of Ryoji
Ikeda and his captivating, almost immersive video installations. Not suprisingly, the guy noticed that
if most visitors really liked the pieces, older visitors (baby-boomers and
older) would sometimes have a hard time getting interested in it.
Inevitably,
then, the tangible can be related to questions raised by the growing extent, in
our everyday lives, of medias, technologies and the virtual extension of our
lives and imaginary : should it be opposed or considered as a threat to
tangible objects (e.g. newspaper, books, photo albums, cd, etc.) and
experiences (e.g. social encounters, sexuality, etc.) or as a mere
reconfiguration of them or even, as an evolution ?
For
Hans Belting (An Anthropology of Images) our relations to virtual images are
anchored in the same triadic relation between the image, the body and the medium
(defined as that which makes the image visible). It seems even inappropriate to
say of an image that it is virtual. For an image, as long as it is not mental,
is always made visible through a material support (a screen, a computer, a pad,
etc.). Therefore, what is transformed in virtual images is merely the surface
on which they are made visible. However, the new technologies bear witness to
our distrust toward the material world and the utopia of a disembodied reality.
What is really threatened by these images is the relation that ties them to
places or localizations. In the age of globalization, the physical territory of
a culture and its referents is people themselves and their memory.
Seen
from that angle, the tangible is deeply connected to anthropological approaches
of art and communication as well as to studies on memory. It can give rise to reflections on patrimony, inheritance and spirituality.
But of course, it can also be further developed with
reference to affect theory, theories of perception, phenomenology and so on. It
is also connected (negatively) to certain forms of iconoclasm, to a
valorization of idea or even — from a lacanian perspective — of symbolization (language) against image or imaginary (see, on these
issues, Martin Jay's Downcast Eyes, the Denigration of Vision in
Twentieth-Century French Thought, 1993).
I put some thoughts into the choice of our keynote
speaker and, personally, I really liked the idea of Jane Benett, Bill Brown
(although I think he is in sabbatical this year) and David Freedberg. I would
also suggest these names : Lorraine Daston (Objectivity, Things that Talks),
Constance Classen (The Deepest Sense: A Cultural History of Touch, The Book of
Touch) and Martin Jay (Downcast Eye).
As for an image, I really like the Carravagio's Doubting
Thomas (see Thomasz's post). I have had the same thought. But
I am sure we could also think of evocative fonts or the use of a generic image.
That's about it for now ! I hope it helps !
Maryse
