Page 125 - Darko Štrajn, Umetnost v realnosti, Dissertationes 18
P. 125
Summary
etry as a vocabulary of his city reading, that he has been censuring ur-
banity in some of its not so much aesthetic aspects. On the contrary:
departing from Benjamin we in the start agree about inherent relation
of urbanity and the intellectual habitus, at least from the beginnings of
the age, which is delineated by the term of modernity. Something must
have been contained in his discourse, what made it a topic of big interest
only long time after it was written, and almost 30 years after the author’s
too early death. In the book we try to explain that this “something” is
precisely the reflexive moment, in which the intellectuality is visible as
the agency of the very notion of space in a city. Of course, already with
Benjamin we know that, considering the intellectual habitus – regard-
less of the fact that in his times it had not been denoted with this utter-
ance – we have to deal with a mutual relationship. Out of it emerges the
individual, who we find on the spot, where we would like to think the
Subject. From this point of view a comprehension of intellectual habit-
us could be revealed to us as it is visible also through lenses of cameras of
Francois Truffaut, Woody Allen and Boštjan Hladnik. On the level of
an intellectual within mass culture it is in fact obvious that an intellec-
tual is involved in production, that he/she is in the process of exchang-
ing his/her labour power for wages, for royalties and the like. Woody Al-
len’s contribution is not in that it shows only this, but that in the field of
functions of production he reduces intellectual production to its com-
mon denominator. In the film Manhattan (1970) this denominator is
literally staged on the surface, behind which there is nothing hidden.
Urban settlement is always organized as a concentrated social space,
whose sociality is expressed in the real within the symbolic, which is re-
flected in the city maps that are an illustration of intelligibility and cog-
nitivness of space. Art festivals are an indispensable attribute of the very
notion of a bigger city. In the age of globalisation festivals are – even if
they represent something totally local – at least potentially an interna-
tional event for the sake of performers or for the sake of public, or just
for the sake of attention of media, which always go after newness. Obvi-
ously, some festivals are on the top of a kind of hierarchy of festivals and
it doesn’t look like that they are eager to transfer their privileged posi-
tions to other cities. However, this does not mean that other cities could
not have quality festivals. But it is more or less clear that in all probabili-
ty they cannot overtake the primacy of famous renaissance centres.
Dada’s efforts, which targeted an awakening of public indignation,
has succeeded more and above all gruesomely differently than Dada art-
ists themselves expected and imagined. The repression of the art, which
etry as a vocabulary of his city reading, that he has been censuring ur-
banity in some of its not so much aesthetic aspects. On the contrary:
departing from Benjamin we in the start agree about inherent relation
of urbanity and the intellectual habitus, at least from the beginnings of
the age, which is delineated by the term of modernity. Something must
have been contained in his discourse, what made it a topic of big interest
only long time after it was written, and almost 30 years after the author’s
too early death. In the book we try to explain that this “something” is
precisely the reflexive moment, in which the intellectuality is visible as
the agency of the very notion of space in a city. Of course, already with
Benjamin we know that, considering the intellectual habitus – regard-
less of the fact that in his times it had not been denoted with this utter-
ance – we have to deal with a mutual relationship. Out of it emerges the
individual, who we find on the spot, where we would like to think the
Subject. From this point of view a comprehension of intellectual habit-
us could be revealed to us as it is visible also through lenses of cameras of
Francois Truffaut, Woody Allen and Boštjan Hladnik. On the level of
an intellectual within mass culture it is in fact obvious that an intellec-
tual is involved in production, that he/she is in the process of exchang-
ing his/her labour power for wages, for royalties and the like. Woody Al-
len’s contribution is not in that it shows only this, but that in the field of
functions of production he reduces intellectual production to its com-
mon denominator. In the film Manhattan (1970) this denominator is
literally staged on the surface, behind which there is nothing hidden.
Urban settlement is always organized as a concentrated social space,
whose sociality is expressed in the real within the symbolic, which is re-
flected in the city maps that are an illustration of intelligibility and cog-
nitivness of space. Art festivals are an indispensable attribute of the very
notion of a bigger city. In the age of globalisation festivals are – even if
they represent something totally local – at least potentially an interna-
tional event for the sake of performers or for the sake of public, or just
for the sake of attention of media, which always go after newness. Obvi-
ously, some festivals are on the top of a kind of hierarchy of festivals and
it doesn’t look like that they are eager to transfer their privileged posi-
tions to other cities. However, this does not mean that other cities could
not have quality festivals. But it is more or less clear that in all probabili-
ty they cannot overtake the primacy of famous renaissance centres.
Dada’s efforts, which targeted an awakening of public indignation,
has succeeded more and above all gruesomely differently than Dada art-
ists themselves expected and imagined. The repression of the art, which
