Page 104 - Darko Štrajn, From Walter Benjamin to the End of Cinema: Identities, Illusion and Signification. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2017. Digital Library, Dissertationes, 29.
P. 104
from walter benjamin to the end of cinema
in Ljubljana, Slovenia. Although much more could be said about BridA’s
work, let us focus on the question of a common denominator of different
exposures, which even in the case of a ‘classical’ painting succumbs to its
inclusion in the narrative of the whole exhibition and, therefore, the com-
mon denominator identifies the painting with a screen. This holds espe-
cially true in the case of the series of ‘screens’ under the title Printed Cir-
cuit Boards. Therefore, the common denominator of BridA’s work could
be defined as an exposure of a systemic construction, which functions as a
metaphor of a scientific mind and its objectification. In the case of Viola‘s
work we came across very visibly used elements of mysticism and primitive
imaginary of the spiritual “realities,” and in the case of BridA’s work, the
same aesthetic function is fulfilled by science. What makes both approach-
es comparable is their distancing from postmodernist play with identity
and social signifiers. However, precisely this distancing, which can be de-
ciphered in the visual effects of all three cases, and which we discussed in
this chapter, must be read as primarily a gesture, which is in principle com-
parable to the original Baroque attitude.
Double exposure, which is fundamentally structuring digital and/or
digital media one way or the other related to the digital technology, gives
the contemporary art a common significance and readability. We are in-
creasingly talking about the modes of production of art works, about aes-
thetics, meaning the affecting of senses, and about an institution that
enfolds this aesthetics into itself and into the world, pretending to have re-
sisted impulses for a social change in the modernist times.
102
in Ljubljana, Slovenia. Although much more could be said about BridA’s
work, let us focus on the question of a common denominator of different
exposures, which even in the case of a ‘classical’ painting succumbs to its
inclusion in the narrative of the whole exhibition and, therefore, the com-
mon denominator identifies the painting with a screen. This holds espe-
cially true in the case of the series of ‘screens’ under the title Printed Cir-
cuit Boards. Therefore, the common denominator of BridA’s work could
be defined as an exposure of a systemic construction, which functions as a
metaphor of a scientific mind and its objectification. In the case of Viola‘s
work we came across very visibly used elements of mysticism and primitive
imaginary of the spiritual “realities,” and in the case of BridA’s work, the
same aesthetic function is fulfilled by science. What makes both approach-
es comparable is their distancing from postmodernist play with identity
and social signifiers. However, precisely this distancing, which can be de-
ciphered in the visual effects of all three cases, and which we discussed in
this chapter, must be read as primarily a gesture, which is in principle com-
parable to the original Baroque attitude.
Double exposure, which is fundamentally structuring digital and/or
digital media one way or the other related to the digital technology, gives
the contemporary art a common significance and readability. We are in-
creasingly talking about the modes of production of art works, about aes-
thetics, meaning the affecting of senses, and about an institution that
enfolds this aesthetics into itself and into the world, pretending to have re-
sisted impulses for a social change in the modernist times.
102
