repetition and representation of reality

repetition and representation of reality T he re i s no s c ientif ic di s coverer, no poet, no painte r, no mu sic ian, who w ill not tell you that he found ready made hi s di s cover y or poem or pic ture – that it came to him f rom out side, and that he did not cons c iou sly c reate it f rom w ithin

Ę˜

1

2

Text written and designed

by Gabriela Baka student of 4th year Crossmedia Design ArtEZ in Enschede ~2012

2» REPEtition ~Styles ~Inspirations ~face ~ego ~circle 3.1» reality ~definition ~Plat's cave ~Aristoteles 3.2» aNALIZE ~Mystery ~Postcards ~J.Kosuth ~Piepe ~An egg

BI BL IOGR A PH Y

PICT U R E S

CONCLUSION

R EPR E SE N TAT ION

R EPET I T ION

I N T RODUC T ION

3.3» Desire ~Surrealists ~Manifesto ~Sensibility

1» 2» 3» 4» 5» 6» TABLE OF CONTENT

3

William Kingdon Clifford

∆

I want to share with You what I see. How I see today? What is my level of consciousness / knowledge of current world.

Show my way of understanding the world. So then no conclusions, just Me. The process and thinking is more important. Conclusions some do not need to come directlly. Some times we more time is needed.

Is my knowledge enought to ask a proper questions?

If I will even start to repeat myslef in this text, or will get stuck is because of the proccess and maybe lack of knowledge. Can happen, that this what I’m talking about is too obvious, to general or cliche.

Is the text an statement?

No, it's just showing my interests about repeating, representation, reality and psychology in connection to art.

Maybe showing my struggle with life and patterns of surrounding.

The more we know, more we can see, more we can question or easier we can get closer to perfection, more we can get confused, but also we are closer to invent something new, better. I want to deal with the idea of human perception.

Is it better to see things? Be more aware of our world and surroundings? Or just the opposite, to hide, and do not analyze too much in life. Just take everything as it is —Easy?

Do we really see things, people, world? If yes then, what exactly? What is happening if we ‘see’ deeper? When we start to analyze? Are we becomING more aware of things, OF the truth? Or we become

4

rea l it y

more confused? And we tend to lose ourselves and our beliefs?

In my view, at certain level of knowledge we simply stop ‘noticing’ the basic things.

Our mind, way of thinking and our perception is selective. A lot of things are next to us, and maybe never they will be noticed by us.

repre sent at ion

of

" I shall sug g est... that one of the g reat achie vement s of mode r n ar t and philos ophy... ha s bee n to allow u s to redi s cove r the world in which we live , yet which we are always prone to forg et.

T hi s world which we are to redi s cove r i s the ‘world of pe rception’ , which i s the world a s we perceive it." × M.P is writing most of his lectures in order to enable his audience to ‘rediscover’ the world by themselves. I would like to do the same, point out some issues of perception.

To rediscover the perceived world with the help of modern art and philosophy.

In my view, those two disciplines are crossing each other in lots of fields, for instance perception, approach of humanity, and our structure of psychology.

×

WE SHOULD BE MORE OPEN FOR THE WORLD AROUND US. FOR THE BEAUTIFUL THINGS, AND THOSE WHICH ARE BAD OR UGLY TOO. Appreciate the world, and simple things. Personally, I also have a problem with it. It’s not easy to relearn to see and feel.

1» INTRODUCTION

5

repe t it iona

a nd

Merleau-Ponty start his lectures with those words: "Phenomana of perception" France, 2001

REPETITION OF: ÷ THE WORLD ITSELF ÷ PATTERNS OF BEHAVIORS /ARCHETYPES ÷ ARTISTIC WORKS AND TOPICS, STYLES ÷ IS A FORM OF INSPIRATION ÷ INTERPRETATION ÷ LEADS US TO IDENTITY, PERFECTION ÷ TO UNDERSTAND THINGS BETTER ÷ TO COMMUNICATE EASIER ÷ TO CREATE DIFFERENT CONTEXT ÷ TO MAKE SOMETHING BETTER, REDESIGN ÷ AS A FORM OF COPYING IN FORM / TOOLS / MESSAGE / VISUAL COMMUNICATION ÷ IS ONE OF THE WAYS OF SHOWING REPRESENTATION OF THE WORLD/ OF THE REALITY

6

2»

Breton said: "No long e r an e x pans e but a r ichness of pote ntial e ne rg y. T he inne r REPETITION ~Styles

Self-realization is in my view, a big motor to every action that we take in our lives. To have goal high, to look above present, and above the horizon. To get our dreams. As Freud said: "self-realization is unique" for all people / artists. We need to focus on our own development, our feelings and seeing. "The ar ti st’s e ye should always be tur ned in upon hi s inner life, and hi s ear should be always aler t for the voice of inward necessit y. Thi s i s the only way of g iv ing expression to what the mystic version command s", said Kandinsky. ^ Are we really look into our self? In my opinion Artists are more aware of they mind and soul than other people. This awareness push them to art. As a person who left her country, I see how much my attitude to my land and how my identity is developing. It’s a process of becom-

7

rea l it y of repre sent at ion

"The process of indiv iduation i s real only if the indiv idual i s aware of it and cons c iou sly makes a liv ing connec tion w ith it.

The g uiding hint s or impul s es come, not f rom the eg o, but f rom the totalit y of the psyche: the S elf. It i s, moreover, u s eless to cast f ur tive g lances at the way s omeone el s e i s de vel oping, becau s e each of u s has a unique task of s elfreali z ation".

θ

θ http:// wikipedia. org/wiki/ Jackson_ Pollock

a nd

"Whe n I am in my paint ing, I’m not aware of what I’m doing. It i s only af te r a s or t of ‘g et acquainted’ pe r iod that I s ee what I have bee n about.

I have no fear of making chang es , de stroy ing the imag e , etc ., becau s e the painting ha s a life of it s ow n. I tr y to let it come throug h . It i s only whe n I los e contac t w ith the painting that the result i s a mess . O the r w i s e the re i s pure har mo ny, an ea sy g ive and take , and the paint ing comes out well"

θ

Pollock has managed to free the line not only from its function of representing objects in the world, but also from its task of describing or bounding shapes or figures, whether abstract or representational, on the surface of the canvas.

space of hi s painting s may thu s be read as a v i sual metaphor of mind". θ Metaphor of mind. State of mind. J.Pollock's painting shows what kind of person he was, what kind of state mind he had. Aggressive struggling with life, alcoholism and acceptation, therefore his paintings are so dynamic, full of expression. They represents his thoughts. For other artists repeating their self is a form of improvements of style and techniques. In general when repetition takes place it helps people to understand artist better, to get closer to him. In that process the artist becomes more sure that, he uses all his possibilities, skills to really get to the point of his expression. Freud in his analyze of dreams claimed that:

repe t it iona

Getting your style as an artist is hard. You need a lot of experience, self-confidence, ideas, being aware of your predispositions. Art today is reflection, our personal views on the world, the problems with which we are struggling. It contains positive and negative feelings, so artists can share them with viewers through art. The artist as everything and everybody, has his own story in his life.

He wants to share it with society, to be understood, accepted and appreciated by people.

In that process of searching the best way to express, he starts to repeat himself, repeat topics (most of the times topics are defined the problems that he has or things that he is inspired with) tries to explore them in all possible ways.

Why? To see more details, to get to the perfection or to get a new context p.e Jackson Pollock, who was a major figure in abstract expressionism movement. When we look at his paintings, we get the felling of repeating, maybe even they can be boring for us.

But we should think about the process that he as a artist went thought. He was exploring differences between all those paint splashes. The process and new experience, and going away from traditional painting was the most important for him.

^ http:// wikipedia. org/wiki/ Kandinsky

ing aware what Poland means to me. What is Polish art and polish mentality? I can see differences only because I’m here in Holland. My background, my knowledge about art is different.

I became more aware of my own identity but also started to be influenced by my new surrounding. That was one of the reasons to stay here. My decision to go to art school was inspired by the Polish Poster School. Those Posters significantly influenced the international development of graphic design and poster art.

Their major contribution is in their use of the power of suggestion through clever allusions. Using strong and vivid colours from folk art, they combine printed slogans, often hand-lettered, with popular symbols, to create a concise inventive metaphor. As a hybrid of words and images, these posters created a certain aesthetic tension.

In addition to aesthetic aspects, these posters were able to reveal the artist’s emotional involvement with the subject.

They did not solely exist as an objective presentation, rather they were also the artist’s interpretation and commentary on the subject and on society. They where containers of metaphors, which can more effectively approach people.

8

We as a (visual) artists consume the world with our eyes, trough them directly we create feelings, emotions, which lead us further. We look on world throught images, compositions, colours, concepts, and context.

We process images and our surroundings, thinking to create something with a new context or to improve (re-design) it.

Some times this process takes a long time. In some cases it can take place in our unconscious only, and we are not aware of it.

After that we can not be sure if this is our own idea or we really saw something like this before. This is a more complicated and

2»

REPETITION ~Styles and Inspirations

Commercial design is simply the same, and mostly is boring, bad in colors and screaming for attention. If we go on the street, we start to do not notice advertisement, they are disturbing in our surrounding. How this can happen if we design them to get attention, to get customers, with the feeling that they are communicating and maybe their are even unique. How come we get opposite feeling?

Companies are just afraid of having a new creative campaigns. In most of the cases they use old, cliche templates for design. In this case repeating those

9

rea l it y of repre sent at ion

This problem we can see in current design. Let's imagine if one person create a new identity, and it’s became really outgoing, and fresh on the market, then other companies start to copy the idea of the technique that was used.

Does not matter for them, that the profile of their company is different, they just want the same thing. They want to show that they are equal or better from the concurrence.

a nd

The lightbulbs made by Edison and Tesla, or the camera was invented in the same time by different people. Or Salvador Dali made a drawing of DNA structure without seeing it. Eight years before that time it was made first picture of it, but scientist didn’t know what was it. Salvador Dali could not see it. If one person defeat a time record, other people can make it much more easily. It’s goes like a chain. In the world there is a certain time for all those things. A special power makes things going. I have the feeling that most of people live simply and deny its existence.

Mistakenly some people can see explanation in God’s will.

structural process. The confusion still grows.

Nowadays we have a bigger access to knowledge, pictures, art images, we can get easily destructed, and lost ourselves in all those information. We can see thousands images per day which artists are posting on the web. We know that they are considered by society as good, so we subconsciously want to create the same things. Why? Our super-ego is entering, and we start to think about acceptation, fame. In that moment we loose our identity, style and if we just copy image, we become passive and our desires lead us. We are making choice to copy somebodie else ideas or even files.

That’s bad side of repeating.

Just using the images of others because they look good, without thinking of the context and circumstances of design or art piece. Without understanding the communication in symbols in that piece.

repe t it iona

This style of thinking and communicating nowadays still leads the superiority but its origin comes from censorship in my country. Because of censorship artists and designers needed to develop a different language of communication with society. They create a new way of storytelling, full of hidden messages. This approach to the poster is different than cold and simple form of posters from Western Europe, where feelings shouldn’t be so shown. They determinated my work. I was used to show things in more illustrative way. Feeling of shape, metaphor and use of symbols and having a more artistic approach to posters are close to my way of working and seeing things. I started asking myself, is Polish Poster School only inspiration for other artists or is it something more? How come so many themes are repeating? It’s not possible that people get to see other, previous art/design pieces. It is just impossible to see all art from the past. Today my house mate told me a story about monkeys. Monkeys on the islands have coconuts but for years they can’t open them.

But one day, by coincidence, one of them manage to do it.

And next day another monkey on a different island is making the same thing. How this could be? The story with monkeys is just a fictional example, but there are more real ones.

$ http:// en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Art

form, have a bad inf luence on the society. People get use to bad quality around them.

Furthermore they are stuck in this form and being passive for surrounding and uncontentious about other ways of expressions. They simply just pass by, or just looking.

Searching for something, which will get they attention, for something which will go deeper in their emotions.

People are simply not aware of value of art or design, and they can’t explain what is it for them. They even can think that everybody can make it. SOme poeple (in general) consider art as something worthless. $ 1.

If they do not understand art or design, they are taking for granted the opinion of others. If somebody is saying that Picasso is good they will believe it. And do not question it more. Maybe even they will go to the museum, to look at the paintings.

2.

If they are not aware of quality, because nobody shows them good examples, they will expect the same things that they can see around them. And vicious circle is closing.

10

$ Art is a term that describes a diverse range of human activities and the products of those activities, but is most often understood to refer to painting, film, photography, sculpture, and other visual media.

Music, theatre, dance, literature, and interactive media are included in a broader definition of art or the arts.

Until the 17th century, art referred to any skill or mastery and was not differentiated from crafts or sciences, but in modern usage the fine arts are distinguished from acquired skills in general.

rea l it y REPETITION ~ Inspirations

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

2»

repe t it iona

" T h e pour pose of ar t it shoul d not pa s s quick ly be fore our e ye s in th e g ui se of ob je c t s we ‘ know we l l ’ but , on h e c ont rar y, hol d our ga z e , a sk qu e s t ion s of it , c onve y to it in a biz ar re fa shion th e ve r y se c re t of th e ir s ubs tanc e s ."

%

%

11

said MerleauPonty in one of his lecture: "Phenomana of perception" France, 2001

In my view, the face is a symbol of our identity. It's the most important part of the human body in terms of visual communication. We are communicating through it, through speaking, by our mimics.

Our face shows more, to people, that we could expect. Our moods, feelings, and our experiences. We can see if people are tired, healthy, in love or stressed or they lie. Faces are unique.

They are created, and contains some of the features from faces, genes from our parents, but still they are unique.

The face is a central sense organ complex, for those animals that have one, normally on the ventral surface of the head, and can, depending on the definition in the human case, include the hair, forehead, eyebrow, eyelashes, eyes, nose, ears, cheeks, mouth, lips, philtrum, temple, teeth, skin, and chin.The face has uses of expression, appearance, and identity amongst others. It also has different senses like olfaction, taste, hearing, and vision. #

Since ages humans where registering people bust or portraits on painting. Nowadays we use photography for it. The purpose is the same. To register time, feelings, memories. Kings and Queens, our ancestors, or even celebrities. In middle-age, body shape wasn't so important, as it is today. There were more deformation and symptoms of diseases, also people were wearing different cloths which was showing the status of a person. Humans were always curious to see face similarities with their relatives.

The purpose of portraits is to register changes in the appearance, and also it was believed that they will be not forgotten after death.

The aim was not to show reality since most of the portraits where retouched. Also, they were painted from the perspective of the artist, but in the way that "principal" or "customer" will be satisfied. Now in the XXI century, the face is a really important tool in visual communication.

We sell most of goods in this world with the image of a happy faces.

12

When we see a face, a head, we connect to the identity, the person, the symbol of humans, something that is unique, but have the same features as other peoples’ faces. It define us.

Some times from the face we can get more informations than from the somebody's words, gestures or body languages.

Just by showing or not showing the face, we can say a lot. The way of showing head/face is as important as head/face itself. There are plenty of ways for doing that for instance if we would like to show metaphor of our problems, or personality we can put some objects instead of our face or just partly cover face with it.

Those images bring us to other level of seeing.

We can associate objects with person and create a new meaning. Fascinating for me are the possibilities that we have with just using the image of the face.

Of course they are defined by context. Important for me was a question: why if we know and we saw so many times those collages with faces, we still want to explore them? Why we want to makes things, that were so much explored?

# http:// en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Face

of art or artists by themselves are starting making collages.

For some people collage is just another way for expression, treated on the same level as paintings or sculptures, but for others its just a try out,

a sketch to make something bigger. Is it easier to make a good collage or a painting?

Is it easier or harder to make something new from things which are already existing?

The important thing that I notice is again topics, images, ways of drawing, cutting, thinking is repeating. I started to ask myself: Why? The messages from those sketch books and some circumstances are the same. I should not even mentioned that the tools are identical. Is it because of group of students or even the society?

Without our own identity?

We live in the society with all those moral rules and behaviours that we where told and we are so stuck in them that is hard for us to go upon them.

Some people do not even notice that.

a new knowledge and new inspirations from the culture?

Yes, but at the same time even when we are creative we easily follow fashions, styles and movements in life and work.

We tend to belong to a group, to be a part of something. We follow politicians, religions, we want to be equal but also we want to be better than others.

REPETITION ~Face

Culture should support us, make us more open and give us power to explore, not set limits for us. Shouldn't we get

To be somebody more important. To be noticed by others.

Always comparing and being critical in our judgements. As humans we are full of contradictions.

13

repe t it iona

2Âť

Since we share and see the same things, we have equivalent inspirations, similar experiences that makes our situation and art not exceptional?

Is it just the culture?

How come culture can gives us limitation?

Shouldn't be the opposite?

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

rea l it y

The way of working it not equal for all of artists. It’s a work that never ends, repeating all over again but at the same time, each one brings something different, something new. Already students

0 Sigmunt Freud Civilization and Its Discontents (1930)

In the page with pictures, I'm showing some examples of different images, paintings, photographies or posters where the idea of using the face to create a metaphor, and repetition of some forms.

We can see similarities in form and also in that the same object was used.

It is not only those social rules, borders which hold us and our creativity in check. There is something more. We are also filled by our egos and our constant struggle with it and with the environment. Freud was developing the idea about Ego and Id and from that he went to his concept of super-ego. It is more connected to 'special psychical agency which performs the task of seeing that narcissistic satisfaction from the ego ideal is ensured... what we call our 'conscience'.

The super-ego aims for perfection.

It comprises that organised part of the personality structure, mainly but not entirely unconscious, that includes the individual's ego ideals, spiritual goals, and the psychic agency (commonly called ‘conscience’) that criticises and prohibits his or her drives, fantasies, feelings, and actions. According to Freud: "The Supe r- eg o can be thoug ht of a s a t y pe of cons c ience that puni shes mi s behav ior w ith feeling s of g uilt. For example , for hav ing e x tra mar ital affairs " .

0 The super-ego works in opposition to the id. The superego strives to act in a socially appropriate manner, whereas the id just wants instant selfgratification. The super- ego controls our sense of right and wrong and guilt. It helps us fit into society by getting us to act in socially acceptable ways.

In Sigmund Freud's work he also discusses the concept of a "cultural super-ego". Freud suggested that the demands of the super - ego "coincide with the precepts of the prevailing cultural super-ego. At this point the two processes, that of the cultural development of the group and that of the cultural development of the individual, are, as it were, always interlocked".

0 So our inner struggles are not only with our own problems and frustrations, they are problems of civilisation, of the culture. They are coming from outside, as pressure to inside, but also we have power to express our feelings, problems to other people.

14

We think that we are so special having our own problems and thinking that other people have a nice live. It's totally untrue. All people have the same problems, maybe the context is sometimes different. There are a limited number of feelings and thoughts, thought patterns in humans.

Borges used to say that the number of ideas are finite, and that the history of the world is the different enunciation of a few metaphors.

In most cases, our problems are the same throughout our lives, and in fact, created by us. Once again, the repetition.

During our life we are constantly busy with solving our problems, and dealing with daily difficulties. We have predisposition to easily get lost in our believes and thoughts. Get stuck in them.

Even when we know how to solve our problems and we are doing it. They are coming back. Why? We need to have feedback from outside, to zoom out from the situation, from the cultural borders. Try to be beyond it, and dive in to the cause of everything.

2»

Those question was leading me to ask about collective unconscious and then go to archetypes.

REPETITION ~Ego

All my life I wanted to explore Freud. While reading his book "Analyze of dreams" I discovered, that his text do not answer my questions. Next step was Gustaw Carol Jung and his research about collective unconscious and problems of archetypes.

15

repre sent at ion

His is pointing out that reality, and things are not as they seems to be. It is a part of ‘scientific realism". Where is a believe, that account of structure of things and forces provided by physics and other sciences does indeed revel to us things that are really there even if we cannot observe them, and the further belief that reference to this structure is of fundamental importance when we see to explain natural phenomena.

a nd

First my association went to direction of Freud and his Psychoanalysis. Later to statements of surrealist insofar as artists who where exploring the field of dreams and where inspired by Freud’s theory.

Then I noticed how big inf luence on people and artists had Rene Magritte with his clear paintings of reality. His art inf luence a lot of other artists and make people think about our reality.

repe t it iona

How to get aware? OR to not repeat? to go thought it? To get beyond? How to live in a different way?

of

rea l it y

How we can do that?

Who we need to ask for help,if all of us are stuck in the same way/ ThOUGHT?

" Heg el re marks s ome where that all fac t s and pers onag es of g reat impor tance in world hi stor y acc ur, as it we re , t w ice. He forg ot to add : the f irst time as trag edy, the s econd as farce." @

16

Can we say that everything have the purpose in the world, and accidence also happen for that we can repeat them? That we can experience them once again? To get new emotions, knowledge. To get inspired and create new things, technology's and so on from them. So can we think that the accidence and things happened because they are planned? And we can just experience them, or we have some

2»

REPETITION~Circle

How strong are we?

Generally in my opinion, we (humans) and our lifes are determineted by our own experience and brain predisposition. Or how much, we will train in our perception in reality. We can't change certain circumstances or our background, genes. We need to accept as much we can, but be aware that we have life in our hands, and we can get stuck in cultural rules and membership in society. Curiosity and questioning leads us to a solution. But still we need courage and hard work to get what we want. Humans are not only the same in a biological way. Our psychology also works in lots of ways the same. Who defined those general rules? Where are all emotions, behaviours, and believes coming from?

17

rea l it y of @

repre sent at ion

In psychology there is this term: 'Nature versus nurture' from that discussion we can get information about of inf luence of heritage.

How much we get with our genes? How much is us is unique, independent from our parents?

How much of our personality and our mind is defined by our ancestors. What define as the most: genes, culture, way of education and our families or maybe our own life story and experience? What is our independence?

How important is it for us? As a teenagers we want to go out from our family houses soon as possible, to study in other places, to learn life, and to have a feeling of freedom. We do not want that our parents tell us what to do anymore. We do not want to obey. We want to decide for ourselves. But what we also want is discovering ourselves through world around us. We search for our identity, for our independent form. This is a chase which take place in our whole life. I think we never get the clear feeling of ourselves. Independence is an abstract term, a feeling beyond us, which we want to get. How unique are we? What is our value between the society, or in art or design.

from Eighteeth Brunaire of Luis Bonaparte.

"Being and Love" by Sebastian Gonzalez,

∆

§

a nd

kind of inf luence on them?

In Derrida’s words: "The f uture i s that which – tomor row, later, next centur y – w ill be. There’s a f uture which i s predic t able, prog rammed, s cheduled, fores eeable. But there i s a f uture, l’avenir ( to come) which refers to s omeone who comes whos e ar r ival i s totally unexpec ted. For me, that i s the real f uture. That which i s totally unpredic table. The Other who comes w ithout my being able to antic i pate their ar r ival . S o if there i s a real f uture be yond thi s other know n f uture, it’s l’avenir in that it’s the coming of the Other when I am completely unable to fores ee their ar r ival ."

Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte

repe t it iona

Our civilisation, rules, behaviours, certain believes, they constantly repeating. They have some basic ideas in itself which are the same thought years, generations, and across cultures. They are global and specify life. Patterns filling us, our everyday life.

TIK-TAK of the clock. The time constantly is running away, constantly we see next 24 hours.

Circulation of the sun. We try to find out our own rhythm. Days, weeks, months, years- calendar is a repeating form. Now a new year started. How many people think of a new beginning? Is it? How many times we can have a new start- another continuation.

How many times we thought that one day looks as another? Have we the feeling that we repeat ourselves? Day by day? Is it true? Am I the same person from yesterday, or am I different today? And what is gonna be tomorrow?

Why have we the feeling that one day is longer than the other? And some hours are relatively longer than others? Is it only our perception?

World and our reality in which we are living in is full of inventions, rules, objects that are relative. It is as we want it. We can change it without any interaction, just by our thoughts, attitude. Are we aware of that? Is there is a synchronization of all energy's in the world, between objects and people?

Hart beats, clocks, emotions, politics movement, economics, believes, general consciousness a of the people or technology, science. Interaction, process, product. This energy is in ourselves, and in the world. Must there be other dimension for understanding reality and thoughts? Something beyond physical perception. General or collective unconsciousness of civilisation.

This unconsciousness contains energy and knowledge about us. For example: How come people can get the same ideas in the same time independently in different places of the world.

When they have different background and they do not know each other? How this can be that they can create the same objects? It is not only that they have the same needs.

Hegel says: "By repetition that which at f irst appeared me rely a mat te r of chance and continge nc y, becomes a real and rati f ied e xi ste nce." ∆

"Me n make the ir ow n hi stor y, but the y do not make it as the y pleas e; the y do not make it unde r s elf - s elec ted c irc um stances , but under c irc umstances exi sting already, g iven and tran smit ted f rom the pa st." § Why I’m questioning all those things? I’m searching for some conclusion, answer, but I guess I can’t reach it. It’s to high. All those material’s which I read, do not give any answer. I search for something as all the people for something to believe. resent concepts that we cannot Something which will define or fully comprehend. capture my soul, my This is one of the reasons why heart. To see the sense all religions employ symbolic in our existence. language or images.

Man never perceives I have the feeling that reading anything fully or about all those philosophical comprehends anyconcepts instead of having a thing completely. He better understanding of the can see, hear, touch, phenomena you are putting it and taste; but how far in a conceptual framework that he sees, how well he doesn’t capture all the beauty hears, what his touch of the phenomena... there is altells him, and what ways more than the mere conhe tastes depend upon cept... (the mere concept means the number and qualthat the concept is always too ity of his senses. These small to capture the thing). are the limit of his perception.

Collective of unconscious is a term of analytical psychology, coined by Gustaw Carol Jung.

It is proposed to be a part of the unconscious mind, expressed in humanity and all life forms with nervous systems, and describes how the structure of the psyche autonomously organizes experience. Jung distinguished the collective unconscious from the personal unconscious, in that the personal unconscious is a personal reservoir of experience unique to each individual, while the collective unconscious collects and organizes those personal experiences in a similar way with each member of a particular species.

Man uses the spoken or written word to express the meaning of what he wants to convey. His language is full of symbols. What we call a symbol is a term, a name, or even a picture that may be familiar in daily life, yet that possesses specific connotations in addition to its conventional and obvious meaning. Eagles, lions, and oxen in old churches- symbols-derived from the vision of Ezekiel, and that has an analogy to the Egyptian sun god Horus and his four sons. When, with all our intellectual limitations, we call something ‘divine’, we have merely given it a name, which may be based on a creed, but never on factual evidence. We constantly use symbolic terms to rep-

18

"Civilized man reacts to new ideas by erecting psychological barriers to protect himself from the shock of facing something new. When something slips out of our consciousness it does not cease to exist. It is simply out of sight." ¿

¿ S.Freud and his "Introduction to Psychoanalysis" (1917) http:// en.wikipedia. org/wiki/ Freud

2» REPETITION ~Circle

19

rea l it y of repre sent at ion a nd

Consciousness naturally resists anything unconscious and unknown.

repe t it iona

Man has developed consciousness in a process that took untold ages to reach the civilized state (which is arbitrarily dated from the invention of script in about 4000 B. C.). And this evolution is far from complete, for large areas of the human mind are still shrouded in darkness. Whoever denies the existence of the unconscious is in fact assuming that our present knowledge of the psyche is total. Consciousness is a very recent acquisition of nature, and it is still in an ‘experimental’ state. It is frail and easily injured. We can become dissociated and lose our identity. We can be possessed by moods, or become unreasonable, so that people ask: "What the de v il ha s g ot into you? " We talk about ‘control’ , but self-control is a rare and remarkable virtue. This capacity to isolate part of one’s mind, indeed, is a valuable characteristic. Freud and Josef Breuer had recognized in that neurotic symptoms, but in fact they are symbolically meaningful. They are one way in which the unconscious mind expresses itself. A story told by the conscious mind has a beginning, a development, and an end, but the same is not true of a dream. It has also its own limitation.

Thus, part of the unconscious consists of multitude of temporarily obscured thoughts, impressions, and images that, in spite of being lost, continue to influence our conscious minds.

If you observe a neurotic person, you can see him doing many things that he appears to be doing consciously and purposefully. Yet if you ask him about them, you will discover that he is either unconscious of them or has something quite different in mind.

We can find them in everyday-life, where dilemmas aresometimes solved by the most surprising new propositions. Many of the artists, philosophers, and even scientists own some of their best ideas to inspirations from the unconscious. The ability to reach a rich vein of such material, and to translate it effectively is commonly called genius. We can find clear proof of this fact in the history of science itself.

The so-called ‘mystical’ experience of the French philosopher Descartes involved a sudden revelation in which he saw in a flash the "order of all sciences". The British author Robert Louis Stevenson had spent years looking for a story that would fit his ‘strong sense of man’s double being,’ when the plot of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde was suddenly revealed to him in a dream. Good and evil is in everyone of us.

» "Jung's Psychology of Archetypes"

by Kazimierz Pajor, 2004 Warszawa

Patterns of behaviour called archetype are a universally understood symbol or term, a prototype upon which others are copied, patterned, or emulated. Archetypes are often comes from myths and storytelling across different cultures. Even if they have different origin, they have similar features in all of the cultures. In psychology, an archetype is a model of a person, personality, or behavior.In philosophy, archetypes since Plato at least, refer to ideal forms of the perceived or sensible things or types. In the analysis of personality, the term archetype is often broadly used to refer mostly to a stereotype: personality type observed multiple times, especially an oversimplification of such a type. Archetype refers to a generic version of a personality. In this sense 'mother figure' may be considered an archetype and may be identified in various characters with otherwise distinct personalities.

Archetypes are likewise supposed to have been present in folklore and literature for thousands of years, including prehistoric artwork. The use of archetypes to illuminate personality and literature was advanced by Gustaw Carl Jung early in the XXth century, who suggested the existence of universal contentless forms that channel experiences and emotions, resulting in recognizable and typical patterns of behavior with certain probable outcomes. Archetypes are cited as important to both ancient mythology and modern narratives, as argued by Joseph Campbell in works such as "The Hero With a Thousand Faces".

20

http:// en.wikipedia. org/wiki/ Jung http:// en.wikipedia. org/wiki/ Archetype

rea l it y

The origins of the archetypal hypothesis date back as far as Plato. Jung himself compared archetypes to Platonic ideas.

Plato's ideas were pure mental forms, that were imprinted in the soul before it was born into the world. They were collected in the sense that they embodied the fundamental characteristics of a thing rather than its specific peculiarities.

2» REPETITION ~Circle

21

repe t it iona

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

Questions appears. Are we follow the stereotypes? Should we fight with them? Or should we accept them, and use consciously in our life? Why are learning about them on literature lessons? How come still those attitudes and patterns are in the use? They are modern term. »

"Historians often say that those who don’t know history are likely to reap it. But does it mean that by knowing history, we can thereby avoid its repetition? Or is there really such a thing as the repetition of history? This kind of problem has never been thought; historians supposed to be scientific, have never addressed of history, and that it is possible to treat it scientifically.What is repeated is, to be sure, not an event but the structure, or the repetitive structure. Surprisingly, when a structure is repeated, the event often appears to be repeated as well. However, it is only the repetitive structure that can be repeated... ’ 22

3» REPRESENTATION | 3.1»reality~

23

rea l it y of repre sent at ion a nd repe t it iona

Marx claim that in history there are examples for repetition as representations.

It happens not because the past design was adopted that there repetitions accrued: these repetitions are not concerned merely with the problem of representation. He claims further that: Representation becomes actual repetition only when there is a structural similarity between the past and the present, that is to say, only when there is a repetitive structure inherent to the nation that transcends the consciousness of each individual."

Д

Д K. Karatani in his book wrote his overview on repetition in history like this:

The most important problem of people when they think about repetition is that during this process they can get closer to perfection in they life or work. That they can maybe even think, that possible is to go beyond ourselves. Coping objects is copying reality. In this case the image is not not consider as reality... It is our interpretation, and representation of that object on our image. Is it a ‘real world’ (naive realism-real is what we experience with our senses) or it is just a appearance of reality? I think it is impossible to separate things from their way of appearing. We are learn to use our senses, for some objects they are working subconsciously, for instance lemon. Our mouth produce saliva and our face is also changing, just because we taste it before, and we know it is bitter. I also think we mix a lot defining and perceiving objects, and reality in general.

"We are surrounded by curtains", said Rene Magritte.

In his work often painted the curtain and opened them to see that behind each curtain there is another. That can be metaphor of having problems (when we defeat one, a new will come and take our free view) or metaphor of our perceptions (that we try to see, we think we do, but still we are slaves of our relativism). Our subjective view on the world, make the world more interesting, full of more variety, more challenging. There is no one view on certain topics or things, and that allows us to see thing that other people can not. That every one of us have its own way of discovering.

This bring development.

‘We are surrou n

As Joseph Kosuth said: "The different mediums are exploding... when ever ybody is a revolutionar y the revolution is over." № We can say ‘we are surrounded by curtain’, but in the same we have a choice to revel the secret what is behind them. We are deciding if we are going t the next level. Those curtains are what hinders perception is at the same time what enables it. There is no reality without the curtains. Representation is the use of signs that stand in for and take the place of something else. It is through representation that people organize the world and reality through the act of naming its elements. Signs are arranged in order to form semantic constructions and express relations. In general things that ‘stand for’ or ‘take the place of ’ something else. Also to present something second time, to re-present, in this way of seeing it becomes repetition.

24

№ http:// en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Joseph_Kosuth

ded by curtains’

3»

REPRESENTATION | 3.1»reality~ Definition

25

rea l it y of repre sent at ion

Let us see history of representation. The idea is really old, in my view comes with first humans cave drawing in Lascaux. They wanted to explain, present story or some situations from reality, to share with other people.At that time first symbols, images and interpretations was made.

Plato, was the first to llooked upon representation with more caution. He recognised that story telling is a representation of life, yet also believed that representations create worlds of illusion leading one away from the ‘real things'.

He consider representation as a danger. In contrast to Plato, Aristotle was the provide a description of indirect realism. In his ‘On the Soul’ he describes how the eye must be affected by changes in an intervening medium rather than by objects themselves and speculates on how sense impressions can form our experience of seeing, reasoning that an endless regress would occur unless the sense itself were self aware. He concludes by proposing that the mind is the things it thinks. He calls the images in the mind 'ideas'. He considered representations as necessary for people's learning and being in the world.

THEORY OF FORM » Typically refers to the belief expressed by Socrates in some of Plato's dialogues, that the material world as it seems to us is not the real world, but only an image or copy of the real world. Socrates spoke of forms in formulating a solution to the problem of universals.

The forms, according to Socrates, are roughly speaking archetypes or abstract representations of the many types of things, and properties we feel and see around us, that can only be perceived by reason. In other words, Socrates sometimes seems to recognise two worlds: the apparent world, which constantly changes, and an unchanging and unseen world of forms, which may be a cause of what is apparent.

a nd

"If we want to s ee thing s in their r ig ht perspec tive, we need to understand the past of man as well as hi s pres ent. But if deter mine the exi stence of pres ent and past, we need to be aware that there w ill be a f uture and what it can br ing to u s". Ю

repe t it iona

Representation began with early literary theory in the ideas of Plato and Aristotle and has evolved into a significant component of language, and communication studies. To represent is ‘to bring to mind by description, 'to symbolize, to be the embodiment of '. A representation is a type of image, an essence of the reality. We can get information about the objects and his surrounding.

The degree to which an artistic representation resembles the object it represents a function of resolution and does not bear on the denotation of the word. For example, both the Mona Lisa and a child's crayon drawing of Lisa del Giocondo would be considered representational, and any preference for one over the other would need to be understood as a matter of aesthetics.

Ю Jung's Psychology of Archetypes’

by Kazimierz Pajor, 2004 Warszawa;

Forms or Ideas and not the material world of change known to us through sensation, possess the highest and most fundamental kind of reality. Only knowledge of the Forms constitutes real knowledge. This allegory shows how people can be not aware of what is real or what is just representation.

How easily we can believe in everything. That we take in general things as they are.

Allegory shows us in parabola what the nature of humans, is capable or incapable.

wikipedia: http://www. objectivistfilmbulletin. com/platoscave.html

Let us imagine humans living in underground cave, since childhood and they legs, arms and heads are connected with chains, so they can’t turned.

They can see only this what is in front of them. And what is there? Shadows.They are looking on the images which are created by big fire above and behind them in a distance.

In front of the fire is build a wall, like in the puppet show.

And it is a show indeed, just manipulation of perceptions.

Prisoners, see only shadows from the puppets, which are simply passing by in front them. Let us suppose that some times they can hear some voices, so they will think for sure that those voices comes from the shadows. If the prisoners cold communicate somehow with each other then, they will start to name figures in front them.For them truth will be literally nothing more than those shadows of the images.

26

What will happen if one of the prisoners, will be release?

Firstly he will have problems to stand up to move, he will be scared and confuse to turn his head. If he in the end, will menage to do this, then he will see the fire with the stage. He will be shocked, and he will not understand the image in frot them, he will not recognize in the real figure’s, those shadows which he knows.

For a long time, he will not believe that, he was living in illusion created by others. In fact he was a puppet for them.

Prisoner will still think that shadows are more truthfully than real objects. His eyes will not see, and not recognize what he never saw before. And he is not able to recognize 3d objects, so he will also have problems with naming them.

Let us imagine what will happen to him, if he will by dragged from the cave, on the surface of the earth. The sun and the light will paralyze him. He will not understand where he is.

After some time, he will start to see shadows, and then ref lections in the water and then real objects it them selves.

Maybe even first he will understand and explore sky by night, with the moon, because he is more use to see things in darkness. In the end he will see the sun.

In the allegory there Socrates suspect, that the prisoner will contemplate the sun, and find in it a cause for all the existence on earth.

That plants are growing, they seasons are changing, that also it create shadows. And if he will start to remembering how his life in the cage where look like, then he will be grateful for this opportunity to see the world. He will really enjoy the world, discovering it slowly.

What if the chosen prisoner will come back to the cave, to his old life? Firstly he’s eyes will have problems with adapting to the darkness, and then he will have problems with naming shadows, and recognize them. Other prisoners will be laughing.

3»

REPRESENTATION | 3.1»reality~ Plato's cave

‘Being and Love’ by Sebastian Gonzalez, Netherlands 2011

έ

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

What is here the approach towards to the world? Being in action, taking the life in in hands, and choosing to live, to go forward, and through this to create a history, to take part in creating the world.

27

repe t it iona

And that going out ‘there’ is bad, evil. What if ‘the one’ would like simply to shear with his experiences with other prisoners? His behaviour will be lead by feeling of helping the community.

They will not understand what he is talking about, maybe they not even want to listen. And if they were somehow able to get their hands on and kill the man who attempts to release and lead them up, wouldn't they kill him?

The ordinary objects we see around us - we can compare them simply to information, objects, reality in which we exists. We are stuck in our reality. In the place we know.

And we do not want to change anything. Simply we are maybe to scared, or our present is to comfortable for us. Our all life we try to create a safe surrounding, safe circumstance of our life.

And are we satisfied form it?

In my view not. Always accompanied us, a feeling of change. This feeling is somewhere deep in side us hidden.

Our constant unsatisfaction should leads us to action.

Those actions can be small, but significant. Its about our attitude, which have a big inf luence on our perception of the world. Just with changing our posture to the world, with can become more happy.

If for that change we need find a new place and we want to combine this with traveling, we should be aware that, we will take with us our own reality. Our own problems and things that we grown up. Can happen that, even in the surrounding we will start to create the same world, the same reality that we had before. We will repeat our behaviour. But also can happen that because of the new surrounding, we see how blind we where. A new place can be just an excuse to change our self. Can stimulate us to action. To get new experiences, and maybe get away from stagnancy.

Let’s go back to example of people from that cave, they wish to stay in the world that they know. Even if that one person erience, and surroundings.wanted to show them other possibilities, they didn’t want. Ask yourself, to which group you belong? Curious one, and you will go from the cave, or feeling of safety is more important for you, and you stay in reality that is good, easy and safe (relatively)? This attitude defines our life, and our art.

rea l it y

"As Her z og showed u s; we cannot have a g ood world if we don't look for s omething eter nal , for an idea of ju st world, for the C ommuni st Idea. L eav ing e ver y thing behind ag ain, throw ing ours elves into the road s, making the path by walking ". έ

From childhood man has an instinct for representation, and in this respect man differs from the other animals that he is far more imitative and learns his first lessons though imitating things. Aristotle discusses representation in three ways: The object: The symbol being represented. Manner: The way the symbol is represented.

Means: The material that is used to represent it.

This lesson of Aristotle is basic. If we analyze some things we always need to ask our self about those thee ways. What does something really means, and why? Is it because the way how it is shown, how it appears to us? And what tools have been used for that, what language?

The most important part of representation is the relationship between what the material and what it represents. We can ask: Can stone represent a man but how?

"O ne apprehe nd s realit y only throug h repres e ntation s of realit y, throug h te xts , di s cours es , imag es : the re i s no such thing a s direc t or unmediated access to reality. But becau s e one can s ee realit y only throug h repres e ntation it does not follow that one does not s ee reality at all… Realit y i s alway s more e x te nsive and complicated than any sy s te m of repres e ntation can possibly comprehe nd , and we alway s s e ns e that thi s i s s o- repres e ntation ne ve r ‘gets’ reality, which i s why human hi stor y ha s pro duced s o many dif fe re nt and chang ing way s of tr ying to get it." ∞

¤ from Dryer 1993, cited in O’Shaughnessy & Stadler 2005

"C on s eque ntly, throug hout the hi stor y of human c ulture , people have become di ss ati sf ied w ith lang uag e 's ability to e x press realit y and a s a result have de veloped ne w modes of repre s e ntation . " Ω

28

New inventions, and movements are appearing because we constantly searching for the new ways of seeing reality. Searching for a better way, maybe more direct or more easy or more poetic. The biggest movement of art was created because of lack of satisfaction. For instance: Surrealism can be understood as a crack in the bedrock of traditional values. At that time civilization change was drastic. New discoveries, theories, second world war, and big collapse of rules, values in life or lack self- control- those features determinate that time. Let's do not forget about theory of relativity.

Consequently, in representations it is possible that potential problems of misunderstandings, errors, and falsehoods. The accuracy of the representations can by no means be guaranteed.

System of signs and technique use for representation never stands in isolation from other cultural forms. For instance, the interpretation and reading of representations function in the context of all structure full of rules for interpreting, and within a society many of these codes or conventions are informally agreed upon and have been used over the years.

Such of understandings however, change because of context and circumstances: people, place and time. In art, objects, themes, people, abstraction shapes do not represent the same things. Differences appears because of style of artists- visual language, context give by maker and the viewer and of course culture.

Does this ‘agreement’ or understanding of of icon, symbol and index and it representation take place? Yes and no. In my view is relative.

"Free-repres entation. It i s not far, as the c row f liesf rom cloud to man; it i s not far by the imag es f rom man to what he have s een, f rom the nature of real thing s to the nature of imag ined thing s. The y are equal value. Mat ter, movement, need, desire are ins eparable. The honour of liv ing i s well wor th s ome ex er tion to g ive life. Think of yours elf as f lower, f r uit and hear t of a tree, since the y wear your colours, since the y are one of the necess ar y sig ns of your pres ence. O nly when you have ceas ed to as c r ibe ideas to it w ill you be g ranted the belief that e ver y thing i s transmutable into e ve r y thing. " ◊ In Max Ernst collages, frottages and paintings he ceaselessly exercises the will to confuse form, events, colours, sensations, sentiments- the trif ling and the grave, transitory and permanent, old and new contemplation and action, time and durationcontradictions. He identified himself with his work, by carrying his insight beyond this unfeeling reality to which we are expected to resign ourselves, he ushers us a matter of course into a world where we consent to everything, where nothing is incomprehensible.

Ω

Mitchell, W, ‘Representation’, in F Lentricchia & T McLaughlin (eds), Critical Terms for Literary Study, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1990

◊

3» REPRESENTATION | 3.1»reality~ Aristoteles

Sufiicient is to say, that when painters are working with real objects, their aim is never to evoke the object itself but to create on the canvas a spectacle which is sufficient in itself. The subject of painting consists manner of a painter and it is shown thought it.

Artists want to make a world in side of the painting so we as a viewers should dive in to it.

Is it representation, or ref lection of the world, objects or himself?

29

of repre sent at ion a nd

Can be as George Braque said: "Painting i s not a imitation of the world it i s a world in it s ow n."

repe t it iona

For instance objects and people do not have a constant meaning, but their meanings are fashioned by humans in the context of their culture, as they have the ability to make things mean or signify something. Viewing representation in such a way focuses on understanding of the world. It is a process of creation and constructions of new meanings.

If art is a representation of reality, then also is a process of creating meaning.

Art can be still seen as a representation of reality, life, our inner emotions, problems, dreams, desires, aspirations, our consensus and collective unconsciousness, but also in the same time art can not represent all those things.

rea l it y

said Max Ernst, 'Surrealism, Permanent revelation' Great Britain, 1970

In my view Rene Magritte impact for art is unstoppable. Consciously or unconsciously, directly and indirectly artists have continually been inspired by the repertory of images and the ideas of the painter, which are universal, beyond the time, and become imprinted in minds of society. Maybe even for some people origins of them are unknown. So many artist attempt to work from the everyday and not from what is considered art.

Their everyday environment becomes the exceptional. They find the unknown in their own surroundings, produce scenarios and slight shifts in logic. Comparisons and contradictions are united. For Magritte contradiction is the mainspring of poetry.

Nearly all expressions of art struggle with the conf lict between reality and representation. This is the main theme for the painter from Brussels. The famous pipe clearly points to the difference between a real thing, its representation and the mental image of it. Repeatedly, the tremendous confusion between representation and reality is visualised through the medium of a painting-within-a-painting. The information given by windows, mirrors and shadows is also highly misleading. For example, when a cloud desserts from a painted picture it allows the appearance of a possible transfer between representation and reality. In this way the image is given the value of reality on the level of representation.

Magritte wrote: "L'ar t de peindre est un ar t de pens er ".

The paintings are a visible description of thought. They contain his idea about art, reality and continually allow observational and representational problems appear. For Magritte writing was as important as an image. The form of text, the way how he wrote words on the canvas, where decisions that he made, with the feeling of importance. They where also having meanings. In his view that was not only the conventional way of presenting object and his name. It wasn’t only have a link between them. The idea was that the link is the most important. In those paintings text have his purpose, to create metaphor, not only to give us direct information. This is what I like the most in posters or illustration, or art. That we an play with the viewer, with the process of reading or interpretation of certain piece.

We can give information directly, or we can use methaphors.

I think using indirect language bring us viewers on the higher level of understanding, and brings more satisfaction. There are steps in seeing the art.

First is general overview, there should be something which intrigue us, so we are curious to explore more. Next step is that we get more information about it, and then we should activate our associations, and then the work becomes complete. It can be like this because of the metaphor, or symbols, and associations which are used in art piece.

In case of Rene Magritte paintings both language and images are unmasked as symbolic systems, relying on conventions. " T he y only refer to realit y w ithout thems elves hav ing any realit y value. Realit y, lang uag e and imag e are uncoupled and their mutual relationships." ^^

30

^^ "Rene Magritte" , From The Library of Great Painters, NY

3»

REPRESENTATION | 3.2»ANALYZE~ Mystery

31

rea l it y of repre sent at ion a nd repe t it iona

They become independent and equal system of communication. Standing completely alone, an object without a name can be complete in itself.

But the world put in the same situation, can just means itself stripped of its referential function. Even when the object is given the correct name, it says little about the actual meaning of the object. The system becomes interchangeable and the object, its name and its image can take each other's place. In this way it gets clear that language and image have the same symbolic nature. An image is only used in a text to indicate an object if its name defines it too generally, and in order to have the effect of making the reader sit up and take notice. In writing, that effect is later described as a poetic effect. Magritte wants to use poetry and its mystery in his paintings. But I will get back to this later, in my text.

There is no distinction to be made in a painting between a real object and its representation: after all, both are painted. Therefore painted words are not subordinate to images. Their perception does run through the consciousness of the viewer in a different way. Each word and each visual form necessarily stirs a meaning or association in our consciousness, even when vague objects are concerned.

Reality, language and image are weighted according to their differences and agreements. We should be aware of that we don't see everything. Behind every object, can be another hidden. Rene Magritte discover that he can see the world as a curtain, as a horizontal screen in front of his eyes. He said: Thus reality itself is given the appearance of representation. He was prepared for a new discoveries.

Free from all regulations, unexpected, poetic links can appear to sharpen thought and observation. "T he wonde r f ul mi stake : to put eg g in a cag e instead of a bird." Paul Nouge describe the methods with wich Magritte achieve in his work to get to create an atmosphere of alienation, by showing the objects in alien surroundings, creation of new objects, transformation of well-know things and alteration of material and size, using paradox. His work is a result of a systematic investigation into a poetical effect to subvert everything. Not random contributions.

Ж 'Rene Magritte', From The Library of Great Painters, NY

Magritte consciously and carefully chose his subjects in order to create new, disconcerting experiences. Their mutual relationship is subordinate to reason, for it was known beforehand, but remained hidden from consciousness until the discovery. Discovery of the relationship and new meanings which are appears in his work. The objects eligible for this investigation always belong to visible, daily reality. Familiar objects touch us much more strongly when they are shown in an unfamiliar context, or to put in another way, when an object is isolated, the charm of it is directly proportional to its banality. He plays with c ontradictions and comparisons to the things and world that we know, with the banality and complex structure of the world.

In the development of his artistic theory, the painter distinguished three main basic ideas: the search for a completely subversive poetic effect by creating objects unpleasant,sad, the search for secret affinities through the problem-solving method and finally he wanted to evoke mystery through the poetic combination of ordinary things. Basic ideas in his work are not so easy to define.

Their lowest common denominator is poetry.

"Painting is limited to the description of inspired thought, that can be made visible.

With inspired thought I mean, thought that unifies the things in the visible world in an order which evokes mystery".

Ж That formula was endlessly repeated by Rene Magritte: thought, poetry and mysterythose are key terms, around which his later writings are built.Thought: means something like 'soul' or 'consciousness'. It is characterised by freedom, spontaneity, caprice.

It is therefore not possible to submit it to theory or prediction of the possible. Thought

32

is 'essentially free' and must be not confused with different 'ways of thinking' or passive thought-that is a thought which is dependent on theories and orders. Thought appears almighty. Everything we know, feel or see, has its origin in thought. It is also true that all explanations, be they theological, metaphysical, psychological or biological in character, are rooted in thought.

Thought is only incapable of explaining itself. It is undeniably given huge inf luence.

Mystery alone is greater-is even includes thought. According to Magritte thoughts are resembles the world. For it coincides with what it sees hears or knows. They becomes the same as that which is offered to it by the world. In this way becomes a 'immediate knowledge'.

Thoughts and world are inextricably linked. Resemblance does not make a link between things by investigating them, guessing their worth or comparing them. It is connected to the thoughts. It is actual activity of thought, that can be made visible in a painting.

It is about similarity Magritte claims: Thought by becoming like what the world offers him and returning what is offered to the mystery without which there would be no possibility of the world,nor any possibility of thought.

This sentence shows that there is a dialectic movement of give and take between the world and consciousness.

"Finally, we can g et to conclu sion that e ver y thing that i s taken up by thoug ht to re-consider, i s f reed ag ain by it s repres entation i s painting. That happens by e voking the myster y in the world."

Ж We need to also look on the other aspect: Rene Magritte always says that he looks on the world as a painter, so in the first place means that he is thinking with images. The visible description of this type of thought is not an expression, representation or symbolising of ideas and feelings.

The content of thought is no different from thought itself.

It is not dependent on certain reasoning. It asks no questions and equally does not attempt to look for answers.

Sight and consciousness become identical. Thought resembles the visible form via ideas, feelings or experiences.

That is one of the reason that Magritte speaks about 'absolute thought'- it is a 'thought that sees' and can be represented in a painting. Then we can see from the painting what we think about ourselves and our own world. And this description thoughts in a paintings should be as a poetry- a visual poetry.

Ж "Rene Magritte", From The Library of Great Painters, NY

Evoking mystery is the ultimate aim of » his work s.

3

REPRESENTATION | 3.2»ANALYZE~ Mystery

33

repe t it iona

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

rea l it y

From the beginning of his work, poetry was on the first place. It comes into existence in the way in which things are linked together, although there is no system for it. But then poetic thought is also irrational and unpredictable.

The representations have always been taken from everyday reality. This make us feel poetry more real, as secretive as the world itself. According to the artist the world is unknown, and some representation can be more real that the world in itself. Using the same objects can make the painting more closer to reality, but in the same time more unknown.

Why is that? We are so used to the objects around us, so we don't see anymore their reality their mystery.

We starting to do not see them anymore. Magritte tries in his painting to show us again those objects, to evoke their mystery using the poetic language of imagery, which shows familiar objects in an unfamiliar relationship.

What is a mystery in his paintings? A riddle.

An image that does not ask questions and does not satisfy curiosity? According to the painter: ' my ste r y i s a hig he r force , which know s e x cept it s elf.

A f irst and the la st word , the g reatest pur pos e of be ing the world , the incom parable and the ess e ntial, the unknow n and the un knowable , that cannot be investigates by any s c i e nce , s omething like G od , the au - dela of thoug ht and the world, the abs olute and the abs olute necessi ty for the ex i ste nce of the world. My ste r y can be e x plained by nothing, but i s the s ource of all knowledg e .

It i s an ir rational realit y, which cannot be laid dow n by any doc tr ine ." Ж

" It i s not how thing s are in the world that i s mystical , but that it exi st s". Ťh Magritte confirmed the classical norms of painting in order to turn them against themselves. He goes to work from inside out. His art resembles reality in order to interrogate it in a better way. Means that the way that painting should be painted is to not distract attention from the subject.

Work must create the illusion that the material aspects of it have been lost and only the imagery remains.

Magritte knew that banality and mystery always go hand to hand, but still he wanted to create a clear and maybe obvious paintings, he wanted to achieve the feeling of a new mystery, which is not dark, secretive and enigmatic. It is more unfamiliar for us.

Ťh According to Wittgenstein, Tr a c t a t u s 6.44

Ж 'Rene Magritte', From The Library of Great Painters, NY

If we fallow Magritte way of thinking about mystery, we can notice that is impossible to approach it with logic, but only by emotions. Although mystery surpasses thought and the visible world, it does not in any way exist outside reality.

Mystery must be sought in ordinary reality.

For me the important thing is to ask: What does it mean: to think of a image?

Rene Magritte is answering: it means to see the image. The eye registers the image but the image is only given value in our thoughts, we see in there trough our personality.

It is our interpretation. The painter does not want to represent the world superficially or passively, he wants instead to penetrate the essence of it.

The art of painting is to give the object of 'perfecting the working of the eye'. That is not the usual way of seeing, as we know eye can itself mislead.

34

Furthermore, lots of things, objects, facts are escaping our attention. We think we see them, but in reality we see selective things. We need as a artist/designers awake our senses, desires.

Otherwise everything will just take place in our mental universe, and never see day light. The existence of an outside world must not be denied,and it will remains unknown. Only representation of it remains in our mind. We only perceive an apparition of reality.

Eternity?

We should be aware that this way of seeing have of course influence on art- in this case paintings. Since we do not see reality, and we do not know what is it exactly, art is less capable of showing it. This is what Magritte want to say in his work. Therefore the paintings do not look out on reality but on a representation of the reality which we carry inside us.

3»

REPRESENTATION | 3.2»ANALYZE~ Mystery

35

rea l it y repe t it iona

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

The conflict between reality and its representation is explicitly invited by the method of a painting within a painting.

Windows are brought into question as view into reality and mirrors or reflections cannot make a claim to being an exact image. But what is exact?

With Rene Magritte this relation becomes m i slea d i ng -becau se reality is in itself misleading.

ф said Sol Lewitt, from 'Rene Magritte', From The Library of Great Painters, NY

Rene Magritte declared: 'it is more beautiful on a postcard'. This seemed to turn his mind away disagreeably from what was really important in the production of painting. I hope that my paintings will make people think of what they see' he said, and such a sentence would have been vindicated by Lewitt, Kosuth, Wiener and many others.

Whe n an ar ti st u s es a conceptual for m of ar t, that sig nif ies that all ha s bee n preordained and dec ided on in the preliminaries and that the e x ec ution i s a mat te r of routine ".

ф Magritte spent a lot of time finding the right ideas for paintings, multiplying little drawings as promptly as thought. He did not talk of a 'Good subject' like classical artists, but of 'problems'. Each painting to be produces is a problem to be resolved. He required an alliance between intuition, imagination and logic.

It is a sort of police novel in the line of Edgar Allen Poe. A rebus. A jigsaw puzzle in which all the pieces have to be reunited, even though they are disparate and always strange, forever strangely heterogeneous.

Magritte discovered Giorgio Chirico art and found there the way to abandon all recourse to the effects of form, stroke and material. The axis indicated by Chirico is underlined by the importance of content. The meta physicality of the painting was talked of in this regard and in this sense the concept was not far off, as it is itself the tool of philosophy. Be logical said Lewitt, and do not lose energy in empirical-ism of all sorts. Magritte would have bring him pretty postcards in order to help to give f lesh, even virtually, to principles as demanding as this: "O nly idea s can be work of ar t. T he y make up a par t of the chains of de velopme nt which can e ve ntually f ind the ir for m . All idea s do not a sk to be mate r iali s ed " , this sentence is by Sol Lewitt, but Magritte also could write it.

Our experience determines our perception of things. Now in a mass-culture we are used to see things, and we start to not caring, we are overloaded with information, we are looking without seeing the content just slipping over the surface. Without zooming in or out. Seeing general cliché things or random information. This allows us to make mistakes, because we use things, which we do not really know or see, and for sure we do not even expect what is hidden behind them. Rene Magritte, Marcel Broodthaers and Joseph Kosuth are talking about it in their art. They are talking about the way of seeing reality, and the forms of objects.

36

The way of translation of reality in their art works. From that we can get idea, that we as a society, we get lost in our translation of reality.

JOSEPH KOSUTH "Ar t i s conceptual and not s ensitive". We have 24 letters in the alphabet, and with this tool, all western nations make different combination to create a unique system of words so we can communicate with each other. But because of the same language we are having problems with understanding others. It's not only problem of speaking and having different knowledge of language. Problem lies mostly in us. We are to much concentrated on ourselves. And then when it comes to conversation, we pretend to listen what other people are saying.

In fact we follow our egos and we search for people to ref lect our problems. Again we slippering on the surface.

Ϋ "Being and Love" by Sebastian Gonzalez, Netherlands 2011

3» REPRESENTATION | 3.2»ANALYZE~ Postcards

"The text i s a text ": Five words in orange neon refuse any other connotation. An almost superhuman work is carried out here in order to discourage representation, its delusions, its adherences, its symbolism. A photograph of a chair, a real chair and the definition of chair, just a pose their codes, in a complete abstraction according to their theoretical director.

The work tends to defy formal analysis because one chair can be substituted for another chair, rendering the photograph and the chair photographed elusive to description.

Nevertheless the particular chair and its accompanying photograph lend themselves to formal analysis. There are many chairs in the world; thus only those actually used can be

37

rea l it y of repre sent at ion a nd

Joseph Kosuth is an artist who is questioning the nature of art, its form. Because of this aproach, and his work, he is concidered to be heir of Marcel Duchamp. His work is a visual expression of Plato’s concept of The Form, which I was mentioning before.

repe t it iona

As I read in Sebastian Gonzalez book: "T he s ec ret, as in the analy si s , dwell s in the word s, in the dialo g ue , in what it i s not s aid. T he only way to g o f rom the one who speak s to the what that speaks, and back , i s through word s and sile nces. T he s ecret dwell s in the wetness that only word s, whe n told at the r ig ht time and in the r ight place , can produce . Word s alone have the ke y to take u s to that place s o ins anely enchanting, that place whe re word s work no more". Ϋ

With the letters of the alphabet, we can create positive and negative words, we can write history of the world, some informations about us, or love letters. We can make somethings with real content, and use it in certain context. What if words, signs or symbols are containers of meaning and information?

Then we need to be careful what words, fazes we are using. That’s true we should take care what language we use. Nowadays lots of wo rds are abuse. People just simply do not know their definitions, so they use them in the wrong situation.

We are just used to use fixed names for some objects and systems, feelings, characters but they will look the same also have the same function or purpose of existence. We are learned to not wander or question them. We are too much stuck in the borders of fake reality. Things are to strong build up in our culture and way of thinking. It is hard to go out. Words or objects are not a containers of information or meanings. They get the meaning thought context and situations.

As Marcel Duchamp made with 'Fountain'.

He just took an object which is well known to everybody and gave him a new meaning. (Is a cliché to use this example?) How did he that?

Giving a new context. The same thing makes Joseph Kosuth with his chair, he is playing with the image, object in itself and its name.

He is asking w hich description, the name of object or the object itself is stronger? Which contains more information? Or they devoid of information's and they are appearing only in our head in our imaginations I must add that as we know everybody have different imagination and have different experience with mentioned here before 'chair'.

INFORMATION it is most restricted technical sense is an ordered sequence of symbols that can be interpreted as a message.

Information can be recorded as signs, or transmitted as signals.

Conceptually, information is a message.

Information is closely related to notions of constraint, communication, control, data, form, instruction, knowledge, meaning, pattern, perception, representation, and especially entropy.

The English word was apparently derived from the Latin, ‘to give form to the mind’, ‘to discipline’, ‘instruct’, ‘teach’, connection from French to give form, to form an idea of. Furthermore, Latin itself already contained the meaning concept or idea, but the extent to which this may have influenced the development of the word information in English is not clear.

The ancient Greek word for information means: form or idea, shape, but can be also be associated with thought, proposition or even concept.

described. Those chairs not used would not be analyzed. The enlarged dictionary definition of the word chair is also open to formal analysis, as is the diagram containing instructions of the work. The artist himself say about his work:

One and Three Chairs, or ‘Five Words in Blue Neon

"I u s ed common, f unc tional obj ec t s - such as a chair - and to the lef t of the objec t would be a f ull- s cale photo g raph of it and to the r ig ht of the objec t would be a photostat of a de f inition of the obj ec t f rom the dic tionar y. Ever y thing you s aw when you looked at the obj ec t had to be the s ame that you s aw in the photog raph , s o each time the work wa s e x hibited the ne w installation necessitated a ne w photog raph . I liked that the work it s elf wa s s omething othe r than simply what you s aw. By chang ing the location , the obj ec t, the photo g raph and still hav ing it re main the s ame work was People in general are afraid ve r y inte resting. It meant you could have of things that they do not an ar t work which wa s that idea of an ar t know. They scared of fears, work, and it s for mal compone nt s we re n't but also they are maybe even impor tant " . ashamed that they have probξ lems, fears, issues to struggle with. Maybe they creating As I said before the words do not have a meanborders and limitation by ing in them selves, the same is case of symbols themselves. The challenge or stereotypes. We think that there are reseris to get rid of things, pains, voirs of metaphors, but they are not. We use that we create for ourselves. them and we think that we already have an unOther people do not want to derstandable message for society, but we forget listen about others problems. how important is the context of our work/art.

For question: How are You? People who do not know anything about symWe always answering: Evebols, they will not understand us, maybe they rything is good, and You? In will not even notice this symbol. most of cases, this answer is Why? Our perception have borders, limitauntrue. We are just afraid, tions. Its not allows us to see. We will never see what others can think about and name things, that we do not know, firstly us. And that maybe we can we should learn them, explore and use to them. get hurt, because they will For example: People on an island, if they never come closer to us. As I mensaw a boat before they will just notice that a retioned before we look for a ally strange fish or piece of wood in swimming felling of safety, to be in the next to them. Maybe even they will be scared shelf. We play roles in our of it. But we will not understand directly what lives,or in the certain situwas that thing.If we compare this situation to ations, because in our view the Prisoner from Plato’s Cave, then we will maybe the world expect it remember that, ‘the one’ was taking his time from us. Is it playing role, or in learning and seeing world. He started from is it simply a lie? If I consider shadows, and slowly he was experiencing and myselfs as a good person, seeing more. In the same time he was learnthen I also see good features ing. Directly after realisng he was confused in others. When I see good and scared. In allegory he was put in the new things around me, I'm not circumstances. He did not choose to change his prepared, I’m aware at that position, and his reality. time, that something bad can happened to me. It’s like we all know, that we will die one day, but still we live, and actually we trying to forget that. And If someone close to us suddenly dies, we are shocked, how this can happen. And we can started to questioning ‘Why?' But after some time we forget again.

A truly materialist interpretation of the world cannot exclude from that world the person who verifies it. Death itself concerns him, the living person, the living world..

38

REPRESENTATION | 3.2»ANALYZE~ Postcards

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

ξ from Siegel, Jeanne: Artwords.

Discourse on the 60s and 20s. UMI Research Press, Ann Arbour/ Michigan 1985, New York

ξ

39

repe t it iona

3»

rea l it y

Can we say that, we live in bubbles? And we create them. We make conscious impression for public that we accepting reality and that we are aware for example that we will all die, but it is not true. Living in stereotypes and social schema's gave us this feeling of fake safeness.

But the bubble can be destroyed easily. The border is thin. We do not want to be hurt so we are isolating fom surrounding, but in he same time we are waiting for good emotions, good people, love, or other experience, so there should be easy acces to us. Living in this bubble we think about in positive values. And we can not understand how come other people can kill others, or give them so much pain? Furthermore we are sure that we could not do something like this, or even if this situation would take place, we definitely would try to stop, or prevent of those actions. Reality can be different, and can be dangerous. In that critical situation we will do everything to survive. So maybe we will kill to not be killed. What kind of reality we live in? We must all admit that we believe in life really deeply, and all the images that people creates are to resume it, to maintain that feeling. All our actions are coming from the feeling, that we want to live.

We are choosing to live. We can train our skills of awareness, but we need to see and touch in order to understand things.

Subjective perception, subjective understanding. Our perception depends on the culture, mood, weather, light, company, presentation, surrounding and the most of all, our experience in life. One day we can see something important, nice in colors which gives us positive emotions, but when we come next day to see it again, those feeling can be totally different from which we remembered. Circumstances are really important and always different.

Ц Code of codes, Kosuth a master of language, make everything fall down from the wall of meaning, where Magritte had unsteadily placed it.

The linguistic code is adjoined to it, in the negative, the ironic code, in the positive. The image: A pipe. The writing denies it and it is his method for indicating it in engraving. The language is not the point. The writing is abstract, in retreat given over to combination.

The image attempts to be its reference. The text does not portray that which he represents. The image adheres to it and substitutes it. Magritte very early grasped that, if he wanted to create a painting of thought, a thoughtful painting, he need to verify it conceptually and to unmake the traditional links which unite and image and its legend, or inversely the text and its illustration according to immutable connivance.

As Marcel Broodthaers wrote on one of his works, made of a white glazed cupbard filled with egg shells: I believe that I had pronounced a discourse’ The whole system of representation and portrayal shooked to its foundations.

Conceptual text is not made to reassure. The diverse paintings of Magritte entitled The Key of Dreams are thus to a certain degree the explosive ancestors of Kosuth's photostats. In both cases, the painting is no longer a spectacle. It does not substitute an absent object. It does not represent anything other than its own semantic demonstration.

It would be even, according to Kosuth's wish, perfectly abstract. It is a chain of produsse senses. And the spectator is not given the idea he is participating in a work of nomination of which the result always remains improbable.

Magritte opened the game that Kosuth compressed on the same black painting. In one of his 'Cles des songes', the painter divided the space of his work into 4 equal parts. In first he painted a lady's handbag under which he wrote 'The sky'. In second frame he put a image of Swiss half opened pocketknife, with 'The Bird' as a text. The third one is the leaf of tree accompanied bye 'The table'. The last one is surprise us: its a image of sponge with the same text. In this sense, painting is a conceptual work. In the case bag /sky, the link is totally arbitrary and demands very arduous work, being itself arbitrary to the senses.

For the pocketknife / bird, on the other hand, it jumps at you that the analogy has a whole system of moving, and its also referee to the shape of a bird. As far as the tree leaf/table is concerned, is it not evidently a matter of a connection via origin. Finally the sponge- is the only apparently stable element and significant in the whole. But actually, it is not. Preceded by the three other cases this last has lost is value if meaning. And if it was also arbitrary like the first? Or indeed, and if not more so, in this tab-

40

ulation, it does not rest on an accredited collective meaning? Therefore either bag, being called sky is also as true as the sponge, 'sponge' as to represent the sky with a lady's handbag...

The non-meaning threatens the whole statement, announcing a potential meaning, never to be held back. Kosuth, in this instance, entered into the scene, declaring: "You can certainly see that all this is per fectly abstract and that it is necessary to treat the multiple aspects of an idea of something." Ц

3» REPRESENTATION | 3.2»ANALYZE~ Pipe

41

rea l it y of repre sent at ion

His work shows only eggshell’s. He knew that he could only work thought casting, painting and reports, the materials and morals are not the domains of the contemporary artist and that there remains for him only the vacuum, its resolution, its immateriality. Mallarne is equally one of the masters of the thought of Magritte, who often made ref lexive and fascinated use of the egg-like whiteness of the shell: giant egg in cage, chicken meditating in front of an egg, in an egg-cup, the painter uses the egg as a model for the portrayal of bird in f light, etc.

One of the section of the 'Les cles des songes' shows a white egg under which Magritte wrote 'Accacia', as if the start of the visible and that of the readable play with each other there.

в said Marcel Broodthaers inMarcel Broodthaers, 1989 USA, NY; Marcel Broodthaers, TheTate Gallery, 1980, England,

a nd

"A more beautiful from than an eggshell. No Unless the shell of a mussel.

The shell... and ever ything is egg... The world is an egg.

The world is born from the big yolk, the sun..." в

repe t it iona

The stoics said that the egg was the perfect image of the understanding of universe.

Its yolk being the physical its white, ethics and its shell, logic; we can in fact perceive the relationship between natural matter, moral values and the exercise of intelligence. Marcel Broodthaers wrote:

In fact Magritte does not use the egg as a symbol, but as a strenght of image capable of shaking the senses, of making language uncertain -'ab ovo'- from its origins. In this sense, the paintings of Rene Magritte are operators very close to Marcel Broodthaers objects, which he declared voluntarily: "Mu ss el s , eg g s , obj ec t s w ithout conte nt othe r than air and w ithout g race . O nly the ir shell s force f ully de monstrate the e mptiness . It i s the only pedestal that should be looked at. In fac t, I w ill delive r reality to you w ith my work " .

в

And thus, for Broodthaers as already it had been for Magritte, it is the mental that he makes real by the roundabout use of symbols. And this touches on the immaterial. Philosophers and visual artists, Magritte and Broodthaers animated such a concept. They were following Marcel Duchamp but as they say with 'Belgian manner'.

"Fiction enables us to grasp reality and the same time that which is veiled by reality."

в

в said Marcel Broodthaers inMarcel Broodthaers, 1989 USA, NY; Marcel Broodthaers, TheTate Gallery, 1980, England,

Marcel Broothaers, is my new discovery. He is not so famous, and I never heard about him before. His work really surprised me. It is a riddle to discover, which often contain politic messages. His work is really clear, full of poetry, shapes, typography and metaphors. We can feel his romantic soul thought it. He was a collector of objects. He explore all fields of art: starting from poetry (which he never quit), installation, painting, movies, photography and collages and ready-mades. He is playing with shapes, and typography in such aware way. His way of presenting his work, and the idea of new museum/gallery, gives all his art pieces a lot of white space. This way is use until now. It gave also a feeling to the viewer what is important.

He worked principally with assemblies of found objects and collage often containing written texts. His most noted work was an installation which began in his Brussels house which he called Musée d'Art Moderne, Départment des Aigles (1968). This installation was followed by a further eleven manifestations of the 'museum', including at the Dusseldorf Kunsthalle for an exhibition in 1970 and at documenta 5 in Kassel in 1972. For such works he is associated with the late 20th century global spread of both installation art, as well as institutional critique, in which interrelationships between artworks, the artist, and the museum are a focus.

42

His friend, the painter Magritte, gave him a copy of the poem in 1945 and it appears to have acted as a link between Broodthaers’s literary work and his art objects. This poem became the starting point for several works

by Broodthaers in the early ’70s. He was interested in both the literary and visual qualities of the poem. As well as the words, Broodthaers was interested in the so-called ‘blanks’ on the page, these white spaces which act like a silence that conveys as much meaning as the importance of the image of the poem. He was separating individual letters, and words on the canvas.

But also at the same time he was fascinated by the way Magritte used words to contradict a visual image. Here he plays his own game, pitting visual and linguistic meanings against each another. We can see this big inf luence in his piece ‘Paintings’ from 1973, where he was particularly interested in those works where Magritte introduced written words to contradict a visual image, and made a number of paintings and prints based on this idea. Such works question the relationship between art and the reality it depicts. This is one of a large series of works each consisting of nine panels and referring to various areas of culture. Here sixteen words refer to traditional paintings, listing for example, 'style, subject, colour' in French. The way the words are combined in each canvas represents a different painting.

The text about museum writen by Broodthaers began by evoking a painting of Magritte called Eternity, posing both the question of time.

How can we end without evoking the admirable 'museum' work produced by Broodthaers during there years? 'The museum is a logical fiction' said Broodthaers. Magritte anwser: 'The net curtain is a very effective way of representing mystery'. It is the act of covering the image that obliges the mind to create it.

The idea of a new museum: Broodthaers announced the end of Museum. ‘Museum’ as he and the society at that time knew. The ‘Museum’ with it traditional approach, the burgeois manner. He was thinking about the role of the museum and its place in ref lecting contemporary society. In September 1968 he invented the Musée d’Art Moderne, Département des Aigles, which comprised an installation of crates, postcards and inscriptions situated in his Brussels apartment. Marcel Broodthaers consider a museum as a: 'white cube of representation' OR A white shell of humans impressions and improvements'.

Broodthaers always wanted to be successful, and to sell some of his art works. He is writing: "since I couldn’t build a collectin of my own, for lack of even the minimum of financial means, I had to find another wayof dealing with the bad faith that allowed me to indulge in so many strong emotions. So, I said to myslef, I’ll be creator". He wanted to create his own space, where he can shows, his art, where he will not have borders of presentation. This is one the reasons of creating a museum. His master in poetry was Benjamin Buchloh, and Broodthaers often refers to his texts. His ambitions, and romantic approach comes from his texts.

Important is to mentioned about the concept of Broodthaers with his 'museum' project, those are all the rules and steps which Broodthaers obeyed and ivent:

" What i s c ulture? I w r ite? I have take n the f loor. I am a neg otiator for an hour or t wo. I s ay I . I reassume my pe rs onal at titude. I fear anony mit y". (I would like to control the meaning/ direction of culture) wrote Buchloh, and Broodthaers turned to a medium was expicitly personal. Writing. He wanted, by writing open letters, take part in public and politic debate.

3»

REPRESENTATION | 3.2»ANALYZE~ An egg

Its not only that literally M.Broothaers take the famous image of the Pipe from R. Magritte, and he play with it. Or Joseph Kosuth create the same space in the museum, just filed up with quoting on the wall. Their massages are the same, the process is the same. Their are touching important problems, and topic, in the way that they go beyond them self. Beyond their work, time and space. Their work is still actual. And its about our perception. Representation of objects, and their meanings.

"Nature s eems to be espec ially g enerou s and inventive for impatient or too weak s oul s. She offers them the ref ug e of madness that protec t s them f rom the suffocating at mosphere of the world." ф Those words from Rene Magritte are significant for philosophy of now. The feeling of suffocating atmosphere. We choke in our own world, surrounding, with our self. We can’t stand our actions or passivity of our mind.

43

rea l it y of

3. Use the discoveries of conceptual art in order to illuminate objects and paintings from ancient times.

repre sent at ion

2. Then objectively study these symbols (the eagles) and particularly their use in artistic representation.

a nd

Nowadays, nobody would be shocked to see only white wall with painted text on it, at that time, is was revolution.

What was the text from the wall? A critic about the art, politics, and economy. He was talking about opinions of society, and their values. He was interested in studies antagonist view between nature and culture.

1. Firstly put in default all ideology it is possible to form around a symbol; create a collective all believes.

Important for me is Magritte, and Marcel Broothaers and Joseph Kosuth, are artist, which are conscious about their present, and about perception. They aware how the human from their time looks like. They have similar approach to art, and to the reality. They are exploring the reality, and problem of representation in their art. They all pieces have moral aspects.

Significant thing also is that they combine typography and the images in they art work.

They create a new meaning and new value, new associations in their work. We can see in their work, struggle with the same topics. Occurs there also repetition. If we collect all their wok together, we will see all variety of the same ref lection.

repe t it iona

His work, change appearance of galley’s and museums. In my view that was significant in history. Shows a beginning of new, modern and conceptual art gallery. Where artist can play with the given space, when gallery change specially for the art piece.

ф Marcel Broodthaers, 1989 USA, NY; Marcel Broodthaers, TheTate Gallery, 1980, England,

"S ome times we have the feeling that thing s w ill happe n, that i s the e x te rnal respon s e of the world to hi s uncons ciou s desire " .

љ

Let us follow our desire.

Surrealists and Dadaists are the closest for me. Why? They wanted to cross the border of boredom, go beyond life, experience. Defend rights of inspiration and free expressions.

It was artistic answer for what was happening in the world in that time. Time of I and II World War, death, Communist, repression of Human Nation. But in the same time, when people were suffering, they are coming together, trying to support each other. They wand to face the tyranny, they can not be passive. The believe in humanity was shaken. People had the feeling of the end of the world, they started to do not believe in life. People attempts to communicate the incommunicable pushed language towards its limits, and the finale breakdown into a kind of triumphant nonsense came with Dadaism.

ễ

explanation from Louis Aragon in "Surrealism, Permanent revelation" Great Britain, 1970

said A.Breton in his Surrelist Manifest.

љ

44

In the beginning of XX century also a lot of experiments started, new scientific invention was discovered. We started to think more about our inner world and also about our sexuality. Behind the chaos of ordinary reality, art movement are creting, against the ordinary. That was the origin of the surrealist movement. A collective desire for action, intellectual mobility, and creation with active commitment to ideals.

Triumph of dreams, interpretation, freedom, expression, sexuality all this to get beyond paintings, beyond the poetry, beyond the world. Surrealist’s wanted to 'open the prison' of unconscious, contradict associations.

"There i s no f reedom for the enemies of f reedom."

ễ "There are no limits to freedom for one, there is no freedom for all. All is an empty notion, an awkward abstraction; one finally rediscovers his lost independence. Here ends the social history of humanity.

Abandon the caverns of existence. Only by turning away from life, by checking the spirit, can supposedly real physiognomy of life be determined, that's hard. Our spirit should be in harmony to get to certain surreal eternity.

Death of mind is absurdity. I live in eternity. I believe that I live, therefore I am eternal.

Past and future serve matter.

Spiritual life is conjugated in the present tense. If death touches me, it does not touch my mind or thoughts. The mind lives on disaster and death- desert of death". ễ

3» REPRESENTATION | 3.3»DESIRE~ Surrealist’s

rea l it y of repre sent at ion a nd 45

repe t it iona

" Sur reali sm i s bas ed on the belie f in the super ior reali t y of ce r tain for ms of ass oc iation he retofore neg lec t ed , in the omnipotence of the dream , and in the di sinte rested play of thought.

It lead s to the per manent destr uc tion of all other psychic mechani sm and to it s substitution for them in the s olution of the pr inc i pal proble m s of life.

The thief of death, the m u s i c- h a l l s o f b e y o n d , t h e s h i p w re c k o f t h e l o f t i e s t i n t e l l e c t i n s l e e p, t h e crushing curtain of the f u t u re , t h e t o we r s o f B a b e l , t h e m i r ro r s o f i n c o n s i s t e n c y, t h e i n s u r m o u n ta b l e s i lve r- s p l a s h e d wa l l o f t h e b ra i n - a l l o f t h o s e striking images of human c a t a s t ro p h e a re p e r h a p s n o t h i n g m o re t h a n i m a g e s . T h e re i s a re a s o n t o b e l i e ve t h a t t h e re e x i s t s a certain point in the mind a t wh i c h l i f e a n d d e a t h , re a l a n d i m a g i n a r y, p a s t a n d f u t u re , c o m m u n i c a ble and incommunicable, h i g h a n d l o w, c re a s e t o b e p e rc e i ve d i n t e r m s c o n tradictions.Surrealism, p a r t i c u l a r ly i n re g a rd t o its means of undertaking t h e i nve s t i g a t i o n o f t h e e l e m e n t s o f re a l i t y a n d u n re a l i t y, re a s o n a n d u n re a s o n , re f l e c t i o n a n d i m p u l s e , k n o wl e d g e a n d f a t a l i g n o ra n c e , u t i l i t y a n d i n u t i l i t y, e t c ., p re s e n t s at least one analogy with historical materialism in t h a t i t d e p a r t s f ro m t h e 'c o l o s s a l a b o r t i o n' o f He g e l i a n s y s t e m . It s e e m s impossible to me that limits can be assigned: a phil o s o p hy d e f i n i t e ly a d a ptable to negation and the n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ." æ

æ A. Breton in "Surrealism, Permanent revelation" Great Britain, 1970

"L ang uag e e x i st s s o that man can make u s e of it in a sur reali stic way." Ð The surrealist intention is to collect samples of unconscious expression in their poetry or art, which therefore contains a considerable amount of nonrational material. Striking is abundance of marvellous metaphors. Surrealist think that: when no specific idea is imposed upon language, it seems to take control over and f lood, as it were, directly from the unconscious to the painting or to the paper, where its configurations escape the determinism of reasoned expression.

In surrealist poetry and painting, words and objects which normally are never remotely connected are now happy to forms pairs: strange and apparently arbitrary liaisons spring up spontaneously, to shock the rational mind. It is formed of the unintentional pairing of two alien elements, a union which creates a kind of third element, the product of their marriage: ' bouquet of naked rain'. Surrealist painting are bring to us even stronger feeling of disturb, by setting objects in totally unfamiliar context. To those images belongs: Ernst eye-in-a-stone or Magritte locomotive coming out of fireplace. Those artist where working to create pictures, which will work upon the mind. The more disturbing an image becomes, the more likely it will be to produce a numbing of the rational faculties, whereby the unconscious is directly contacted. ¥ claimed M.Ernst, "Surrealism, Permanent revelation" Great Britain, 1970

Ð wrote Andre Breton in his Surrealists Manifesto.

For surrealist's desire is the most important, they can fallow words of Freud: "D esire i s bor n of a man' s most intimate procliv ities ; it i s the e x pression of hi s most pe rs onal s elf. To allow it f ree re in to achie ve a s e n s e of authe ntic par tic i pation in life . T hi s i s s ome thing de nied to thos e whos e

46

' s ec ret life ' i s for e ver held in check by v ic tor y of Fre ud called the 'realit y pr inc iple ' over the 'pleasure pr inc iple'. The man, who reco g ni z e hi s desires can be called f ree, since he s ee hi s ' inner cau s alit y." Ð To understand and thereby to fulfil your secret desires.

Process of projecting of defining an unconscious entity in terms of words or pictures is itself satisfaction enough- as through desires are satisfied when once they are authentically expressed. Automatism is the best-known method used in Surrealism to tap the imaginative resources of the unconscious.

Ask Yourself, what is important for you? Is it fallowing Your desires? Is satisfying your needs the most important for You? Is Your life about that? We dream, we have desires, and goal, and we constantly chaise them.

What is happening when we get something? Are we satisfied? Or we want more? From my experience I know that following just desires in the life is not possible. There is always so much obstacles on the way.

We most of the time take under consideration moral, and social aspects of life.

The struggle make life more beautiful.

Another desire? Andre Breton name objects ‘catalysts of desire’, and he was right. Desire to possess. We are surrounded by them, and we become uniquely attached to them.

The unity of the objects will remain a mystery as long as we will think of its various qualities- appearance. We naming them, collect them and putting to ‘things’ to much attention, memories, feelings. We have desire to surround with excellent quality, and beauty.

We think that object what we posses show who we are.

In my view its true, but we need to be careful what reasons lead us. To show our personality and interests , or to show how much money with have.

"Pr ivate proper t y has made u s s o stupid and passive that an objec t becomes our only if we ow n it, that i s, if it exi st s for u s as capital , or if it i s u s ed by u s." ¥ In the act of collecting it is deceives that the object be dissociated from all its original functions in order ti enter the closest possible relationship with his equivalents. This is opposite if use.

From Surrealist’s perspective words and shapes are simply representations of the original and all-important image that is in the mind.

The surrealist object derives from an artificial accident, a process in which the artist tries to simulate the working of chance as he puts together an object which, it is hoped, will formulate something from his unconscious.

Primitive works of art are viewed by Surrealism as authentic expressions of minds which have retained that sense of identity of subject and object which Western man has lost. The art of the insane is welcomed in similar vein, as being somehow a more pure expression of the human psyche than the works of sane artists. Breton even talks of their products as constituting a reservoir of mental sanity.

" T hose moment s when e ve r ything slips away f rom me , when immen se c rack s appear in the pl ace of the worl d , I woul d sacr if ice all my life for the m ." ð

3»

REPRESENTATION | 3.3»DESIRE~ Manifesto

47

rea l it y of repre sent at ion

The aesthetic response involves his whole sensibility, between the mental and the physical. Connection to a mysterious type of beauty.

a nd

"As long as nature and he i s denied to the s ens ation of a 'plume of w ind at the temples', thi s making him shiver w ith pleasure". ð

repe t it iona

Surrealism has established its own 'aesthetics' by defining beauty in terms of a purely affective response to phenomena. Beauty is a kind of psychic disorientation, a disturbance that affects both mind and senses. Breton said that he stayed unmoved by nature or art.

ð "Surrealism, Permanent revelation" Great Britain, 1970

Convul sive beauty.

It ha s been an innate tension which provokes in the percipient an analogou s reaction of tenseness and giddiness. Nowadays in art, we depart from ideal beauty, to get closer to the new idea of beauty.

All those deformations in human bodies, strange shapes that wake up in us a disgusting feeling. Also having a lot of sexual meaning. The work of Hans Bellmer or Luise Bourgeois is like that. Bourgeois made a confession. during her life. Her works are abstract but also you can find there human figure expressing themes of betrayal, anxiety, and loneliness. Her work was wholly autobiographical, inspired by her childhood trauma of discovering that her English governess was also her father’s mistress. It is olso a portrait of human relationships, one of them took place between her parents.

48

Destruction of the Father (1974) is a biographical and a psychological exploration of the power dominance of father and his offspring. The piece is a flesh-toned installation in a soft and womb-like room.

Made of plaster, latex, wood, fabric, and red light, Destruction of the Father was the first piece in which she used soft materials on a large scale.

Upon entering the installation, the viewer stands in the aftermath of a crime. Set in a stylized dining room (with the dual impact of a bedroom), the abstract blob-like children of an overbearing father have rebelled, murdered, and eaten him. How strong feeling she had about him, and how much he determinate her work.

Rimbaud's poetry, shows that in his case, art became a pure creation and exteriorization of the self, not representation of external. How? By imposing his private creations on the world around him.

3»

REPRESENTATION | 3.3»DESIRE~ Sensibility

rea l it y of repre sent at ion

This brings me to mind: David Lynch's ‘Rabbits’, where the main characters are rabbits talking aloud. Exchange among themselves is irrational, completely detached from reality; absurd dialogues. And so, anxiously observing and listening, as one of rabbits asks about an hour, and the accompanying laughter mysterious unseen by us, the audience, as other rabbit notes with dismay, that night there was no moon, and when Jack-men rabbit goes out almost every moment, and comes back into the room, accompanied by thunderous applause. In the meantime, we are witnessing a strange and mysterious events. The atmosphere further episodes are increasingly stifling and oppressive.

The action takes place all in one room, which enhances the feeling of alienation.

Marquis de Sade get his attention in the world by his lucid exploration of man's darkest instincts, for his celebration of an authentic and unrestrained desire, for his portrayal of the erotic imagination perpetually clashing with society in its search for realization in the outside world.

a nd

But let's go back to convulsive beauty. All kinds of phenomena can partake of the convulsive: verbal images containing surprising 'short circuits' that suddenly illuminate at the same time as they dazzle the mind: pictorial images that are astonishingly at odds with the secure world of rationalized perception: objects which, like the eighteen-foot loaf that S. Dali somehow mislaid while crossing a New York street, represent a challenge to normality; phrases read out of context, for instance: 'the eyes of certain women'.

Besides the convulsive beauty, surrealism has more than others movements a cult of feminine beauty. The most complete of surrealist vision is to witnessed through the eyes of the lover.

They where asking themselves: What is happening in people's head, in their imagination during the act of love.

The erotic element in surrealist art is not something one can overlook. Surrealist artists have developed the basic theme in an astonishing variety of ways: Bellmer and Molinier operating incredible transformations of the female form (dolls, sculptures), Svanberg and Dali creating fetishistic images to evoke a strange poetry of perversion. We can discern there some complexes or obsessions.

The erotic content of surrealism is not solely a negative manifestation, the attempt to undermine respectability. It’s something positive. Erotic experience can make your view more clear, you can even get to the point of better understanding.

repe t it iona

Accompanied by a whole psychedelic music and mysterious sounds that are a work of genius composer Angela Badalamentiego.

Enigma. All was calm and silent. Everything was looking at me in a strange and questioning manner. Then I saw that each corner of the palace, each column, each window had a soul which was enigma.

'Surreal Things, Surrealism and Design' from V&A Publication 2007

49

Θ Jonas words from book "Being and Love" by Sebastian Gonzalez, Netherlands 2011

As I mentioned in the beginning in this text, I wanted to share my state of mind. My mind is made of art, so I need to understand art, to understand perception to understand myself. I was busy with my self-development. Going beyond my knowledge and exploring philosophy of phenomena of perception.

"By thu s re marking contac t w ith the body and w ith the world, we shall redi s cove r our s elf, since , pe rce iv ing a s we do w ith our body, the body i s a natural s elf and , a s it we re , the subj ec t of pe rception " s aid Kant. þ

I notice repetition of the world itself, art, and artists in their own works.

I started to explore this topic, because I also see the idea of repetition in my work. I was wondering about collective unconscious and stereotypes, symbols which we are repeating.And walking though the representation, misunderstanding of the language, and reality. The forms of objects and it perception, interpretation, and our reality was explored.

I get to the point that my curiosity has been not satisfied, and I would like to continue it. I’m on the beginning of the journey. I get to be more aware of myself, but also maybe a bit more confused.

In my view, we all should be more aware about our life, our reality. What we can change?

What we can take, and give to the world around us.

"Being and Love" by Sebastian Gonzalez, Netherlands 2011

The world of perception contains not just of all natural objects but also paintings, pieces of music, books and all ‘world of culture". Far from having narrowed our horizons by immersing ourselves in the world of perception, far from being limited, we need to re-discover a way of looking on art works, language, and culture, and to respect their autonomy and their original richness.

This is our challenge.

þ

My f r iend was asking hims elf the s ame question: "Is life really s omething ? C an it be def ined objec tively? " I was asking more: "If our the world i s real , and what i s it value? " A contradiction appears in Kant for whom, if we were to gain access to the noumenal domain, the conduct of humans would appear "as in a puppet show, ( where) e ver y thing would g estic ulate well but no life would be found in the f ig ures".

Out of a soup of molecules and water, something emerges whose existence can only be asserted as such from the engaged point of view of those who are alive. In Jonas. Life as a meaningful distinction in a world devoid of meaning, in ‘the cold and dead universe of physics’ – to use Varela’s words – is something impossible to recover a posteriori. The signifying unity of life must be posited as the first thing, despite of being historically posterior to its physical ground. For this concept of history belongs always-already to living beings. The only point of view from where life appears as a meaningful phenomenon– as a self-relating totality, as an identity in the most basic sense of the term–is from the point of view of a living being. "life can be know n only by life’ means al s o that there i s nothing ‘obj ec tive’ in life". Θ

50

rea l it y repre sent at ion

of

4» CONCLUSION

51

repe t it iona

a nd

I’m choosing to live , and to explore f uture.

Э

∆

№

52

Э John Clang "Picture of a man", 2011 ϑ John Clang "Picture of a women", 2011 № Studio Akatre.com, identity for theater

Д

rea l it y

☐ Polish Poster School www. eyeseaposters.com

by Francis Starowieyski Д

of

set of pictures, author unknown

∆

repre sent at ion

ϑ

sorce unknown

5» PICTURES ~FACE PICTURE REPETITION

53

repe t it iona

a nd

☐

0

æ

54

"Zero and not" 1985

æ

¥ "One and three chairs", 1965 "Red, Wittgenstaine" 1987

§

rea l it y

"Ex-Libris" (Wittgenstein's Gift) , 1990

0

¥

5» PICTURES ~JOSEPH KOSUTH

55

repe t it iona

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

§

≠

◊

‡

56

rea l it y of repre sent at ion

‡ "Ceci n'est pas une pipe"

by Rene Magrite ◊

a nd

Ю

"The human condition", 1933

Ю "Sin of man", 1964

Ὼ

Ὼ

repe t it iona

"The interpretation of dreams" 1927 "The son of man" 1964

5» PICTURES ~RENE MAGRITTE

57

source http://www. wikipaintings.org/ en/search/ rene%20 magritte/1

≠

Œ

Ϡ

58

Ђ

rea l it y of "Pipe", 1969

repre sent at ion

Ťh

Œ

Ťh "Tableaux formes academiques", 1970 "L’espace de l’écriture" 1964

Ϡ

a nd

Ђ "White cabinet and white table"

PICTURES ~MARCEL

59

repe t it iona

5»

source https://www. google.nl/se arch?tbm=is ch&hl=nl&s ource=hp&b iw=1129&b ih=520&q=m arcel+broodt haers&gbv=2 &oq=MARC EL+BROOT HAERS&aq= 0s&aqi=g-s1 &aql=&gs_l= img.1.0.0i10.

1923l1923l0l 3741l1l1l0l0l 0l0l181l181l0 j1l1l0.frgbld.

INTERNET SOURCE

BOOK SOURCE

» https://www. google.nl/se arch?tbm=is ch&hl=nl&s ource=hp&b iw=1129&b ih=520&q= marcel+broo dthaers&gbv =2&oq=MA RCEL+BRO OTHAERS& aq=0s&aqi= g-s1&aql=& gs_l=img.1.0 .0i10.1923l19 23l0l3741l1l 1l0l0l0l0l181 l181l0j1l1l0. frgbld.

» "Jung's Psychology of Archetypes"

by Kazimierz Pajor, 2004 Warszawa;

» "Rene Magritte", From The Library of Great Painters, NY

» "Analyze of dreams" by Sigmund Freud,2010 Warszawa;

» MerleauPonty ∆ "Phenomana of perception" France, 2001

» http://www. wikipaintings.org/ en/search/ rene%20 magritte/1

» "Revolution and Repetition" by Kojin Katarani

» http://www. wikipaintings.org/ en/josephkosuth/wittgenstein » http:// wikipedia. org/wiki/ Jackson_ Pollock » http:// wikipedia. org/wiki/ Kandinsky » http:// en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Face » http:// en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Art

» ‘Phenomana of perception’

by MerleauPonty, France, 2001

» wikipedia: http://www. objectivistfilmbulletin. com/platoscave.html

» "Being and Love" by Sebastian Gonzalez, Netherlands 2011 artist books: »"Marcel Broodthaers", 1989 USA, NY; »"Marcel Broodthaers", TheTate Gallery, 1980, England, » "A Dictionary of Surrealism" Great Britain, 1974 » "Surrealism, Permanent revelation" Great Britain, 1970 » "Surreal Things, Surrealism and Design" from V&A Publication 2007

60

6»

BIBLIOGRAPHY

repe t it iona

61

a nd

repre sent at ion

of

rea l it y

With help of ∆ Joanne Dijkman /theory support/ ∆ Ina Bode /design and mentor support/ ∆ Carsten Klein /design and typography support/ & ∆ Sebastian Gonzalez /theory and philosophical support plus editting/

62