Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Zizek
The Internet space, specially the virtual reality, is not the territory in its puresy abnormal behavior? Reduces to its basic skeleton, the abnormal behavior can regard as for to the true defense death and the sex, opposes the mortality rate threat, and natural difference accidental tax revenue: Any unreasonable scene formulation is " castration" Denial; -, in the animated cartoon, the human can survive all catastrophe's universe; Reduces which adult sex to a weak competition; Hasn't been compelled which to die or to choose one of two natural. Similarly, pervert' the s universe is the pure mark order universe, signifier' Lets matters slide the s competition, does not have the hindrance by the genuine person's boundary. Not therefore, again, our Internet space experience whether to suit this unreasonable universe completely? Isn' Also the t Internet space closure's universe, has not had the hindrance to be true by the inertia, only constrains the rule which undertakes voluntarily by it? In this laughable universe, at one kind of unreasonable ceremony, similarly the posture and the scene is duplicated unceasingly, does not use any final closure, namely in this universe, the closure rejection, is far away from the sending a letter number destruction ideology, rather formulates the primitive thought denial.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Soutine's work was interpreted in three particular ways, which correspond roughly to periods of his work and its reception. The first perspective, which corresponds to the early works I have described, was praised for its 'naivety.' It was because of these qualities that Soutine's first and only major collector, Dr. Alfred Barnes bought fifty two of his paintings en mass and exhibited them in Paris and Philadelphia. Critics spoke of him primarily in terms of his outsiderness: he was the primitive foreigner, the savage barbarian, the angst-ridden Jew.
ReplyDeleteBut Dr. Barnes also saw in Soutine's work a reference to the already canonized work of the late French impressionists and post-impressionists, especially to the work of Cezanne:
“Soutine's paintings, although they seem so individual, even so bizarre, owe much of their very originality and bizarreness to his use of basic features in Cézanne's form. He emphasizes, by means of a pattern of broad color-areas, the location, direction and shape of the main plane occupied by each of the units together with their intersection at contrasting angles. This emphasis involves, as in Cézanne, simplification of representative detail, positiveness of shapes, flattening of rounded surfaces by means of facets or planes, pronounced linear contour of color, accentuation of linear perspective, and surface-pattern of technique.”1
This alternative interpretation is representative of how Soutine's work was read after he became more well known as a result of the exhibitions put on by Barnes. Soutine was transformed from the outsider to the complete insider, the inheritor of French painting, and a modern master painter:
“Soutine could be seen as heir to the great French art movement for the 19th century, especially when he took on French subjects, Chartres Cathedral, for instance, very near the Castaing home, or oh-so-French workers. After years of being intimidated by abstract art, intellectual cubism, psychoanalytic surrealism, critics could find relief in painterly kind Soutine.”2
Soutine himself apparently began to see himself this way— he began to make copies of famous works of other masters, copying Courbet, Chardin, and Rembrandt and attempted to destroy his earlier work.
After his death, Soutine's work was again regarded in a different light: as a proto-abstract expressionist painter. This was interpretation that was presented at Soutine's only retrospective showing, seven years after his death at the Museum of Modern Art in 1950: “[The exhibition] coincided exactly with the extraordinary rise of Abstract Expressionism and the seismic shift of the center of the art world from Paris to New York. Artists and critics were eager to see in Soutine a Parisian precursor of Willem de Kooning--who claimed to be "crazy about Soutine"--and Jackson Pollock.”3
The reason I was interested in exploring Soutine is because for me he represents the kind of antihero. His career is a kind of reverse development of the work I would like to make. His work stands as the missing link in the Greenbergian modernist narrative between the classicizing, painterly trend in French pre-war painting and the machismo and violence of the American post-war Abstract Expressionists, which for me has the opposite connotations than it would for Ol' Clem. For this reason I decided to try to emulate his earlier work. I chose his early stilllifes for their sense of deprivation lent by a reduction in symbols and an increase in pictorial flattened space and for their thick and fast wet-on-wet paint application. I attempted to use his fleshy palate and emulate his rough mark making.