File spoon-archives/seminar-11.archive/collage_1994-96/seminar-11.Oct94-Nov94, message 7


Date: Tue, 25 Oct 1994 11:33:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Anne R. Berkeley" <berkeley-AT-wam.umd.edu>
Subject: Re: subjectivity



As for "what kind of a viewing subject does collage construct," I think 
it's a pretty good question, and certainly useful. Normally we 
conceptualize these kinds of things in terms of their production, 
producer versus their reception..the aesthetic effect of the thing, e.g., 
"isn't that an interesting building, the line, the imposing mass..how 
striking, a classic.. isn't Phillip Johnson it's designer? What a 
genius.. I heard he has fascist leanings." but of course what's really 
happening is that the effect of all these buildings including those of 
Phillip Johnson is to condition our responses--those deeper ones, the 
undercurrents, the defining experiences--to the objects we encounter. 
Hitler understood this very well. Much of the political discourse in the 
U.S. as expressed through T.V. also gets the point. 

So I think it's a darn good question, good way to approach questions of 
this nature in general. What I don't get is collage. What the heck are we 
referring to? Did I miss something? Or are we trying to "invent" a 
definition, a new medium by collating stuff that's heretofore uncollated 
out there?

Anne Berkeley
berkeley-AT-wam.umd.edu

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005