The photograph and reproducibility is perhaps the medium of the postmodernism. To take a photograph is to freeze reality in an image, cut it out and seal it off.
postmodern because it is a work which can never be fully autonomous. It breaks down the possibility of the original. Douglas Crimp comments on this as plurality. Not a 'pluralism of originals' but plurality. As such no concrete origin can ever be located, no single moment, even though the photograph is supposed to capture a single moment for duration.
What about when a photograph lies, when it is doctored, when it is altered in post-production. Then is it art?
What about typological photography? Reducing taking pictures to a constant process which reveals difference or sameness, presence or absence, the extraordinary or the banal? Then is it art?
What about the photographic object? Then is it art?
Photographic presence, is a ghostly absence- is that the postmodern art experience- the emptying out of the image and filling up of potentiality without didacticism but subjective possibility.
These are questions... please help me answer them....
They are triangualting in my mind
No comments:
Post a Comment