by Barbara Bolt
I read this over these last few weeks and really wanted to take my time with it. At the start I found it a bit hard to get into with the sheer number of times that representation and representationalism was said. I really believe that ideas like these can be described in lamen terms for everyone to understand and that makes the idea stronger because more people can grasp it. I persevered on and did begin to understand and appreciate how much attention was payed to these minute details. Some really interesting ideas came up such as…
“Derrida writes of this thinking without knowing or as he puts it writing without seeing”[pg43] which to me I feel really relates back to Manulani Meyers epistemology and these two are intwined both of them talk about how to create deeper research through understanding. I would say I was reading without seeing some of this text but as I would continue it would become clear and I would understand.
“In practise, as we have seen, the work can take on a life of it’s own. This movement, suggests Delueze is: Capable of affecting the mind outside of all representation; of substituting direct signs for mediating, representations; of inventing vibrations, rotations whirlings, gravitations, dances and leaps which directly touch the mind” [pg 41]
I found that I could contextualise this from when I play piano without sheet music. A lot of the time I will close my eyes and let my hands do what they want. I found that it was less about the notes that I was playing but more the timing not my brain actively engaging I let go and everything sounds nice. ” through the handling of materials, methods, tools and ideas-in practise, that art becomes experiences. Thus it it at the level of the eyes and hands that the work of art escapes from the frame of representationalism”. [pg 48]
Reading theory like this I am uploading someone else’s consciousness into my brain and from that my brain picks out what I can relate too which was talked about in the text “For example, when I first read Heidegger’s work, I would try to fit it into preconceived categories in my endeavour to “grasp the meaning”[pg 49] and I was like yes I have been doing this the whole time. But through reading and opening my mind to this other way of thinking and understanding that deepens my understanding.
” when Heidegger talks of understanding, he is not referring to understanding as a cognitive faculty that is imposed on existence. Understanding is the care that comes with handling, of being thrown into the world and dealing with things. Levinas notes that the originality of Heidegger’s conception if existence lies in positing a relation that is not centered on the self- conscious, this self knowledge, this inner illumination, this understanding….. refuses the subject/ object structure(Levinas 1996;23). This relation of care is not the relation of a knowing subject and an object known it defies the logic of representationalism”. [pg 48]
I found the end a bit anti climatic I had read this whole big thing and it wrapped up pretty nicely but I thought I would be mind blown but to transcend representationalism is to just go with the flow and enter a state of zen and not be the overly critical artist. Which I know but it’s nice to have a nudger to re remind me. I learnt a lot before coming to this idea and am intrigued to see how the book turns out. It’s all about the journey and not the destination. I enjoyed have something academically heavy to read to challenge my brain.
BIBLIOGRAHPHY
Bolt, Barbara. Art Beyond Representation : The Performative Power of the Image. London: I. B. Tauris & Company, Limited, 2004. Accessed October 25, 2021. ProQuest Ebook Central.