By Luis Paz. Culture & Entertainment - Página/12, April 24, 2011 .- German Diedrich Diederichsen is a journalist, a person professionally accustomed to do (already done) questions. What foundation has, therefore, make ask him? What is raised is that was just released in Argentina a compilation of essays by him: Psychedelia and ready-made , the second volume of his texts of local appearance after People loop. At 18.30 today will present at the Book Fair. And it is an opportunity to hear the concepts and theoretical frameworks of the most prestigious German critic in his field of pop culture in general, and aesthetic and ethical tensions that it generates. Perhaps with this is sufficient, but there is still part of the question unanswered: what is deep, which means attending a talk by a journalist and not a writer a critic and not a theory? "It's part of a global trend by which the public is moving away from the aesthetic experiences and bringing together the information," German author evaluated. And it's an example: "In many European countries, people pay an entrance to a theater or a club where you do not see a movie, play or a concert, but reporters talking about plays, movies and shows. It's something the strangest thing, "he says, without resigning to save your smile. "But it is a construct that has nothing to do with the status quo of the cultural interaction of individuals: the Internet is not related to an aesthetic experience, but with information. It has come to life analog. " Diederichsen's argument about her visit to Argentina that does not go beyond the logic of what we discussed in Psychedelia and ready-made : amateur pornography, psychedelia, pop, minimalism, punk, the notion of generation and nature of the drugs are not being put in difficulty from an aesthetic experience but to be read as information. It is clear when asked about their criticism of the eye as the supreme body of experience human, the subject of the first essay of the book: "The vision problem is the problem of Internet. The issue with the web is that it consists and formatted for the information and not for aesthetic experiences. At each cutting edge of technology that existed, the data were art devices and yours, always different. With the Internet, the artistic experience in an environment designed circuits for information, then the eye understood as information and not as aesthetic experiences, "defined. The question is, to enable Diederichsen, if there may be aesthetic experiences in the network or if only there is no information on those experiences.
- This would mean that watching a concert through the Internet is subject to an aesthetic experience.
- In music and the Internet, the dimensions coexist there is always a determination and a technical reality and organs, and a determination and a symbolic reality and the senses. There are always specific information to open a cultural sense. When the guitarist, bassist and singer looking for live the same note, there is one fact that is physical (strumming the guitar, singing) and one that is cultural and has to do with what represents the note. I believe that among those instances, the organic and cultural, there is the same distance between the execution of an agreement and its counterpart on the internet. The concert takes place in an organic and physical space and the network which can be given is a representation. It is very interesting, but difficult, try to see if the shift from one activity to a web context or just replace it reinforces it.
- It seems clear that the strengthening exist: organic and culturally, to watch video that reinforces a memory lived on experience. Something that is enabled by current technology.
- Yes, but there is a problem in domestic use of these devices, it has to do with what we see impossible. The difference between photography and painting is that the representation appears to be technical and not cultural. We see the apparatus, not the concepts that allow us to form an image. We see a digital camera without noticing that we like to use culturally determined sense of perspective, focus, contrast, and, above all, choose what to photograph.
- These devices allow one of the phenomena discussed, that of amateur pornography.
- The thing about amateur pornography is very curious. At first it was an experience that was based on the status quo: ordinary people having sex in places normal and normal forms. This led us to say: "Another couple more. Why?". How to find someone who would like seeing other people in your situation? Amateur porn was an inability to be industrial. Then, as in pop music, the mainstream pornography industry reached a point where it saturates its ability to sell and aesthetic experiences can only sell advertising space. So amateur porn turned against the status quo of industrial porn.
- But when that happened, the porn industry began to replicate the amateur. What does that have super distorting the immediacy, intimacy and these narrative forms?
- Always in industrial forms of cultural products is a tension between what one wants to see and what you can find. In that imitation we are making is given back what was in the music: when did the concept of the album, the package became the content that was sought and finally the packaging and content relationship returned to its original state. There are many containers similar content: porn telling a sensual or sexual situation between a person who comes home from work and another waiting at home is a content that circulates in industrial packaging and amateurs. It is true that there are so many porn categories specificity and the differences that we educate ourselves to find between an expression of pop and other gender. Which equals all, those who seek these contents do not have to pay for them currently and the ones who pay their producers are those who place advertising.
- You propose three facilitators of pop music that are comparable to those of porn: technical advances in production, expanding the forms of packaging in the circulation and the extent of the market and tools for reception. As you say, pop music and pornography safe sell advertising space. Is that because they changed their forms of creation, it confused the idea of \u200b\u200bthe container and the market became specific?
- is a transformation of all industrial aesthetic experiences, which may or may not be his final transformation. Structurally, the elements changed but the relationships between these spaces still exist: the core of pop culture is still running. At first, these changes seemed closer to a final transformation, radical. But these elements are the same thing happened to the previous ones: a commodity circulating in the pop industry is a particular object, but also a symbol or an object in a social sense that somehow built loses its context and falls within pop culture. Any further reference to this system comes splits of context and becomes Finally, a new commodity for the pop.
- What do you think happened to rock? Because, physically, is still trying the same but their associated cultural meanings, their bodies as a commodity and its critical nature have changed.
- The rock was Oedipus, was willing to kill his father in a symbolic sense, listening to rock music was not listening to your parents. But this is a time when young people hear the music of their parents. Today, wanting to kill your father is not very original. The problem is that Oedipus was replaced by Narciso, who has nothing to do. Oedipus could do something: to kill his father, although only a few make it, the heroes who was the crystallization of the movements of the '60s. What can Narciso? Narciso not need to fight to get attention because we all serve and love him. It can not be your only chance is to love yourself and receive love. Something else must be done, but what? Narciso Oedipus was active and passive. As person who is not looking to do. That's what happened to the rock.
0 comments:
Post a Comment