Re: Re: considering abstraction in digital art? (around Paul Klee)

—– Original Message —–
From: "curt cloninger" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 7:26 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: considering abstraction in digital art?


> Hi Andre,
>
> I've been reading Paul Klee a lot lately, and I like his take on
> abstraction. His answer might be "something like both a and b, with
> certain caveats." If there is a spiritual or a transcendental, we are not
> going to re-present it simply by drawing the surface of objects with
> illusionary renaissance perspective. So to get at the
> life/history/essence of an object, we have to try to represent that object
> over time, which is hard to do in a single, static, 2D picture plane.
>
so if we interpret time as a dimension, and aply the same rationale to other
(theoretical) dimensions inevitably the representation in itself is a
reduction, however if the in stead of reproduction we think in terms of
invocation, e.g. 'state' of sence, experience or consciousness - it is
almost neccesarily transcendent.

> So Klee developed a system of representation to try to get at the source
> of what something is. And of course his paintings don't look exactly like
> the surface of a thing. But they always have some relationship to the
> surface of a thing, because the surface of a thing has at least something
> to do with the essence of the thing. And since existence is very complex
> and the language of painting is necessarily more simple and reductive,
> then the painting will necessarily be an "abstraction," since it can't be
> a simulation. But the goal is not abstraction for its own sake. The goal
> is to get at the essence of a thing, and in order to do this using the
> limited vocabulary of (in Klee's case) painting, it's going to be
> abstracted.
>
Okay, that's cool, part of why I asked in the first place was because much
of the 'abstraction' that I've seen in digital and net.art so far, has
struck me as somwhat superficial windowdressing gimickery.

> Interesting that Klee's systematic approach to representation influenced
> Armin Hofmann who influenced Casey Reas whose Processing software is
> currently influencing the aesthetic of the generative art scene. All via
> a Bauhaus modernist graphic design door, which is a funny door for it to
> come through, considering it winds up in the midst of the late modern,
> often anti-formalist net art scene.
>
Sounds interesting thanx (esp. for me with a g. design background), will
look through that vector. (Always felt there is something quite twisted
below the surface of most things German :)

> Some quotations that seem relevant:
>
> There's this sort of ridiculous idea left over from the 20th century that
> abstraction and figuration are legitimate poles. And I from the very
> start have incorporated the two things together. I've been fascinated by
> the idea that there is really no distinction – it's just a question of
> scale. (matthew ritchie)
>
hmmm, poles and their legitimacy are always a matter of perspective - but i
think there's a point in sugesting that abstract if understood as only the
opposite of figurative would be a grossly reductive abstraction of
abstraction :)

>
> Forms react on us both through their essence and their appearance, those
> kindred organs of the spirit. The line of demarcation between essence and
> appearance is faint. There is no clash, just a specific something which
> demands that the essentials be grasped. (paul klee)
>
whoa, that's getting heavy - i like the implicit recursive relationships in
that statement.
>
> It is not easy to orient yourself in a whole that is made up of parts
> belonging to different dimensions. And nature is such a whole…
>
'holarchies' - all they way up, all the way down

> The answer lies in methods of handling spatial representation which lead
> to an image that is plastically clear. The difficulty lies in the temporal
> deficiencies of language. For language there is no way of seeing many
> dimensions at once. (paul klee)
>
>
> There should be no separation between spontaneous work with an emotional
> tone and work directed by the intellect. Both are supplementary to each
> other and must be regarded as intimately connected. Discipline and freedom
> are thus to be seen as elements of equal weight, each partaking of the
> other. (armin hofmann)
>
like ths attitude very much!

>
> In the face of the mystery, analysis stops perplexed. But the mystery is
> to share in the creation of form by pressing forward to the seal of
> mystery. (paul klee)
>
>
> The chosen artists are those who dig down close to the secret source where
> the primal law feeds the forces of development. (paul klee)
>
>
> To overcome an obstacle or an enemy
> To dominate the impossible in your life
> Reach in the darkness
> (paul simon)
>
hmmm, basically boils down to what Ken Wilber's crowd would call 'Include
and Transcend"

>
> Art plays in the dark with ultimate things and yet it reaches them. (paul
> klee)
>
… and often runs them over :)

Andre SC
> +++++++++++