Dear M, we are all assured that painting is inherently a two-dimensional affair, yet we invite you to consider an additional relationship: that of the image of the image.
For years, we have meticulously endeavored to destroy every painting created. And we have not taken pleasure in this, quite the contrary, we have felt considerable
contempt. You see, we have never been as interested in painting as much as something akin to it. We pursued the dimension of emulation, and in the end, in the image
of the painting reproduced on the canvas, we found the same aura that characterized the original color, in a vision free and lofty up to the sky.
S.34 Transitory Replacement:
[Temporary Substitution <—-> Interchangeable Elements] <—-> (Shift in Artwork Dynamics <—-> Exploration of Alternate Perspectives)
S.35 Transformative Exchange:
[Artistic Swap <—-> Trade of Ideas] <—-> (Evolution of Artistic Concepts <—-> Renewal of Creative Expression)
S.36 Altered Substitution:
[Modified Replacement <—-> Transposed Elements] <—-> (Shifting Artistic Paradigms <—-> Transformation of Artistic Language)
S.37 Shifted Transference:
[Moved Supplanting <—-> Succession of Influence] <—-> (Change in Artistic Impact <—-> Shaping of Artistic Legacy)
S.38 Interchanged Succession:
[Successive Swap <—-> Alternation of Roles] <—-> (Interplay of Artistic Identities <—-> Evolution of Artistic Practices)
S.39 Metamorphic Switch:
[Artistic Metamorphosis <—-> Transferred Perspectives] <—-> (Redefinition of Artistic Boundaries <—-> Exploration of Hybrid Artforms)
Within the act of exhibit, there’s a subtle interplay between what comes before, what follows, and what happens in the moment. This suggests that elements
like invitations, flyers, catalogues, and documentation are not merely auxiliary to the exhibition, but rather, they fundamentally shape its essence.
Suppose we were to obtain views of the exhibition captured during the artwork’s installation, and we mingled these with images of the finished exhibition.
The image, as the lone testament to the layout, sets off a sort of temporal echo, which can rewrite or influence what the exhibition was or might have been
upon completion. This is evident in the silent images found within our art history books.
Every time we cast our eyes over a work of art from the past, we’re not actually seeing the artwork itself. Instead, our gaze aligns, in that moment, with the
eye of the photographer, burdened with their interpretative choices and sparked into action by our own anticipations.
S.1 Act of Exhibition: Auxiliary Elements (Invitations, Flyers, Catalogues, Documentation) <——-> History of the Exhibition
S.2 Artistic Temporal Echo: Artwork Installation views <——-> Viewer’s Anticipations and Interpretative Choices <——-> Historical
Permanence of the Exhibition
A.4. The relationship between the original apple and its reproduction may change when the viewer is no longer observing, as the act of observation itself
can alter our perceptions. This idea raises intriguing questions about the role of the observer in both art and science. To continue this line of thought,
one might ask: how does the interplay between observation and interpretation influence our understanding of reality and artistic expression?
[S.11 Placeholder Element Concreteness and Abstraction] <——-> [(Concrete Object) : (Abstract Placeholder Element)]
[S.12 Media Interface in Placeholder Element Production] <——-> [(Physical Artwork) : (Digital Creative Tools with Placeholder Elements)]
[S.13 The Coexistence of Real and Imaginary Placeholder Elements] <——-> [(Real-World Object) : (Fictional Placeholder Element Concept)]
[S.14Materiality-Immateriality Continuum of Placeholder Elements] <——-> [(Tactile Art Object) : (Intangible Placeholder Element Experience)]
[S.15 Transmedia Storytelling with Placeholder Elements] <——-> [(Object-Based Narrative) : (Placeholder-Based Narrative)]
We believe there is little to be done; lately, we find ourselves more intrigued by the absence of subjects rather than their presence.
It seems to be a constant fixation in our mind, that of a certain removal, even if we’re not yet sure what it applies to.
In the late afternoon, the objects in the study seemed to be wrapped in a strange, fading shadow. They emerged towards us without actually moving.
It was rather the light that highlighted them, that moved them, on the modernist chessboard of perception.
M.1 Use of heavy, non-transparent drapes to completely cover the artwork.
M.2 Placement of a large, blank canvas in front of the artwork, creating an illusion of emptiness.
M.3 The use of mirrored surfaces around the artwork to deflect and confuse the viewer’s gaze.
M.4 A press release or gallery guide that intentionally omits any mention or depiction of the artwork.
M.5 Placement of the artwork in a darkened corner of the gallery, using minimal or no lighting.
M.6 An elaborate written narrative describing a different artwork altogether, diverting attention from the actual piece.
M.7 A barrier or curtain that requires viewers to actively move it aside to see the artwork, discouraging casual observation.