Re: <documenta X><blast> the image/the urban

Jordan Crandall (xaf@interport.net)
Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:57:58 -0400

brian lonsway wrote:

> While it may be true, for example, that the image
> has begun to accrue a significant value in our culture, and that its
> prominence may have begun to blur boundaries of dimensionality with its
> signifieds or the subjects of its representations, I feel that the
> making-distinct of these blurred criteria is an important task of those
> interested in a 'politically activist' theory and practice.

Could we then make a rigid distinction between the image and the picture
(the representation)? As you say here

> the representation of space (an
> aspect of its image) must be seen as an entity distinct from the space
> itself in order for me to create within either realm (although the two
> certainly influence each other's perception, experience, etc.)

The image is something larger than its representation, which is
necessarily wedded to technological facing. The image might be closer
to "the space itself" than the representation.
-------------------------------------------------------------
a forum on spatial articulations, perspectives, and procedures
texts are the property of individual authors
for information, email majordomo@forum.documenta.de with
the following line in the message body: info blast
archive at http://www.documenta.de/english/blasta.htm
or http://www.documenta.de/deutsch/blasta.htm
documenta X Kassel and http://www.documenta.de 1997
-------------------------------------------------------------