In a life post-us
Does history matter? In a search through excavation of the archeological site Thomas Hirschhorn quoted "Does the passing of time only determine the significance?" (394) In the Hans Ulrich Obrist Interviews (2003). At which point did the trash of yesterday become today's artifacts of the past? Unanswered and ill explained, Hirschhorn describes the engagement of the people behind the working system of the world- from the highest power of the food chain to the lowest working at a fast food chain.
When all of the above comes to mind, what is happening with today's artwork tomorrow? In a world post-present, that is to say that we're living in a world where the technological rate doubles itself every 1.5 years- and advertising and media branding is flowing in and out of the brain and in and out of 'popularity' in mere weeks at a time, keeping up with the change seems impossible. As for art, the same is happening as one's 15 minutes of fame is in and out like the something. Hirschhorn rejected the idea that a catalogue is to legitimize an artwork and rather that it should 'inform, create knowledge and discuss connections and contexts' - where I believe true, such forms of discussion should exist in order to stimulate minds, they also act as a document of preservation (if lucky enough to succeed in an ISBN number). But such achievements surely would go unnoticed in the future, right?
Schopenhauer described living as an 'eternal frustration' (Schopenhauer 'The World As Will' 10), to live in a world without god, without meaning and direction, the proof seems to be in our lives- the fast past change in life seems that everything we do becomes a 'filler'. Easily arguable, existence has a cap, and what we do is crammed into a period of time. A world of subjects and objects as described in Schopenhauer’s world of will, each to be perceived and perceiving- inevitably living? It’s troubling to end on this note, but what are we to do with time in a troubled world of no direction.
Thomas Hirschhorn interview with Hans Ulrich Orbist, Thomas Boutiux ed., Hans Ulrich Orbist: Interview volume 1, Milan: Charta, 2003, pp.393-400.
"Arthur Schopenhauer." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. May 12, 2003. Metaphysics Research Lab, CSLI, Stanford University. 18 September 2009 <
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schopenhauer/>.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm not really sure if this has any relevance to what you have been saying, but your blog made me think about how things have changed for the individual so much since technology speed up. What I mean is that people these days seem to be more inclined to hold on to and gather up objects, things, tangible things. Is this an attempt maybe to hold on to the 'real'. Almost like a 'look at me, see all my things, I must exist'. An odd theory I know, but it for some reason, that's what I read in your blog. As the "troubled world of no direction"
ReplyDeletecontinues, we continue to find meaning, direction, realness. But the thing is, or I guess the problem is, how does one successfully do that? Maybe that is why things from the past are glorified, they are the real. And in a way, that is the only way we can maintain some time of direction, by looking at and treasuring what has gone before us, with a hope that people will do the same for us.
I see the attempt to hold onto the real as the eternal struggle, if Schopenhauer has given us anything at all I feel it is a pessimistic out view that we strive against through sentimentality and what you said- objectification of the world. Connecting this some what 'outer being'/non existent part of us towards something physical beyond the grasp of our own body.
ReplyDeleteI believe that there is no real success in direction, not within the past anyhow which we always draw to. This world of insecurity and loose morals doesn't extend much past our own troubles
Yesterday morning on the radio I listened to a professor talking of the way we use time in relation to technology. Where we think our leisure time goes in to relaxing we are actually immersed in a constant 'doing.' Cellphones do not let us relax, they keep us in constant contact while facebook (if you use it) also consumes our time in a meaningless way. I'm also worried about my own feelings of having no direction and purpose in life and if even our leisure is a waste of time things seem sort of pitiful.
ReplyDeleteWhat does free time mean in the twenty first century?lecture by Professor Chris Rojek, Professor of Sociology and Culture, Brunel University, West London.
24 September 2009
6.30pm
Venue: Room OGGB5, Level 0, Owen G. Glenn Building, 12 Grafton Road
In relation to Kate's and Hayley's comments... there always seems to be alot of talk as to the speed of modern society and the technology we seem to so desperately need to get by. Although, I like to think that the individual is still in control even under these conditions. I like to think I am in control. Then I think about the services that maintain the modern technological systems that we use everyday: electricity, phone networks, ISP's, water and plumbing, roads and traffic systems. And there are also the public organisations like the Police and Ambulance services. I get this feeling of dread as to my reliance on these systems and I run scenarios over in my head trying to figure out how I would survive if I lost them. Certain parts of society have come so far from our origins, living off the land, while others are forced to to survive. And then I wonder, is this a bad thing that I live in this social structure? Man is a product of evolution like any other animal and perhaps it is not entirely unnatural? Or perhpas this is just an excuse? No matter, I enjoy sitting on public transport watching episodes of Family Guy on my Ipod© that I downloaded off the internet.
ReplyDelete