<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fobia a mirar</title>
	<link>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 11:45:26 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Boy80</title>
		<link>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-167879</link>
		<author>Boy80</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:10:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-167879</guid>
		<description>Organic chemistry, indeed,   in investigating more and more complicated molecules, has come very   much nearer to that 'aperiodic crystal' which, in my opinion, is the   material carrier of life. ,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Organic chemistry, indeed,   in investigating more and more complicated molecules, has come very   much nearer to that &#8216;aperiodic crystal&#8217; which, in my opinion, is the   material carrier of life. ,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gabriel</title>
		<link>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-138816</link>
		<author>Gabriel</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2009 15:49:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-138816</guid>
		<description>By the way. Tus posts sobre libros son excelentes. Yo sería feliz si existiera una revista dedicada a reseñar libros sobre arte, escritos en cualquier lengua (aunque reseñados y discutidos en español), en una apuesta por estimular el "milieu" de los historiadores del arte españoles (en ocasiones disueltos entre las legislaciones autonómicas de Patrimonio, los imprevisibles cultural studies y un positivismo que ni Haskell -por supuesto ni Haskell- hubiera soportado).
Me gustaría que habláramos sobre ello.
Un abrazo,
Gabriel</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way. Tus posts sobre libros son excelentes. Yo sería feliz si existiera una revista dedicada a reseñar libros sobre arte, escritos en cualquier lengua (aunque reseñados y discutidos en español), en una apuesta por estimular el &#8220;milieu&#8221; de los historiadores del arte españoles (en ocasiones disueltos entre las legislaciones autonómicas de Patrimonio, los imprevisibles cultural studies y un positivismo que ni Haskell -por supuesto ni Haskell- hubiera soportado).<br />
Me gustaría que habláramos sobre ello.<br />
Un abrazo,<br />
Gabriel</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gabriel</title>
		<link>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-138683</link>
		<author>Gabriel</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2009 02:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-138683</guid>
		<description>La cita de Clark está tomada de T.J. Clark, The Sight of Death: An Experiment in Art Writing. New Haven, CT: Yale
UP, 2006
http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300117264

    De la reseña de Anita Brookner para "The spectator":

    "Early in January 2000 the art historian T. J. Clark arrived in Los Angeles for a six-month stint at the Getty Research Institute. He was fortunate to see, in the Getty Museum, two great pictures by Poussin, the Getty’s ‘Landscape with a Calm’ and the National Gallery’s ‘Landscape with a Man Killed by a Snake’, on loan from London. Over a period of weeks Clark visited the pictures almost every day and was able to register the tiny but memorable changes brought about not only by the process of intense contemplation but the traces left in memory and dream fragments which could only be clarified by more looking."

    "What this investigation demonstrates is that anything can be broken down but not necessarily put together again. It also demonstrates that Poussin, so often lazily categorised as a ‘peintre-philosophe’, is also a pure maker (look, for example, at the painting of the male figure’s mouth). What it proves — and this is entirely acceptable — is that the best antidote to reading is looking. I paid a further visit to ‘Landscape with a Man Killed by a Snake’. I did not see one half of what Clark saw. I was conscious that the paint had sunk and the varnish darkened. But I also noticed, with pure pleasure, something about Poussin’s language, or marks, that I had not remarked before. This may have been nothing more than Clark’s influence, but it was proof, if proof were needed, of the validity of this sort of exercise. Forget blockbuster exhibitions: this is the way to see pictures."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>La cita de Clark está tomada de T.J. Clark, The Sight of Death: An Experiment in Art Writing. New Haven, CT: Yale<br />
UP, 2006<br />
<a href="http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300117264" rel="nofollow">http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300117264</a></p>
<p>    De la reseña de Anita Brookner para &#8220;The spectator&#8221;:</p>
<p>    &#8220;Early in January 2000 the art historian T. J. Clark arrived in Los Angeles for a six-month stint at the Getty Research Institute. He was fortunate to see, in the Getty Museum, two great pictures by Poussin, the Getty’s ‘Landscape with a Calm’ and the National Gallery’s ‘Landscape with a Man Killed by a Snake’, on loan from London. Over a period of weeks Clark visited the pictures almost every day and was able to register the tiny but memorable changes brought about not only by the process of intense contemplation but the traces left in memory and dream fragments which could only be clarified by more looking.&#8221;</p>
<p>    &#8220;What this investigation demonstrates is that anything can be broken down but not necessarily put together again. It also demonstrates that Poussin, so often lazily categorised as a ‘peintre-philosophe’, is also a pure maker (look, for example, at the painting of the male figure’s mouth). What it proves — and this is entirely acceptable — is that the best antidote to reading is looking. I paid a further visit to ‘Landscape with a Man Killed by a Snake’. I did not see one half of what Clark saw. I was conscious that the paint had sunk and the varnish darkened. But I also noticed, with pure pleasure, something about Poussin’s language, or marks, that I had not remarked before. This may have been nothing more than Clark’s influence, but it was proof, if proof were needed, of the validity of this sort of exercise. Forget blockbuster exhibitions: this is the way to see pictures.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gabriel</title>
		<link>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-138677</link>
		<author>Gabriel</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2009 01:28:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-138677</guid>
		<description>Ooops!... "de SU relación CON el cuadro objeto..."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ooops!&#8230; &#8220;de SU relación CON el cuadro objeto&#8230;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gabriel</title>
		<link>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-138675</link>
		<author>Gabriel</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2009 01:24:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.centroguerrero.org/2008/05/23/fobia-a-mirar/#comment-138675</guid>
		<description>"Any justification of the way I have gone about things over the past two months will be 'ex post facto' and misleading (and the thing that depress me most about art history at present is that so many people will be more interested in the justification than the results). What happened happened: I found myself writting about the two paintings and could not stop. The fact that I had no very clear sense of the world the paintings belonged to did not matter, at least so long as the ignorance wasn't touted as a principle.There is no clear boundary line between ignorance and knowledge. The most diligent scholar of Poussin is 'ignorant of the world these paintings belong to'. None of us knew Pointel's first name until thirty years ago. Nown of us knows for sure that 'Snake' is not drawn from some ultra-obscure (may be discreditet) classical source. And so on. Scolarship -may be I am falling into writting this way because at present I am plowing through Walter Benjamin's 'Arcades Project' in the afternoons -is always a matter of skirting round a black hole of the unknown, the impenetrable, the centraly mysterious. Historians who constantly present their Scotland Yard credentials (Ernst Bloch's lovely phrase) never fail to miss seeing what the real crime was" (pp.163-164, 17 march entry).
      Es lógico. Clark no sólo ha discutido a Greenberg y a Fried (al menos al primer Fried) al entender el "modernism" sólo como una metáfora -aunque como tal, como forma de "cristalización", sea funcional- y como el resultado de aproximarse a los objetos bajo el efecto del espectáculo, sino que tampoco asumió sin más el  "kantismo sin sujeto" (como lo llamó Ricoeur) que ha presidido la "Theory".
      Es realmente llamativo que Haskell tuviera ese aprecio por el trabajo de Clark -en efecto, uno de los impulsores de la New Art History- cuyas posiciones teóricas no compartía (bueno, creo que Haskell nunca compartió una posición "teórica"). En comparación con algunas de las reseñas que vinieron del establishment académico y de los museos (como Cachin o Penny), la reseña que en su momento Haskell hizo de "The Painting of Modern Life" es positiva. Y escribió muchas otras verdaderamente menos simpáticas, tituladas "Art and Society again", "From Courbet to Ché" y cosas de este tenor.... Lo curioso es que no pareció equivocarse. Última recomendación libresca suya. Una novela sobre alguien que hacía una tesis doctoral sobre un cuadro, y relataba las idas y venidas de la relación sobre el cuadro objeto de estudio. ¿Se parece a algo?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Any justification of the way I have gone about things over the past two months will be &#8216;ex post facto&#8217; and misleading (and the thing that depress me most about art history at present is that so many people will be more interested in the justification than the results). What happened happened: I found myself writting about the two paintings and could not stop. The fact that I had no very clear sense of the world the paintings belonged to did not matter, at least so long as the ignorance wasn&#8217;t touted as a principle.There is no clear boundary line between ignorance and knowledge. The most diligent scholar of Poussin is &#8216;ignorant of the world these paintings belong to&#8217;. None of us knew Pointel&#8217;s first name until thirty years ago. Nown of us knows for sure that &#8216;Snake&#8217; is not drawn from some ultra-obscure (may be discreditet) classical source. And so on. Scolarship -may be I am falling into writting this way because at present I am plowing through Walter Benjamin&#8217;s &#8216;Arcades Project&#8217; in the afternoons -is always a matter of skirting round a black hole of the unknown, the impenetrable, the centraly mysterious. Historians who constantly present their Scotland Yard credentials (Ernst Bloch&#8217;s lovely phrase) never fail to miss seeing what the real crime was&#8221; (pp.163-164, 17 march entry).<br />
      Es lógico. Clark no sólo ha discutido a Greenberg y a Fried (al menos al primer Fried) al entender el &#8220;modernism&#8221; sólo como una metáfora -aunque como tal, como forma de &#8220;cristalización&#8221;, sea funcional- y como el resultado de aproximarse a los objetos bajo el efecto del espectáculo, sino que tampoco asumió sin más el  &#8220;kantismo sin sujeto&#8221; (como lo llamó Ricoeur) que ha presidido la &#8220;Theory&#8221;.<br />
      Es realmente llamativo que Haskell tuviera ese aprecio por el trabajo de Clark -en efecto, uno de los impulsores de la New Art History- cuyas posiciones teóricas no compartía (bueno, creo que Haskell nunca compartió una posición &#8220;teórica&#8221;). En comparación con algunas de las reseñas que vinieron del establishment académico y de los museos (como Cachin o Penny), la reseña que en su momento Haskell hizo de &#8220;The Painting of Modern Life&#8221; es positiva. Y escribió muchas otras verdaderamente menos simpáticas, tituladas &#8220;Art and Society again&#8221;, &#8220;From Courbet to Ché&#8221; y cosas de este tenor&#8230;. Lo curioso es que no pareció equivocarse. Última recomendación libresca suya. Una novela sobre alguien que hacía una tesis doctoral sobre un cuadro, y relataba las idas y venidas de la relación sobre el cuadro objeto de estudio. ¿Se parece a algo?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
