See weawes os vooceuss Sy fos Gay -saisod [ ANN i EDITED BY Hol Foster Dia Art Foundation uw cs 3 e a = ce} ae a < es i) rs i u Zz ° oO rs o Fa S o o I oO a aDia Art Foundation Discussions in Contemporary Culture Wumber 2 VISION AND VISUALITY Eaited by Hal Foster1 1968 Dis Ar oution Aig revered Ne part of hbk may be eran any ‘bem wou pon retin om te piesa wo Pink in the United Siar ofAmercn 28 Tose ay Pree 15 Wat Deny Sete Wings 9819 Design by Beta je “Typesetting Src Now York rite by Walon Pblsting Company, Marcela, Misou secin Fest re gs npn Be (eval fro 3) Dewan Conemperay Coke No.1 lel by Hl Fone acer irae Contre. ihe speci oo 2 ison ad Sy Aran sce 2 Aesthetic, Modern 20 cesta [Fit Hal Dia Art Foun, NaS6057 1967012 ISBN 0911820-160 (3: pk) sett et iy Jemtion Cry cae eet eco yn acne se1 1987, the Dis Art Foursation inte ts commitment to critical deuson and debit through a were of sx week Adscasions om diverse ctu topics ogeized by Hal Foster. Ete tacit ofthese dacsions together with prepared text were presented inthe ist volume of am ongoing sere of publlons called Dictsons in Contemporary Ce, The sere intended to record spect ofthe organi dcusion ‘vets ld a Di from tine tote, primarily a ts dowstown spore at 15S Meret Src, New York This volume, Number 2 inthe Disusons in Contepo- rary Calta erie, incl teats prepare bythe participant tn daylong symposium beld on Api 30, 1988, Dia’ ‘eahiton space at 548 Wert 22nd Seret, together with edited twancrips of dacusions th the aden flowing the re= ston of the prtcpnts. The opps ws geteraly ot ‘explontion of mode of vison; the presenters expe’ di ferent ways in which wht seen revised, trough asus 36 ‘al, pryhologia, and bilo filers, befor it i pereied, Character of diflerent model of secing are shown to eve mori, and recently in reaction o model specially amo ‘ated with the pins of meveron. Mt butt lof these anaes centered around the proton and perexpion of ‘ina art Hal Foster, who organi! the sympa and elite this wolame expan in is preface something ofthe topicality ftw eta tetion to there of so, ‘We ate grtefl to Hal Foster for his work om hit Book sl Jor his compton eel erpaintion of the Vion aed View ality symposium, which was attended by a diverse andy as evi ent in the dscasin portions of dhs book, heen engaged atince. We ako thnk the five participants in the symposiam for ther excelent presentations that yan fr the efitents: Ths book al refs the arf production work of Phil Marin, Retain om, td Elen Fos, and of Thatcher Bailey 2 By Pres "We look forward oa series of xen 1988-89 centered round etal scion ad tational voles of this pb leton sri. Coates wt Exec Director in Art Foltion ‘Why vsion and inal, why these term? Aktbough vison ae 250 sgh asa phy operation, and nal sight 2 sil fat the two are no opposed atte to cate wslon so ‘al an historical to, and visual soles th body and the pryche Yee nether ar they denice, the eifeence be teen the teri sgl lifesnce within the via between the mechan of igh and ts hstorial techniques, heres the dtm of vison and ts dacurive determinations di ference, many dillerence, among how we se how we ar abl, allowed, or made ose, ae how we se tht ng or the wt cen therein, With scm thtoric aed repremstation, ach scope age ces to clon out these difrences to make of ‘many soc sles one eset ion to order the in 2 acura hierarchy of ight eis important then, lip thee w= perinpostions ou of focus, to dir the gen arty of vs fats (i aye the only ay to sce the at allan thi ile ook suggests way do thi forthe modern period, Thi the general project in which i prtakes to thicken modern ion, to ston physiological sasteste (Jonathan Cray nd syhicimbriaion (whether dhs seem in terms of vite [segucine Rose] or abversion [Roalind Kraus} 0 wcalie this ison, t indicate ts pare in the prodactin of sujet (all the authors) ond on proction a par of intersabje vty (ieee of the gue in eich, scoring to one p= oid” model the subject is memced by other [Norra ‘yoo and in gener to hitoricie modern vison, 10 sp calyx dominan practices ond scr ressances (Marti Joyxplictl, the others mpl). To complicate matter, here emerged inthe spastic of thie general critique, su ell foram alten tthe sch for aerate ssl rege, ‘Bt why this topic othe takes, ow? This more ca wo anower, for “eines” are says to ite o oo mach, and “precodions to thick to thin, Ri howe, m0 cet tha ever trong cries of erat ade of son ae developed eg. eriiques ofthe “Cartesian perspec” ‘which separates sujet and object, rees the ist anscen- lena and the second inert, and x0 sted metaphyseal howght, empirical ence, and capt log al once oe (igus of the enegorical spration of eisic expremion wich, complicit ith his morn rational even a serial of privileges the prey optical ia vinal r, which formal prin Sipe pining perkoliallydicipline. Here in trn, Martin Joy peta w rca within olen poopctve coat Practice, paradoxes in logic (eg perspective seen a empty ‘eve ad niverally sll vert peropective ox coment ae contingent —"s symbolic for,” in the mous phase of Pn ‘by he abo poss cra! variants, even countertalions an “rt of dserbing” (he erm i Svean Alpers) which merge sn severtenh-century Dutch psn be on cartographic Principles and “madness” (ole dt) which evloped in baroque art hat fants the apc of eine ab jects and undenicores the shetorclcomentonlty af ght. For Jy cach practice extends beyond sawn historical formato: ot only the fit mid to operate in certain modernist Fem at the second is scen naw to calnge Cartesian perpetinl- i i ela primacy in the ponte West Jonathan Crary ako recs any reading of Cartesan pet= spectial as coment or continous In Bt, he lates te ‘heoeeticaldaplacement nthe ely rncteenth cntry, th the shlf fom geometrical optics to 4 phyla acount of ‘ison —from the paradigm ofthe camer sbicus ofsverdial ‘tion of biol subject ad jet, to de model ofthe Body as rodicer of nonseriil rion relate nierent to wooly reference. Inmet ths history cstranges familar others ene {sone to reie of reject, onthe one hand an nea arr: tive of tecicalprogremion (rm camera ebscur o photogs iy) and, onthe other hand, nyse concept of strc eak (aif modest abstraction had hertaly, sown and fiom bor, sided perspectalim). Moreover, one et 1 wonder atthe acer perseernce of perspec a an cp temologl model However, ahr tan elebrate the psx Iolo account, ay, a precondition ofthe modern suropomy ofthe vu, or astral as for ne fre ots oF higher rth--Crary refers othe cosracion of the modern subject, the reconguration of vse, of the sms, ob he bya objets of wience and agents of war (ein tal thin dino ipl rac Uoretiel eatin frat Ihstory: not only, on the onc hand, nto preuppore an exen- tial viewer but abo onthe other band, no histori the wr tno strictly in erm of clara formas if he viewer alo her st of formation, sf hse forms somehow cited prior to the bjt, af they were nat ao complenly produced) tn er pepe; Romine Kenn explores on optical une seis in modernism, here as tapped by Duchamp, Est CGiscomest, and ethers. Thi tition shout the il sens tv tot iment wth corporeal desis that ra cou tert the relative erection (or riaton) of von, cident hohe in modemin, a demain “of pre rele of pare trangareney of pare slag” Inlet, Kea on sider the ramon for his counterion of the phys Solagl concept of the val deta by Cary, well a the rychoamalpil concept of x maen-eine dicated by Bron Rosen particu, she arges tat there ext a Beat, pulse,Hythe vial which, not restrict to space or tne, high ature o Tow, eves wo confound sich ‘ategores fform, ound sch dictions of vision ear ‘ruc art and ela story. ner porta of Paso, hi Apwmorphi pect of ion exposed in an ceunre eee fa tf verti, ‘With Norman Bey, vis is gun eprded coro sive—to subject Int pute asthe gat af he ober, vision, according to Sartre and Lacan, decent the subject: yet this scheme, Bryson argues, the centred abject emis resid! — fn protest, a were This reat emai ads Sartre se Lacan varius t present the gaze in paral term, a 8 ‘ent which prsscites, even amlnes the sub n certain Enera philosophies, Bryson maintains, the decemerig ofthe subject more complete, More importantly, i welcomed rather than ress hus the are snot regarded a terror. “This ha sigicae consequences for the construction of sje vty and spaces, for the conception of art adits techniques, some of which Broom explores. He dos not, however, pos this ‘ther tradton a an akernstie open to our appropriation (hich was nnetels a contested tendency ofthe dicusion, but rather a 9 t denature our habia practices af he sult prepare, nabor, «polit of ght. Fr, Bay, is ot tha the gas not experienced a menace nour care, but dha ths mice cl prot, determined by power, ane not anata ict. To think of «tro iri to ght rakes harder to think what mals ight error oF therwe Jiegueline Re abo finds «payee trope pert in dis ‘oslon of son, pasclny in coun of postmodernism that propose a its prime tite anew fron of space “These accounts abe mentions Jameson, Deleuze and Guta, year) present postmodern terms of er soci w= ‘ality whether cated or mend ht cri ofen Figured in terms of bresown i pyc il the xia chia rec Re questions thi we of sychonas specially, he ages, no sooner is oton of chphrenia evoked than fi veptvis evaporite: anal diference tends to be lided (orth eins “denanchied and prchie i oe died (oth ts anguish” taken a our “plese”, Thi “inocenting™ sf theses an he paehil, Rave matin, noes a b= acento the itl, a there ented some ieee vie sion ble thi chs sight. Thaoresly problematic, the ‘ehio-tope, se concles, may aka be pliially dangerous, tape nthe face fa rpeesve ight which tps the neon scious fr ts con fata of terror and dese ‘Noone set of preconditions governs thi range of gu men thee te, however, dicouries Held ix common. Certainly the entre dcusson draws on analy of the sbjec and the age derive from possracerai and pyc inf, ‘sone ivestiguted a6 3 tract fstramentl1 the (dapicement ofboth thee terms In dis regard, te eins tention to the pycic nbrestion af he seal nd he vs Se epecly important, the semioogeal sersty othe ‘nll fg prodaced in dillerence and en by de- sire Thee igs hve begun to proce, a even here, 3 construction of "percep at story in genera and “frm” at theory in particu. thi rept, the eas sion iso al with x certain “antonio” crque, ita critique of the historia concep posited by dcpine {eget history, for tance) x natural epitemologea ron, The conterporary rage to historic ho eral, For the sin gua non of hie dsson the recogition that ic Sion has httory, tat here re diferent regs of sy (Te concen with a "poll unconscious” of von and an “arctzcalogy” of formations ray nig the contested n= ence of nso and Foc) One hestats o speculate on ‘more wordy canditions; they wil be specific each reader.