DGD: Landscapes-Blue Series 8 (clonografía), 2001 * *
Sooner or later every poet is posed the most difficult questions drawer, "What is poetry? ". The vast range of responses is equivalent to visiting a library and all records, from the academic solemnity to bloody mockery from naive ingenuity to more or less skillful reference that the respondent makes the best answers that you have read in the library.
* I once heard a certain American poet of the shorter answers: What you got? (literally: "What do you have?"). At first it seemed a brilliant resource, but sloppy, to get out on a tangent, but otherwise, the smile of the poet seemed to disarm the interviewer and he went on to another topic. It was not until some time after, in one of those tricks of memory, which usually brings to mind at least related to the circumstance, I suddenly remembered that phrase and also saw his own metaphorical. And is that perhaps the question "What is poetry?" Can be answered only in certain contexts, beyond which is nothing more than empty rhetoric, and always in relation to particular circumstances.
* happened in the "context" of a curious experiment made in a school of painting. As the culmination of an intense experience of examining the graph naive for a year, the workshop coordinator, Natalia, had asked his students to draw a landscape form as "innocent" as possible, as devoid of pre-existing mental formulas of clichés, automation of perception. Later I reviewed the results and showed them one by one: were landscapes, most cities or towns at the edge of the sea or rivers. It was obvious that in most cases the cartoonists had made efforts to "imitate" naive painters that had been discussed during that year, conventionally by breaking the laws of perspective, others had chosen to "look as much possible "to the child graphic. If these parts are carefully examined, it was almost possible note the intellect that was behind the "imitation." The pursuit of innocence could be considered successful only in certain passages in certain resolutions.
* "This is the only one about," said Natalia, and showed me a picture that at first glance I could not tell too much of others. I asked him why he did select it, and said: "It's simple: it is the only one who drew the horizon is not straight but curved."
*
was true: in all other cases the line separating the sky from the sea was straight, while the author or author this particular landscape had not only made the horizon curved, but concave, ie that the line had the shape of a "u". When he proposed the exercise, Natalia had no preconceived ideas, not told, for example "let's see how to draw the horizon" did not think beforehand that this was the "key" to see who had gone ahead in the year: only gave a comparison between different designs and, of course, a keen eye open. The context was the key itself.
* Was it that this poet had meant What you got? , something like "Give me your background and give you an answer does not conform to this particular context but its relation to other contexts." All artists, though they had "tried" to forget prejudices visual automatic schemes, laws of perspective, realism, visual, etc., nevertheless succumbed to the straight line as "intrinsic" horizon. Only one of the artists had achieved, perhaps unintentionally break the automatic implicitly, that idea made. Perhaps the American poet that I mean I would have said that picture was only possible to recognize the presence of poetry.
*
What you got? is also the question "What are your more common, fixed patterns that manipulate your perception of the world and dominate those he can not escape even if you intend to get rid of all the schemes?".
*
Conceivably, the result of that experience could be more rewarding for those who drew straight on the horizon, since that would make them aware of a scheme that had not been able to identify and overcome. For its part, the author or author of the drawing stated he had been able to break a pattern that revealed itself only when comparing the horizon with the other drawings, but also had given to other schemes. For example, had drawn the square houses and within square windows. "Has anyone ever made," Natalia asked, "paint a window inside houses, square or not?".
* Maybe when I asked why, what he was doing was to prolong the What you got? Because once assimilated by the perception, visual discovery of a curved horizon and the huge sway perceptual-provoking in turn became commonplace, scheme, capable of being used by someone who wanted "Imitate" the graph naive. Maybe that's why the answer to "What is poetry?" Only operative question may be another type What you got? , it emerges as a sufficiently illuminating the perceptual apparatus, which is a branch of rational-assimilates, adapts to it and add it as new schematic. Most likely this is also the Dadaists concerned when they said that a lifetime of pioneering work should not exceed five minutes.
*
With its clear counter-question, that poet was perhaps asserting that can only flow a response context and must be discarded immediately and move on, use it twice is to fall back into the scheme, ie the tree that hides the forest or, in other words, the answer rhetoric that hides the true miracle. What you got? is "Give me your context to find the exception, but once you have found this exception, you will confirm the rationality of the rule and will need to find a new one."
*
mobile context, constant flight preset mindset: perhaps the only possible answer, always moving, to what can be poetry.
*
* *
0 comments:
Post a Comment