Re: <eyebeam><blast> transference

[blast-agent <agent@blast.org>]

2 messages, from Carlos Basualdo and Bracha Lichtenberg - Ettinger


Carlos Basualdo <Cbasualdo@aol.com> writes:


Dear Brian,

 Thanks for your insightful comments, with which I agree completely. I
also agree completely on the need to unravel experimental practices
departing from the institutional context -like the museum. By referring
to the "ghostly" dimension of exchange in the net, I am basically
referring to the characteristics of "transference" in this media. Again,
echoing your words, I think that the possibilities of transference here
are closely related to the political (and aesthetical) effectiveness of
the practices that concern us here. I would like to risk the idea that
transference does happen in the net, a lot, in a way that is basically
not different than reading poetry, for example -poetry more than
narrative or theory, I would like to add.

 The García Lorcas of the Web are welcomed!!!

 Carlos


----------------------------------------------


Bracha Lichtenberg - Ettinger <bracha@easynet.fr> writes:

Dear Carlos Basualdo, Brian Holmes and Louis Schwartz
I have suggested that what I call 'transferential matrixial borderspace'
is embedded in any relation of transference, and it seeks ways to become
known and thinkable via art's screens. Psychoanalysis can discern,
apprehend and otherwise work-through an analogous borderspace embedded
in a screen of phantasy stretched in transference/countertransference
relationships, in which an assembled and diffracted subjective entity
can roll itself bit by bit into the Symbolic level. Traces of a
buried-alive trauma are about to be re-born from amnesia into such a
unit's co-emerging memory. The potentiality of partially sharing the
trauma in the transferential matrixial borderspace is the condition for
its re-appearance as transformed. This web-like subjectivity conducts
and transmits a diffracted gaze into art's screen. Something is
interwoven between several entities into a tissue whose connections may
become accessible via art. No technique, even the most obviously
"communicational" like art on the net, can gaurantee this effect. No
technique, even the less obviously "communicational", like painting, is
excluded from attaining it. I mean - the enigma of art precedes
technique even if it looks like being produced by/with it, and even
though, obviously, depending on histories and geographies, some
techniques are available to artists, some are not. Yet I also believe
that the idea concerning transference in/by art can be articulated like
this only starting in our century, vehiculed mainly by artworks of 20th
century. I have written in length on this question of transference in
artworking and art works in an essay printed at: 'Canadian Review of
Comparative Literature', 24(3) (edited by Brian Massumi) and in 'Doctor
and Patient: Memory and Amnesia', Pori Art Museum Publications, 1997.
best to you all
Bracha




-------------------------------------------------------------
a critical forum for artistic practice in the network
texts are the property of individual authors
to unsubscribe, send email to eyebeam@list.thing.net
with the following single line in the message body:
unsubscribe eyebeam-list
information and archive at <a href="http://www.eyebeam.org" target="_top">http://www.eyebeam.org</a>
Eyebeam Atelier/X Art Foundation <a href="http://www.blast.org" target="_top">http://www.blast.org</a>
-------------------------------------------------------------