Re: <documenta X><blast> Visual
Jordan Crandall (xaf@interport.net)
Fri, 25 Jul 1997 17:07:07 -0400
Bracha, thank you for the summary of 17 July. I can understand when you
say that what is 'invisible' (behind the screen?) is, in fact, visible -
it's just not seen by the subject. The subject is ignorant of what is
'beyond appearance,' and it can only get in the way of a gaze that
'envelops us and turns us into seen-beings, without showing itself to
us.' This landscape is prior to our seeing; it is the field upon which
seeing occurs. Rather than looking, we are looked at. And so seeing,
and volition, is reversed, redirected. But then what does it mean that
the gaze belongs to 'things'? How is it routed through a thing that
looks at me? The gaze we encounter is not 'seen,' but only
interpolated, and so is this act of situating the gaze in 'things' our
own? And how does the viewer 'lay down the gaze'?