I do agree. In fact, Greg Ulmer just suggested a similar thing as well:
> What of the symbolic borders? Only a few states have developed fully
>a symbolic identity, with the U. S. being one of those few. It is a
>feeling that one gets: perhaps I should go to America... Or, perhaps I
>am already "there"?
The image is transportable (am I 'there?' while not physically being so),
and this throws up the biggest obstacle to my earlier argument. My
somewhat idealist desire for 'cleanliness' stumbles upon the problematic
relationship of image (as Jordan defines it) and space. What, in fact,
is the practical significance -- that is, the significance to a practice
-- of a theory which resides in the domain of either the image OR the
space, and alternately, of one which is simultaneously resides in both?
The first proposition rejects the symbiotic significance of the two
(image and space), a significance that is clearly motivating many social
practices today: advertising, real-estate development, etc. The second
proposition succumbs to the politic of these very obliterating practices.
In other words, the project of capitalist consumer practice is to
establish an unclear (blurred) realm of overlap between image and space
for the consumer; by so doing, practices which indend to offer a critique
of this dominant practice have two _apparent_ alternatives: either to
flounder in the autonomous (and unimportant) realms which are blurred or
become dominant practices themselves.
This seems particularly clear in the normative practices of architecture
(i.e., the making of buildings). Architects seem to make buildings (from
'theoretical experiments' on the cutting-edge of design to humble bingo
halls in the midwest), practicing in the autonomous realm of space; or to
become executors of corporate image-production desires, making
spacebuildingadvertisementlogos. I believe that these 'apparent'
alternatives are not the only ones. In fact, to return <blast> almost
full circle, I think that the 'switch' project of Keller's and her idea
of spatio-cultural multiplicities is one possibility; my interest in
developing a practice within constructs like home shopping offers another.
But having said this, I'd like to ask Jordan (well, anyone really) about
a practice within the realm of the image. Above, I seemed to reject the
possibility of working 'merely' within one realm. But I'm not sure if
this is fully explored; what is your particular interest in establishing
this concept of image in relation to (urban) space? And what sort of
practice might evolve within this realm?
brian lonsway
......................................................................
j erik jonsson distinguished visiting assistant professor.
rensselaer architecture.
lonsway@rpi.edu.
-------------------------------------------------------------
a forum on spatial articulations, perspectives, and procedures
texts are the property of individual authors
for information, email majordomo@forum.documenta.de with
the following line in the message body: info blast
archive at http://www.documenta.de/english/blasta.htm
or http://www.documenta.de/deutsch/blasta.htm
documenta X Kassel and http://www.documenta.de 1997
-------------------------------------------------------------