Rauschtubcrg's view ~'f his landscape of media was both aff'ectionate and ironic. He likecl cxcavating wllole histories within an image histories of the media themselves. A pcrfcct cxamplc is the red patch at the bottom right corner of Retroactive I (plate 229), It is a silkscreen enlargement of'a photo by Gjon Mili, which he found in LiJe magazine. Mili's photograph was a caref'ully set-up parody, with the aid of a stroboscopic flash, of Duchamp's Nu~le Desee~li'7g a Staircase, I9I2 (plate 30). Duchamp's painting was in turn based on Marey's photos of a moving body. So the image goes back through seventy years of technological time, through allusion af'ter allusion; and a f'urther irony is that, in its Rauschenbergian form, it ends up look
From television, film, and photography we receive a stream of'images every day. There is no wa!- of paying equal attention to all that surplus, so we skim. The image we r en~ember is the one that most r esembles a sign: simple, clear, repetitious. Everything the camera gives us is slightly interesting. Not for long; just for now. The extension, on the human level, of this glut of images is celebrity, which replaces the Renaissance idea of'f:ame.
Fame was the reward for manifest deeds. It stood for a social agreement about what was worth doing; hence the traditional pairing of fa'~'a and what the Renaissance called zirtu, "prowess" or "accomplishment." The celebrity, as Daniel Boorstin pointed out, is famous f'or being f'amous - nothing else; hence his gratuitousness
All papers and essays are for research and reference purposes only!
Copyright 2002-2009
Direct Essays , LLC. All Rights Reserved. DMCA Webmasters make $$$$