Empathy and Embodiment in Contemporary Art

Digital Bodies / Cyborgs

N. Katherine Hayles' Virtual Bodies and Flickering Signifiers are dense with lots of reference to contemporary languages, literatures, and theories, including information theory and Jacques Lacan's "floating signifiers". Information theory is the basis of her writing, specifically: "even though information provides the basis for much of contemporary society, it is never present in itself.” She also restates Lacan's statement as a modern version: "Language is a code."

Her point is quite simple. she is concerned about dematerialization due to technologies and the change of our relationship to embodied experiences with things around us. She uses terms, such as "presence and absence" and "pattern and randomness" to illustrate her idea. The shift to pattern and randomness from presence and absence is everywhere in our daily life and she used contemporary literatures as examples.

What's interesting about her writing is the fact that information technology has an impact on the economical aspect of the shift: from owning durable goods to accessing to information or data. Also it affects all aspects of contemporary literatures in terms of where narratives take place, who plays subjects and how they transform, and how readers experience or read stories. And this shift is perhaps implying us that our physical world is becoming inhabitable place for human beings. These points resonate me the most.

However, according to her, presence and pattern haven't disappeared totally yet. They are displaced into pattern and randomness. Will they disappear eventually? If so, I wonder when? (not in my life I hope)

Body Art / Corporeal Performances

In "The Body in Action: Vito Acconti", Amelia Jones uses Acconti’s works to support her theory on body art. She describes his works as “ambivalent, self-exposing yet self-confirming body art works” and praises him as “one of the most important theorists of the reembodiment of art production and, correlatively, art reception as a radical challenge to modernist formalism”. Acconti defines his body art as “… exchange between artist and viewer; he has explained his obsession with his own body/ self as stemming from his desire to interrogate art not as a “unique object” but as a “distribution system” involving the phenomenological “interchange” of subjects within the social” (similar view as Merlieau-Ponty). In other words, emphasizing the radical interdependence with the other in relation to body/self. This is particularly important in order to understand the rest of her reading. For example, Acconti repeatedly theatricalizes the body with femininity in his works due to his obsession with masculinity. This successfully creates heterosexual, white masculinity a radical instability. Jones also analyzes Acconti’s work using Iris Marion Young’s feminist phenomenology of body motility theory which shows the difference in approach and effects between male body artists and female body artists. Jones writes as “What Acconci’s work shows us, in contrast, is that, in fact, this “continuity” and “transcendence” are elaborate performances that themselves must be continually enacted in order to confirm their privilege as masculine.” Overall I like Jone’s points (above), which open up a whole new understanding about body art (especially male body art).

Empathy / Abstraction

It’s interesting that Alois Riegl incorporates Gottfriied Semper’s “art of dressing” theory to support his counter argument about the origin of geometric styles. In the Geometric Sylte, the author in fact stretches Semper’s theory further and apply the theory, “advancing principle of dressing as the origin of all architecture” as well as over “other media”, such as ceramics and metal works to support his idea: the origin of geometric styles didn’t derive from the technique of weaving but “but the pure fruit of an elementary artistic desire for decoration” as his example shown in the case dwellers of Aquitaine.

However, according to the author, Semper contradicts himself by expressing “the original of creative activity is still believed to postdate the invention of the techniques used to create protection for the body.” This to me seems a relief as an artist but Semper’s theory is certainly interesting to explore (as Riegl did). The author gives Semper a credit by saying “the passage in Der Stil that discusses the topics is still well worth reading, even if it’s no longer authoritative”. I definitely agree with him, especially “worth reading”.

I also like the Juliet Koss's "On the Limits of Empathy" especially how Worringer develops his theory around or against Lipp's formula of "Einjhlung". Worringer's idea was definitely influenced by Lipp, Hildebrand, Riegl, Schopenhauer, Gottfried Semper and Wolfflin, as well as abstract artists at that time. It seems natural to connect the theory of Einjhlung (Empathy) and Abstraction. In doing so, I think Worringer was clever and a great observer of the world at that time.

Kinesthetic Bodies / Architectural Space

I thought this week’s readings are quite fascinating. I can relate all three authors’ ideas about architecture as an embodied art form (as described in each reading) to my work. Paul Frankl focuses on purpose and intention of architecture, as well as essence and function. Mitchell W. Schwarzer takes physical factors and kinetic perception, such as eye muscular movement and tactile ideas, into consideration. He says: “The mature spatial consciousness associated with architecture is clearly dynamic. For Schmarsow, since all spatial awareness must originate within an apparently overriding concept of self-awareness, it follows that all architectural forms depend on bodily structure, sensation, and movement. The spatial form of a building can likewise be viewed as the result of a repertory of gestures and motions, a projection of desires and needs from the subject to the world.” August Schmarzer addresses “art of dressing” in his theory. I thought this is exactly what I’ve been thinking all along while I was reading the other readings (I read them first). I definitely want to research more about “art of dressing”. It sounds intriguing and appropriate for my work …

Distances Bodies / Visual Judgments

There are 3 readings this week. After reading “The Problem of Form in Painting and Sculpture" by Adlof Hilderbrand, it made sense for other readings. My initial response is that it’s essential for any artist across all media to know their objects/subject matters kinesthetically and to be able to translate the knowledge into their visual language believably. I think this is also related to other readings.

Empathetic Bodies / Symbolic Forms

It’s really interesting to see different arguments and thoughts surrounding aesthetic theories have been formulated in Germany from late 18th century to early 20th century.

Combing both readings certainly helps to have a better perspective regarding the subject matter and it particularly compliments understanding the theory by Robert Vischer against other theorists.