Collapsing lines :
The concept of Image, in a Bergsonian sense, is what I infer as that which is less than experience and more than a picture or registration, but a liminal space between them, which draws a curiosity for me. Can one behold the light or warmth from Ambedkar’s encounter with fire as an image—not as a document, nor as a pure idea, but as something kindled in the interval between them?
I am exploring the inherent contradictions between the unknown, as a Ground/the dark, and the ‘Known’. The “known” here refers to what is measured or captured, which can potentially become stagnant.
The problem I encounter is when the image becomes Stagnant [of course, it ceases to be an image; the movement it enters a stagnation], it becomes a dogmatic or a God who is pure and coherent. But how would it be possible for an artistic inquiry to reach an image, which is always in failure to complete?
The undeclared image, which never misses having an inherent direction, but fails to complete itself, nevertheless has its own position. How do the particulars of the image get themselves conditioned for such to emerge within the excess of history? Do we ever need to narrate the narration for such conditioning to happen? What will be the narration when amnesia spreads among the beings? These are some of the immediate questions I currently carry. I would like to have an active understanding of the Image in the form of finitude emerging from darkness, only to return to darkness. And its conditions before it can be arrived at, as such. Then what holds me together is how this condition’s [a contingent becoming] leverages the history [a collection of images] and mediation.
The concept of Image, in a Bergsonian sense, is what I infer as that which is less than experience and more than a picture or registration, but a liminal space between them, which draws a curiosity for me. Can one behold the light or warmth from Ambedkar’s encounter with fire as an image—not as a document, nor as a pure idea, but as something kindled in the interval between them?
I am exploring the inherent contradictions between the unknown, as a Ground/the dark, and the ‘Known’. The “known” here refers to what is measured or captured, which can potentially become stagnant.
The problem I encounter is when the image becomes Stagnant [of course, it ceases to be an image; the movement it enters a stagnation], it becomes a dogmatic or a God who is pure and coherent. But how would it be possible for an artistic inquiry to reach an image, which is always in failure to complete?
The undeclared image, which never misses having an inherent direction, but fails to complete itself, nevertheless has its own position. How do the particulars of the image get themselves conditioned for such to emerge within the excess of history? Do we ever need to narrate the narration for such conditioning to happen? What will be the narration when amnesia spreads among the beings? These are some of the immediate questions I currently carry. I would like to have an active understanding of the Image in the form of finitude emerging from darkness, only to return to darkness. And its conditions before it can be arrived at, as such. Then what holds me together is how this condition’s [a contingent becoming] leverages the history [a collection of images] and mediation.