Buy essay on Task of an Interpreter

There are many positions about the question that media such as photographs and movies makes achieving truth difficult and sometimes even impossible. I think it is necessary to discuss main aspects connected with representation and define the notion of truth in the body of this paper.
Any description of the world is supposed by the concept of representation. But is there combination of words “to represent reality” again by part of lexicon of modern artists, not speaking about that, the similar setting their aspirations answers? It is impossible to deny, that during 90th a question of rivalry of art and reality was primary. Most considerable works of this decade – those which arose out of attempts of artists to join in social or economic mechanisms, when they operated rather, what it was depicted, reproduced in the real parameters, but not treated hints. Why is it necessary to incarnate a certain idea in a picture, painting or film, if it can be realized concretely? What does the notion truth means? According to different sources truth can have different meanings, for example, it is faithful reflection of object by a cognizing subject, reproducing of it such, what it exists in itself, outside and regardless of cognizing subject and its consciousness.
The art of the last decade of the twentieth century ran into the problem of possibilities and social scopes: what artists can to do, where the evolution of their role can lead, how far they can touch at the aspiration of transformation of the world, remaining here artists… In the desire to leave outskirts (representation and metaphors) for the sake of center (authorities) artists made an effort to try on themselves most publicly meaningful professional employments, not abandoning the sphere of artistic practice here. They began to present themselves in the line of enterprises directors, designers or film directors. And many of them – beginning from Karsten Keller to Philippe Parreno – created strong works on this basis.
A sphere of art is an area of activity, where representation prevails; distance is incident to it in relation to reality. In other words, the scopes of representation broadened, plugging in itself new facilities of expression. After a century after Marcel Duchamp representation of object in the context of artistic gallery (which makes it unreal and provides with status of sign in that degree, what stroke of pencil) converts the arsenal of representation into an independent area. An artist does not have reasons to be satisfied by the image of the world through a brush anymore. He can reproduce the world fragment, decompose it to pieces and to compel them to function, create an imitation or prototype. In the art of today an action represents with the same success, with which picture is described.
Setting the scopes of sphere of art from certain distance in relation to “reality”, it is necessary to define, what reality speech goes about – social, political, physical, optical? Today it is enough fluently to walk on exhibitions, to notice that the question of reality’s representation in a modern art unavoidable decides in the format of record film. The truth is hidden in the works and in actual fact this format allows to designate and show “interests” of policy which exposes the formal and ideological poverty too often. On many recent international exhibitions among which are the Manifest-3 (Ljubljana, 2000), Venetian biannual exhibition of 2001 and Kassel Document of 2002, the enormous amount of works of documentary character were presented, especially those, that were taken off on video. It is needed only to show similar videos in a large format in a dark apartment, as an aesthetic failure (and thus, and political) appears yet more perceptible.

buy essay
Predominance of documentation became the index of loss of faith in possibility of art as carried out sense of the system, able to pass our attitude toward the world inherent by its facilities. For many artists, and also for increasing most theorists and counsels, CNN, thus, is a formal matrix of today’s art, and also and system with which it enters into a “competition”. Theme of competition between an art and reality, from now on everywhere present in discourse of counsels of exhibitions, often does talk about absence for them of interest to the traditional forms of visual arts, attended with the dim feeling of uselessness, that is generated, if to give a glance wider, by a question “what, actually, can an art?” This sense is found by an echo in frank frustration which is tested by the figures of art, establishing unattainable power of affecting public of circumferential its industrial forms of production of expressive facilities (fashion, cinema, television). Transience of reality and “large theatrical”, is a priori incompatible with a sphere arts, it was conquered in final analysis.
Use of “realism mass-media”, or “realism of CNN”, as a priority form of art, being the synonym of loss of trust in relation to an inherent art the type of thought, bares the hidden criticism of modernism and its history, if it is not obvious denial. Ideology of “authentic document”, and systematic comparison of art and mass-media images, marks in what – not that other, as an aggregate of values, taking beginning in an art modern. And above all things it is a plastic idea which carries responsibility before history of forms and comes forward an alternative to the dominating languages. We will specify that ‘formalism” about which speech goes here is not taken to mechanical historicism, as the American historian of arts Clement Greenberg exhorted once. For him the value of work depended on that, what place it occupied in history of art, which was taken to the successive “clearing” of expressive facilities. The similar type of thought for which a form is a dominant element of artistic practice obviously suffered in 60th and 70th from equation with the puritan theory of art – with “conservative formalism” (Benjamin H. D. Buchloh). This theory quite denied elements, alien a “form for the sake of form”. For it maintenance could not be something “external” in relation to a picture or sculpture, otherwise laying would follow to “theatrics”, i.e. in heresy. Consequences of the indicated theories were nightmarish: at the beginning of 80th an art got up on the way of not real post-modernist eclecticism, vast catalogue of picturesque and sculptural quotations in which the “inspired” artist was dipped on a way to historization of the practice.
Thus, taking into account all above stated it is possible to come to the conclusion that, however, among principles of picturesque modernism there is a certain fundamental concept, touching creation and interpretation of works of art, – idea that plastic forms, none of which is neutral, are able to make values in itself. In a word, they are not only mediators’ communications which it is required to pass a test on a “seriousness”, to appear decoded and understood. In my opinion refusal from CNN realism does not mean that it follows artists to give up that, to go to meet to reality, do it the subject of the works or in general represent the modern world facilities of photo and video. The point is that there is a wide difference between the types of representation, being at the mercy of medias-formats, and those, which, taking into account or even using these formats, pass them in obedience to born-again principles of art modern, – written into the area of practice and modern production, develop a critical idea which goes along than “kind intentions”, work rather above a form (which is read), than above a sign (which is decoded).