Returning to our Russian peasant for the moment, let us supposethat after he has chosen Repin in preference to Picasso, the state'seducational apparatus comes along and tells him that he is wrong,that he should have chosen Picasso -- and shows him why. It isquite possible for the Soviet state to do this. But things beingas they are in Russia -- and everywhere else -- the peasant soonfinds the necessity of working hard all day for his living andthe rude, uncomfortable circumstances in which he lives do notallow him enough leisure, energy and comfort to train for theenjoyment of Picasso. This needs, after all, a considerable amountof "conditioning." Superior culture is one of the mostartificial of all human creations, and the peasant finds no "natural"urgency within himself that will drive him toward Picasso in spiteof all difficulties. In the end the peasant will go back to kitschwhen he feels like looking at pictures, for he can enjoy kitschwithout effort. The state is helpless in this matter and remainsso as long as the problems of production have not been solvedin a socialist sense. The same holds true, of course, for capitalistcountries and makes all talk of art for the masses there nothingbut demagogy.
What he had earlier treated as a national problem of identity nowbecame a question of the individual's personal integrity. It was no longersufficient to dwell on an earlier historical era of greatness and focuson the continuity of the nation's life. Ibsen turned away from history,and confronted what he considered the main contemporary problem - a nationcan only rise up culturally by means of the individual's exertion of will."Brand" is mainly a drama with a message that the individualmust follow the path of volition in order to achieve true humanity In addition,this is the only way to real freedom - for the individual, and it follows,for society as a whole.
That framework suggested that memory is not a conscious action, but is the way information is processed which is why we remember information we do not intend to ( Craik & Lockhart, 2008).
[Chapter 3 is called “Conceptual Blending.” “The creation and processing of metaphor is one instance of what has become known as 'conceptual blending'.
In other words, Ibsen was in close contact with the art of the stagefor a long uninterrupted period. His six years at the theater in Bergen(1851-57) and the following four or five years at the theater in Kristianiafrom 1857 were not easy. But he acquired a sharp eye for theatrical techniquesand possibilities.
Because it can be turned out mechanically, kitsch has becomean integral part of our productive system in a way in which trueculture could never be, except accidentally. It has been capitalizedat a tremendous investment which must show commensurate returns;it is compelled to extend as well as to keep its markets. Whileit is essentially its own salesman, a great sales apparatus hasnevertheless been created for it, which brings pressure to bearon every member of society. Traps are laid even in those areas,so to speak, that are the preserves of genuine culture. It isnot enough today, in a country like ours, to have an inclinationtowards the latter; one must have a true passion for it that willgive him the power to resist the faked article that surroundsand presses in on him from the moment he is old enough to lookat the funny papers. Kitsch is deceptive. It has many differentlevels, and some of them are high enough to be dangerous to thenaive seeker of true light. A magazine like the ,which is fundamentally high-class kitsch for the luxury trade,converts and waters down a great deal of avant-garde materialfor its own uses. Nor is every single item of kitsch altogetherworthless. Now and then it produces something of merit, somethingthat has an authentic folk flavor; and these accidental and isolatedinstances have fooled people who should know better.
We can now see that the experiential requirement may well fail to haveany bite with regards to conceptual artworks because the artist's aimdoes not necessarily involve conferring to the work of art propertiesthat must be experienced directly in order to be grasped and fullyappreciated. If there is to be any kind of first-hand experientialrequirement for the appropriate appreciation of conceptual artworks,it will perhaps be of a kind that focuses on an imaginative engagementwith the idea central to the artwork rather than a perceptualexperience of its aesthetic properties (see Schellekens 2007)
Some historians, like Reiss, contend that installation art began as analternative practice of cultural discourse that has migrated from its originson the margins of mainstream culture to the very centre of institutionalpractice. It can equally be interpreted that, far from sitting pretty in theseat of cultural power, installation art in museums or as part of large-scalecommissioned projects can function to effectively perplex politics of representationat play in such traditional set-ups. Jacques Rancière's hypothesis ofartistic practices as 'ways of doing and making' that intervene in the generaldistribution of ways of doing and making as well as in the relationships theymaintain to modes of being and forms of visibility", seems to iterate thetransformative potential of art on concepts of public domain and dominion.Installation art, then, as method of space reclamation, can re-territorialiseculture from either margins or centres of commissioning authority, by virtueof an insistence on the viewer as indispensable to the work.
The practice of the Situationist International from 1957, set the scenefor a discussion on psycho-geography and highlighted the importance ofconsidering the urban public sphere as a living, changeable, subjective,as well as shared, space. Many public art projects - both temporary andmonumental installation works - extend these concerns, where the site of artbecomes a cue to reconsider the past in the present day. Installation art isviewed, but it is also heard, smelled and touched, enlisting the viewer in anactive engagement that reflects the lack of closure, even interpretativerestlessness, proposed by the Situationists. Bishop writes that art installationis a co-joined experience of activating viewers and decentering them assubjects. In a visual sense, she evokes this decentering in terms of a historyof pictorial perspective, but one that is insinuated into the identity politicsof fragmentation within postmodern theory: "[...] installation art's multipleperspectives are seen to subvert the Renaissance perspective model becausethey deny the viewer any one ideal place from which to survey the work".
For artists such as the Kabakovs, Wilson and Dion, a viewer's activatedpresent-ness, being there, is key to the raison d'être of their works, whichimplies that installation art is in no small part a matter of spectacle, albeit aspectacle fashioned by blurred delineations between concepts of document and simulation. Comparisons are often evoked between installation artand cinema and theatre, but the comparisons are limited. In a cinema, asde Oliveira points out, the screen divides audiences from the form (thoughperhaps less so with three-dimensional effects). Also, in a theatre, audiencesare usually a silent, seated and still mass, separated from the stage andactors. Installation art activates the spectacle, thus extending the theatricalstage of culture into subjective experiences. The viewer is on location and anessential element of the scene in an engagement that confounds expectationsof art as a purely representative practice. De Oliveira phrased it: theartist and viewer are together in a discursive environment. In other words,the experiential outcome of physically being in the work fosters a sense ofdislocation from both everyday life and art, disavowing segregated conceptsof reality and systems of representation.
[Chapter 3 is called “Conceptual Blending.” “The creation and processing of metaphor is one instance of what has become known as 'conceptual blending.' .