Search

Trechos da correspondência de Walter Benjamin registram que a publicação de “A obra de arte na era de sua reprodutibilidade técnica” na Rússia apresentava-se, para ele, como uma tarefa de primeira ordem. Em abril de 1936, Benjamin confessou a Kitty Marx- Stenchnerider suas expectativas e pessimismo frente a desejada publicação: “A avaliar por essas reações, quase teria razões para concluir que o trabalho terá a menor repercussão no lugar que deveria ser naturalmente o seu, na Rússia”. Quais seriam as motivações da expectativa benjaminiana? Porque a Rússia seria o destino ou o lugar “natural” de “A Obra de Arte...”? Como explicar seu pessimismo? O presente artigo discute o caráter político e militante do ensaio em questão, bem como sua articulação com o debate russo, na contracorrente da estetização da política stalinista e em direção “à formulação de exigências revolucionárias” da arte. The correspondence of Walter Benjamin shows that the circulation of “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” in Russia was to him a matter of the utmost importance. In April 1936, Benjamin confessed to Kitty Marx-Stenchnerider his expectations and pessimism: “Considering these reactions, I might even have reason to believe that the work will have little repercussion in the place that should be its natural place, in Russia.” What were the reasons behind the expectations of Benjamin? Why would Russia be its “natural” place or destination? How can we explain his pessimism? This paper aims at discussing the militant and political dimension of “The Work of Art…” as well as its insertion in the Russian debate in its time, in the countercurrent of the Stalinist aestheticization of politics and into the direction of “the formulation of revolutionary demands in the politics of art.”

Resumo O artigo objetiva analisar as relações históricas e conceituais entre Walter Benjamin e o movimento produtivista soviético, centrando-se, sobretudo, na relação entre a noção de “politização da arte”, defendida por Benjamin como dispositivo de combate ao fascismo no ensaio “A obra de arte na época de sua reprodutibilidade técnica”, de 1936, e a noção de “factografia”, desenvolvida pelo produtivista soviético Sergei Tretiakov a partir de 1927. Sustenta-se, neste texto, que as categorias de “estetização da política” e de “politização da arte” tiveram seu primeiro desenvolvimento conceitual no pensamento de Benjamin a partir de sua viagem à URSS (1926-1927) e do seu contato com o pensamento produtivista. Abstract This article analyzes the historical and conceptual links established between Walter Benjamin and the Soviet productivist movement, focusing on the relation between the notion of “politicization of art” - defended by Benjamin as a device to combat fascism in the essay “The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction” of 1936 -, and the notion of “factography”, developed by the Soviet productivist Sergei Tretiakov from 1927 onwards. It is argued in this text that the categories of “aestheticization of politics” and of “politicization of art” had their first conceptual development in Benjamin’s thinking from his trip to the USSR (1926-1927) and from his contact with the productivist thought.

El siguiente trabajo tratará de la evolución que se ha dado en un término como el de la “estetización de la política” y como ha ido evolucionando a través de las aportaciones de Walter Benjamin y Jacques Rancière, dando además una pequeña visión de sus propuestas para salir de ella. Para ello, empezaremos haciendo una pequeña introducción, después trataremos la visión de Benjamin y por último la de Rancière. The following work will deal with the evolution of the term "aestheticization of politics" and how it has evolved through the contributions of Walter Benjamin and Jacques Rancière. Furthermore, it will provide a small vision of their proposals (so as) to overcome it. To do this, we will start with a short introduction, then we will deal with Benjamin's vision and finally we will deal with Rancière’s vision too Universidad de Sevilla. Grado en Filosofía

This article analyzes the concepts of artistic avant-garde by Peter Burger, Boris Groys, and Peter Osborn in order to observe the connection between philosophical criticism of the avant-garde and the justification of its historical status. These three views coincide in the research subject, but they are distinct in approaches to its interpretation. Their benchmarking study allows us to connect the avant-garde theories developed in the researcher’s work with their vision of the art history. Herewith the context of the appearance and existence of certain historical trends is considered in their connection with the present. Through explication and comparison of the theoretical approaches’ it has been established that all three concepts recognize the key importance of the institution of art for the reflection and the avant-garde self-reflection. Inclusion in social and political processes is highlighted through the institution of art, which defines the artist’s status and specificity the way of reading works through the question of art “autonomy”. The paper presents a comparison of different views on overcoming the autonomy as an exit to the level of criticism of an art institution on the one hand, and its overcoming by going out in practical life on the other hand. The key to understanding the independence and criticality of the avant-garde to the art movements of the past is its temporal aspiration for the future. The temporal independence of the avant-garde is analyzed in relation to the temporal regimes of modernity and contemporary as an opportunity to overcome the historicist schemes of writing the avant-garde to the art history and its consideration in the conditions of temporal and historical independence.Article received 15.01.2019, У статті проаналізовано концепції мистецького авангарду Петера Бюрґера, Бориса Гройса та Пітера Осборна на предмет виявлення зв’язку між філософською критикою авангарду та обґрунтуванням його історичного статусу. Ці три погляди збігаються щодо предмета, але відмінні у підходах до його трактування. Аналіз та порівняння цих поглядів дають нам змогу простежити зв’язок теорій авангарду, розроблених у працях цих дослідників, з їхнім баченням історії мистецтва. При цьому враховуватиметься як контекст появи та існування окремих історичних напрямів, так і їхній зв’язок із сьогоденням. Шляхом експлікації та порівняння теоретичних підходів було встановлено, що всі три концепції визнають ключове значення концепції інституції мистецтва для рефлексії та саморефлексії авангарду. Особливе місце відведено питанню «автономності» мистецтва та його включеності у соціальні та політичні процеси через інституційність мистецтва, яка визначає статус художника та специфічність прочитання творів. Також приділено увагу змінам соціальної ролі авангарду, як подоланню «автономності» та функціонуванню в безпосередній близькості до суспільної «життєвої» сфери. Проаналізовано темпоральну самостійність авангарду щодо темпоральних режимів модерну (modern) та сучасності (contemporary), як можливість подолання історицистських схем вписування авангарду до історії мистецтва та його розгляду в умовах темпоральної та історичної самостійності.Матеріал надійшов 15.01.2019

This article analyzes the concepts of artistic avant-garde by Peter Burger, Boris Groys, and Peter Osborn in order to observe the connection between philosophical criticism of the avant-garde and the justification of its historical status. These three views coincide in the research subject, but they are distinct in approaches to its interpretation. Their benchmarking study allows us to connect the avant-garde theories developed in the researcher’s work with their vision of the art history. Herewith the context of the appearance and existence of certain historical trends is considered in their connection with the present. Through explication and comparison of the theoretical approaches’ it has been established that all three concepts recognize the key importance of the institution of art for the reflection and the avant-garde self-reflection. Inclusion in social and political processes is highlighted through the institution of art, which defines the artist’s status and specificity the way of reading works through the question of art "autonomy”. The paper presents a comparison of different views on overcoming the autonomy as an exit to the level of criticism of an art institution on the one hand, and its overcoming by going out in practical life on the other hand. The key to understanding the independence and criticality of the avant-garde to the art movements of the past is its temporal aspiration for the future. The temporal independence of the avant-garde is analyzed in relation to the temporal regimes of modernity and contemporary as an opportunity to overcome the historicist schemes of writing the avant-garde to the art history and its consideration in the conditions of temporal and historical independence.

This article analyzes the concepts of artistic avant-garde by Peter Burger, Boris Groys, and Peter Osborn in order to observe the connection between philosophical criticism of the avant-garde and the justification of its historical status. These three views coincide in the research subject, but they are distinct in approaches to its interpretation. Their benchmarking study allows us to connect the avant-garde theories developed in the researcher’s work with their vision of the art history. Herewith the context of the appearance and existence of certain historical trends is considered in their connection with the present. Through explication and comparison of the theoretical approaches’ it has been established that all three concepts recognize the key importance of the institution of art for the reflection and the avant-garde self-reflection. Inclusion in social and political processes is highlighted through the institution of art, which defines the artist’s status and specificity the way of reading works through the question of art "autonomy”. The paper presents a comparison of different views on overcoming the autonomy as an exit to the level of criticism of an art institution on the one hand, and its overcoming by going out in practical life on the other hand. The key to understanding the independence and criticality of the avant-garde to the art movements of the past is its temporal aspiration for the future. The temporal independence of the avant-garde is analyzed in relation to the temporal regimes of modernity and contemporary as an opportunity to overcome the historicist schemes of writing the avant-garde to the art history and its consideration in the conditions of temporal and historical independence.

This article analyzes the concepts of artistic avant-garde by Peter Burger, Boris Groys, and Peter Osborn in order to observe the connection between philosophical criticism of the avant-garde and the justification of its historical status. These three views coincide in the research subject, but they are distinct in approaches to its interpretation. Their benchmarking study allows us to connect the avant-garde theories developed in the researcher’s work with their vision of the art history. Herewith the context of the appearance and existence of certain historical trends is considered in their connection with the present. Through explication and comparison of the theoretical approaches’ it has been established that all three concepts recognize the key importance of the institution of art for the reflection and the avant-garde self-reflection. Inclusion in social and political processes is highlighted through the institution of art, which defines the artist’s status and specificity the way of reading works through the question of art "autonomy”. The paper presents a comparison of different views on overcoming the autonomy as an exit to the level of criticism of an art institution on the one hand, and its overcoming by going out in practical life on the other hand. The key to understanding the independence and criticality of the avant-garde to the art movements of the past is its temporal aspiration for the future. The temporal independence of the avant-garde is analyzed in relation to the temporal regimes of modernity and contemporary as an opportunity to overcome the historicist schemes of writing the avant-garde to the art history and its consideration in the conditions of temporal and historical independence.

[spa] El propósito del presente estudio consiste en pensar el funcionamiento del cine y sus dimensiones políticas a partir de una lectura cruzada de Benjamin y Derrida. En primer lugar, se analizarán algunas lecturas críticas de La obra de arte en la era de su reproductibilidad técnica, con especial acento a los conceptos de aura y fantasmagoría. En segundo lugar, se valorarán los modos en que el cine resulta un aparato con potencial emancipador, para cuestionar planteamientos metafísicos inherentes a su concepción política como su capacidad ideológica de velar o desvelar la realidad o el fetichismo de las imágenes. Finalmente, se recurrirá a los conceptos derridianos de espectro, huella e injerto para hallar en el cinematógrafo un potencial político consistente en la producción de una alteración de la sensibilidad y de nuevas condiciones para la experiencia., [eng] The aim of this study is to think about the political dimensions of cinema and its technical functioning through a cross-reading of Benjamin and Derrida. Firstly, the paper will analyze several critical readings of The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility, with emphasis on concepts such as aura and phantasmagoria. Secondly, it will tackle the ways in which cinema becomes a machine with emancipatory possibilities. This evaluation will question the metaphysical assumptions inherent to cinema's political conception, such as its ideological ability to veil or unveil reality and the fetishism of filmic images. Finally, the study will invoke the Derridian concepts of specter, trace, and graft, in order to find a political dimension of cinema consisting in the production of an alteration of sensibility and of new conditions of experience. Keywords: Derrida ; Benjamin ; cinema ; specter ; phantasmagoria ; politicization of art

L’articolo indaga l’opera di Paolo Rosa e di Studio Azzurro a partire dal suo rilievo politico. L’articolo rielabora il concetto, formulato originariamente da Walter Benjamin ne L’opera d’arte nell’epoca della sua riproducibilità tecnica, di “politicizzazione dell’arte”. Mentre per Benjamin la politicizzazione dell’arte riguarda il movimento di emancipazione delle masse da opporre alla “estetizzazione della politica”, il concetto si presta qui a una nuova interpretazione. Riprendendo il titolo di un saggio scritto da Rosa insieme ad Andrea Balzola, l’articolo mostra come l’arte debba “uscire fuori di sé”. In altre parole, l’artista deve abbandonare le consuete modalità della creazione e della fruizione, per istituire nuove condizioni di interazione all’interno degli ambienti prodotti attraverso la creazione di immagini. In questo modo, l’opera di Rosa e Studio Azzurro recupera in una nuova accezione l’“aura” dell’opera d’arte. The article investigates the work of Paolo Rosa and Studio Azzurro in the light of its political relevance. The article rethinks the concept, originally formulated by Walter Benjamin in The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, of “politicization of art”. While for Benjamin the politicization of art concerns the emancipatory movement of the masses, to be opposed to the “aestheticization of politics”, the concept takes now a new meaning. Recalling the title of a book Paolo Rosa wrote with Andrea Balzola, the article shows that art should “go beyond itself”. In other words, the artist should abandon the ordinary ways of creation and fruition, in order to establish new conditions of interaction within the environments produced through the creation of images. In this way, the work of Paolo Rosa and Studio Azzurro recovers in a new key the “aura” of artworks.

En el presente ensayo ofrecemos una interpretación del pensamiento de Rancière. Ésta se vertebra en tres momentos: en primer lugar sostenemos la hipótesis del carácter sistemático de la teoría estética en particular, y de su filosofía en general. En un segundo momento situamos la génesis de esta teoría en la discusión con la teoría de la politización del arte. Para, en un tercer momento, abordar la lectura propiamente política que se desprende de la filosofía de Rancière., In the following essay we offer an interpretation of Rancière’s thought. We do this in three steps: at first we sustain the systematic character of Rancière’s esthetic philosophy in particular and of his philosophy in general. We then locate the genesis of this theory within the discussion with the politicization of art. To end with the truly political reading that follows from Rancière’s philosophy.