http://www.radicalphilosophy.com/uncategorized/squeegee
"...a feathering back trick which might (just) be read as signifiers of the televisual or some strangely dot-free web-fed offset, so long as everyone present agrees." The brushwork in Richter's photograph-based paintings does double duty as suitably virtuoso painterly marks and as a signalisation of the noise of analogue media. They are dialectical, a dialog between two forms and two meanings contained in the same acts. They are ironic, changing the meaning of signifiers (at the technical level of brush-mark and blur) without changing their form. For all the conservatism of Richter's work, this is interesting. It's difficult to imagine a digitally sourced Richter. LCDs present different challenges and affordances than grain and phosphor, and mosaics don't have the same position within art history as scumbling. Sure, there's all the noise of JPEG compression, and this could just about be rendered in a painterly manner, although it would probably take a painter with more mastery of glazes and washes than is fashionable (or art historically anchorable within modernism). Forget the jaggies of GIFs, the net's equivalent of woodcut (or possibly linocut), although a thousand future Lichtensteins won't. The temptation is stencils, but that would have to use spraycans rather than oils, and Banksy has blocked that particular pipe. *Digital noise* is a very different challenge to painting than *analogue noise*, and we're past the period where CRTs helped to obscure this. - Rob. _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
