----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
Anna,
I find your mention of the Museum of Jurassic Technology to resonate quite
exactly with what I find to be a very powerful kind of fake. The fake that
quietly troubles the truth-claims of communication.
It's neither hoax nor sham, neither ruse, nor scam -- but a reflection of
one mode of communication in an untrustworthy mirror -- reminding us that
all mirrors are likewise untrustworthy. It performs a kind of sleight of
hand with authenticity. Or rather it makes authenticity a subject for play
and inquiry.
Or is it kayfabe -- the acknowledged fake -- as in the world of (*spoiler
alert*) professional wrestling (which my writing partner Rob Wittig likes
to cite)? (And, as he likes to point out, novels started out in this zone
as well...)
Renate's example of Larious' Warhol interview further complicates this
artistic mode, as does Warhol himself. What of Cindy Sherman?
Could we add Andy Kaufman?
Larious critically asks his readers if it is possible that we discern
> ?fakery? and ?mockery? from the ?real? in an age where everything is
> layered with the discrepancies of digital re-production and social media.
And yet there are those who accuse post-modern art and deconstruction for
this mess we're in. Too much irony. Too much self-reflexivity. Too much
Simpsons.
I don't find that a reason to try to banish all irony, condemn the
satirical, throw the Campbell's soup out with the Watergate.
I find the troubling of these lines rather productive.
Of course, I may be a very suspect person on this topic.
Looking forward to how this month unfolds.
Thanks for opening these questions.
Mark
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au
http://empyre.library.cornell.edu
