Monday, May 21, 2007
"I can hardly understand the importance given to the word research in connection with modern painting" Pablo Picasso says in a 1923 interview, coolly anticipating Daniel-Henry Miller's latest fulgurescence. But how does cubism work?
You can imagine:
accepted the cinematicity of consciousness,
the minimum that a film needs to do to stress its involvement in (what we are obliged to call) a three-dimensional world is that it captures an object in rotation.
Now, the film here would consist of many (notionally) two-dimensional images, the aggregation of which merely give the impression of three dimensionality.
But each of these images outside its sequence could equally represent no possible real object.
Simultaneous to the realisation of objectivity in (notionally) three dimensions is the complementary realisation of the object in time.
Consequently the forced thwarting of three-dimensionality of the object of cubism simultaneously thwarts the temporality of this object.
Cubism as such is, for the first time in the history of western art, able to capture the metaphysics of commodity production.