Work of Drawing

This entry was posted in uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

Redrawing the Burial of St Lucy 4

Quotable Drawing Since Janus

Whether drawing is a working  drawing  and as such an agile  concept fragment, or whether it is  autonomous to drawing itself  what is the  “work of drawing? Such contexts as arrive to answer this question suggest in turn that the deeper question is what are the narrative levels of abstraction these create as “drawing philosophy”?

To begin with it is interesting to look at tools of narratology  itself that establish focus and context in terms of immersion between subject and object- I would translate this to drawing by looking into the artist to artist  identification we could call part of the “rhetoric” of drawing and meaning that word in the positive sense of a language basis to dialectical interchange. “non focalized” in this context could be taken to mean objectively trying to understand an artist on their own terms- accepting the idea of a validity to “the artists intent” “internally focalized  would  implicate the copy  ie trying to know what an artist knows in a mimetic  mode less entagled with analyzing the why and focusing on the how… and finally externally focused would bring all manner of contexts and analysis to the table and most likely the famous “Janus” parable- siting the present in relation to past and future.

With  Janus eyes

In this  drawing  I am  for

Example interested in  3

Artistst from Balogna –

Guercino, Morandi, and

Caracci who were

Interested in a theater

Of the natural as an

“extended gesture” of

Mannerist trope to

Sculptural plasticity.

One can extricate an interesting conclusion from this simple gesture which is  that naturalism

Can in a sense be contrasted with realism, because what is natural can be stated to an autonomous

drive whereas realism has that external rationale.  This drawing has a natural feeling and sculpts the  light of cyber space as a future world for drawing forms that is uncharted territory.

 

Another level of drawing is the critical… drawing as critic. We are very familiar with criticizing drawings…. But can drawing criticize critics? I have refered to drawing as a concept fragment, able to catch edges and develop directions. Criticism likewise is an assessment , a  state of arrest, of necessity a fragment according to its status as evaluation.

 

The critic I will criticize with drawing is Mieka Bal. In her book Quoting Caravaggio she misquotes Deleuze in her writing after having presented the text which is “ Moving from a branching of inflection, we distinguish a point that is no longer what runs along inflection, nor is it the point of inflection itself; it is the one in which the lines perpendicular to tangents meet in a state of variation. It isnot exactly a point but a place, a position, a site, a”linear focus,” a line emanating from lines. To the degree it represents a variation or inflection it can be called a point of view.”

Bal provides next: “ ( “variation of inflection” : thus placed in the object, this baroque point of view  is emphatically not a subjective relativism…)”   I am interested in the difference then between “variation and inflection per Deleuze” and the Bal “variation of inflection”

 

 

 

The phrase “can be called” references the

Work of drawing. Point of view means a

Totality that is assimilated. “variation of

Inflection only describes something similar

To drawing technique or a violinist  giving

Charm to a score. However Western art

Criticism underestimates calligraphy and

The Deleuze quote has, actually, an

Understanding of calligraphy in western

Drawing that eludes immediate perception

Of a critic usingf disciplinary or inter

Disciplinary tools, in a paradox.

One can see in his statement an intuition

Of the way the western hatch symbolizes

The long axis displaced to another objects

Position which encounters the same

Momentum this time as a transversal. In order to chart this topography the drawing here uses the expedient of photographing a drawing through its own rolled up status, while also referencing the computers ability to scroll dimensions. Deleuze was referencing Leibnitz, and his quote was probably thinkink out the Leibnitz lense as moving in the direction of a perspective object, a difference substituting something like the sphere for the Baroque labyrinth…..

 

So far the work of drawing has covered artist to artist identification, acting naturally, and the odd perspectives of the hand as it becomes as fast as the mind.