Page 240 - Cyberculture and New Media
P. 240

Desistant Media

                                                     Seppo Kuivakari


                             Abstract
                             Through  analyses  of  works  from  contemporary  media  artists  I  argue  for  a
                             certain mode of information I call desistant. Desistance can be understood in
                             terms of mise-en-abyme, considered here as an abyss following the logic of
                             the paradox, or the logic of the hyperbologic, as French philosopher Philippe
                             Lacoue-Labarthe  calls  it.  For  him,  mise-en-abyme  must  always  reflect  in
                             order to ensure (re)presentation, namely, reflection itself as (re)presentation.
                             Thus, hyperbology is the logic of mimesis: the hyperbological is unceasing,
                             endless and thus without resolution. As opposite to a mirror, which holds the
                             truth  as  adequation,  mise-en-abyme  is  a  tool  for  folding  the  truth  by
                             producing  hyperbological  folders  of  uncertainty  into  the  operations  of  the
                             truth  itself.  Hyperbologic  is  indifferentiable  as  such,  imperceptible  and
                             always  superlative:  the  greater  the  attempt  at  any  identification  with  the
                             other, the more this intention fails. This, finally, is “desistance”. To “desist”,
                             in  Jacques  Derrida’s  vocabulary,  is  to  correspond  to  a  kind  of  madness,
                             obsession,  siege  and  caesura,  a  double  bind  and  the  impossibility  of
                             reappropriation: not just formal oscillation but hyperbology.

                             Key Words: mimesis, media art, desistance



                                                          *****


                             1.      Introduction
                                     Within  Western  traditions  of  aesthetic  thought,  the  concepts  of
                             imitation and mimesis have been central to attempts to theorize the essence of
                             artistic expression, the characteristics that distinguish works of art from other
                             phenomena, and the myriad of ways in which we experience and respond to
                             works  of  art.  In  most  cases,  mimesis  is  defined  as  having  two  primary
                             meanings  –  that  of  imitation  (more  specifically,  the  imitation  of  nature  as
                             object, phenomena, or process) and that of artistic representation. Mimesis is
                             an extremely broad and theoretically elusive term that encompasses a range
                             of possibilities for how the self-sufficient and symbolically generated world
                             created by people can relate to any given “real”, fundamental, exemplary, or
   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245