Visual Literacy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
english edition 2 2015 Visual Literacy issue editor KATARZYNA BOJARSKA KRZYSZTOF PIJARSKI “Realism,” Embodied Subjects, Projection of Empathy MARTA LEśNIAKOWSKA Experiencing Cultural Visualisations: the Anthropology of (re)Construction A D M MAZUR Negative Testimonials. Photographic Representation of Holocaust Memory PAWEł MOśCICKI Snapshots of Intimate Encounters teksty drugie · Institute of Literary Research Polish Academy of Science index 337412 · pl issn 0867-0633 EDITORIAL BOARD Agata Bielik-Robson (uk), Włodzimierz Bolecki, Maria Delaperrière (France), Ewa Domańska, Grzegorz Grochowski, Zdzisław Łapiński, Michał Paweł Markowski (usa), Maciej Maryl, Jakub Momro, Anna Nasiłowska (Deputy Editor-in-Chief), Leonard Neuger (Sweden), Ryszard Nycz (Editor-in-Chief), Bożena Shallcross (usa), Marta Zielińska, Tul’si Bhambry (English Translator and Language Consultant), Justyna Tabaszewska, Marta Bukowiecka (Managing Editor) ADVISORY BOARD Edward Balcerzan, Stanisław Barańczak (usa) , Małgorzata Czermińska, Paweł Dybel, Knut Andreas Grimstad (Norway), Jerzy Jarzębski, Bożena Karwowska (Canada), Krzysztof Kłosiński, Dorota Krawczyńska, Vladimir Krysinski (Canada), Luigi Marinelli (Italy), Arent van Nieukerken (Holland), Ewa Rewers, German Ritz (Switzerland), Henryk Siewierski (Brasil), Janusz Sławiński , Ewa Thompson (usa), Joanna Tokarska-Bakir, Tamara Trojanowska (Canada), Alois Woldan (Austria), Anna Zeidler-Janiszewska ADDRESS Nowy Świat 72, room. 1, 00-330 Warsaw, Poland phone +48 22 657 28 07, phone/fax +48 22 828 32 06 e-mail: [email protected] www.tekstydrugie.pl GRAPHIC DESIGN Marcin Hernas | tessera.org.pl EDITING AND Lynn Suh LANGUAGE CONSULTANT PROOFREADING Rafał Pawluk TYPESETTING Publishing House of the Institute of Literary Research, Polish Academy of Sciences This journal is funded by the Polish Minister of Science and Higher Education, through the “Programme for the Development of Humanities” for 2015 – 2017 english edition 2 2015 Institute of Literary Research Polish Academy of Science www.tekstydrugie.pl theory of literature · critique · interpretation „Pro Cultura Litteraria” Association 2 table of contents Visual Literacy introduction 5 KATARZYNA BOJARSKA Visual Literacy topo-graphies 13 ROMA SENDYKA Prism: Understanding Non-Sites of Memory 29 ELŻBIETA RYBICKA Maps: From Metaphor to Critical Topography 49 MARTA ZIELIŃSKA Romantics Plotted on Maps photo-graphy 55 MARIANNA MICHAŁOWSKA The Art of the Document: Photography and Trauma 70 ADAM MAZUR Negative Testimonials. Photographic Representation of Holocaust Memory 80 PAWEŁ MOŚCICKI Snapshots of Intimate Encounters 105 ADRIANNA ALKSNIN Augustine: Charcot’s Bunny reading art 123 AGNIESZKA REJNIAK-MAJEWSKA Image as a Situation: Tragedy, Subjectivity and Painting According to Barnett Newman 147 KRZYSZTOF PIJARSKI “Realism,” Embodied Subjects, Projection of Empathy 168 EWA TONIAK Grottger and His Shadow 191 ADAM DZIADEK Themerson and Schwitters 200 MAGDALENA POPIEL The Aesthetics of Caprice: In the Circle of Visualization looking awry 212 ANNA ZEIDLER-JANISZEWSKA Visual Culture Studies or an Anthropologically Oriented Bildwissenschaft?On the Directions of the Iconic Turn in the Cultural Sciences 236 LUIZA NADER An Affective Art History 262 LESZEK KOCZANOWICZ Magical Power of Art. Subject, Public Sphere, Emancipation 278 MARTA LEŚNIAKOWSKA Experiencing Cultural Visualisations: the Anthropology of (re-)Construction 295 GRZEGORZ GROCHOWSKI Where Codes Meet: On the Literary Uses of Iconic Signs Introduction Katarzyna Bojarska Visual Literacy DOI:10.18318/td.2015.en.2.1 Katarzyna Bojarska is an assistant professor in the Institute of Literary Research of the Polish Academy of Sciences, in the Department of the Research on Literature and Culture of Late Modernity. wenty years ago, in 1996, American academic journal Author of articles TOctober published a survey entitled “Visual Culture and translations Questionnaire.”1 Among the respondents were: Svetlana Alp- interested in the ers, Susan Buck-Morss, Jonathan Crary, Martin Jay, Stephen relations of art, Melville and others. The questions posed tackled several literature, history and psychoanalysis. topics including the shift from historical to anthropological Translated among thinking in the interdisciplinary model of visual culture stud- others Dominick ies; inspiration that visual culture scholars find in eccentric LaCapra’s book, art historians such as Aby Warburg and Alois Riegl; criticism History in Transit. of visual culture for concentrating on the disembodied im- Experience, Identity, Critical Theory age and thus producing ideal subjects for globalized turbo- (2009) and Susan capital; and the claim that the shift in academia (from the Buck-Morss’ Hegel, historical study of images under the umbrella of art history Haiti and Universal towards visual culture) parallels the shift in the art world (in History (2014). The brief, from modernist autonomous art object to postmodern- author of Wydarzenia po Wydarzeniu: ist art practices), while what follows would be the retreat of Białoszewski – critics who tend to find it more challenging and productive Richter – Spiegelman to discuss cultural artefacts in a broader context rather than [Events after the works of art per se.2 Event: Białoszewski – Richter – Spiegelman] (Warszawa 2013). Fulbright Fellow at 1 October, 77 (Summer, 1996): 25-70. Cornell University, 2 Ibid., 25. Ithaca NY (2009-2010). 6 visual literacy Susan Buck-Morss provided an account of how an attempt to institutionalize visual culture studies failed at Cornell University where she worked at the time, and how it was impossible to grasp, frame and change something which was more of a process (an interdisciplinary network of exchanges and encounters) into something that would be an academic discipline. She introduced a crucial problem, namely: “what would be the episteme … of such a field?”3 And even though she went on to name the set of theoreticians included in the reading lists of visual culture courses (Barthes-Benjamin-Foucault-Lacan) and the set of problems addressed (reproduc- tion of images, the society of the spectacle, scopic regimes, perceiving the Other, etc.), she concluded by saying that more than anything, images need to be read (sic!) “emblematically and symptomatically, in terms of the most fundamental questions of social life.”4 This for her means that visual culture is responsible for working out its own theories, ones that “themselves are visual, that show rather than argue.”5 Jonathan Crary, on the other hand, saw in the emergence and success of visual culture studies a response to the “collapse of certain enduring assumptions about the status of a spectator.”6 According to him, vision remains closely attached to more general historical questions dealing with the “construction of subjectivity.” Martin Jay on his part, seemed to have been convinced that visual art in the 20th century can no longer be separated (and as such studies in separation) from other images, from the conditions of their production, circulation and reception (an idea popular at least from the times of John Berger’s Ways of Seeing, from 1972).7 We seem to owe this meaningful shift to the pressures coming both from within 20th century art as well as from without. However, this lack of a single method, the call for new (visual) theories as well as the “threat” of anthropology (the threat of ignoring the historical order of things and their historical specificities), together with an overdose of the inter- and multi-disciplinary have made many suspicious of the status of this new interpretative mode, this new approach to visuality and culture more generally.8 As Nicholas Mirzoeff has rightly pointed out, like history visual culture is both the name of the academic field and that of its object of study. Visual culture involves the things that we see, the 3 Ibid., 29. 4 Ibid., 30 5 Ibid., 30. 6 Ibid., 33. 7 Ibid., 44. 8 See Visual Culture: Images and Interpretations, eds. Norman Bryson, Michael Ann Holly and Keith Moxey, (Hanover N.H.: University Press of New England, 1994). INTRODUCTION KATARZYNA BOJARSKA VISUAL LITERACY 7 mental model we all have of how to see, and what we can do as a result. That is why we call it visual culture: a culture of the visual.9 And it is precisely the proximity of history and the visual that proves crucial in thinking about Polish culture and the role images played in its transformation at the turn of 21st century. Why is it interesting and actually necessary to introduce this framework? Mostly because its inception can be dated to the very beginning of the 1990s and the birth of Polish democracy. At that time, people began to see themselves, their history and their current role in history differently (or at least many hoped that was the case). Moreover, in that cultural context, which was very strongly based on the word (especially the written word) and literature as records and expressions of collective sentiment and identity, the role of imagery (and visual arts alike) has for a long time been underestimated. And yet it seems that when it comes to the experience of Poland’s political transformation and the outcome of the fall of the Iron Curtain, together with all the accompanying identity, political and economic consequences, it is the visual (rather than liter- ary) culture that offers the big picture and one that is complicated. In the history of the 20th and 21th centuries, one finds numerous instances of both artist-as- -(art)theorists and artists engaged in digging deep