Aesthetics of the Virtual (SUNY series in Contemporary Italian Philosophy)
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
Reconfigures classic aesthetic concepts in relation to the novelty introduced by virtual bodies.
Arguing that the virtual body is something new—namely, an entity that from an ontological perspective has only recently entered the world—Roberto Diodato considers the implications of this kind of body for aesthetics. Virtual bodies insert themselves into the space opened up by the famous distinction in Aristotle’s Physics between natural and artificial beings—they are both. They are beings that are simultaneously events; they are images that are at once internal and external; they are ontological hybrids that exist only in the interaction between logical-computational text and human bodies endowed with technological prostheses. Pursuing this line of thought, Diodato reconfigures classic aesthetic concepts such as mimesis, representation, the relation between illusion and reality, the nature of images and imagination, and the theory of sensory knowledge.
that the mirror catches, but it is actual in the mirror which now leaves the character with only a virtuality and pushes him back out-of-field. The exchange is all the more active when the circuit refers to a polygon with a growing number of sides.29 The mirror allows for a reciprocal exchange, a virtual-actual circuit that results in reversibility between limpidity and opacity, clarity and obscurity. And the hermeneutic power of the crystal image, which Deleuze spins amidst great cinematic works
the sense of freedom associated with this connection would change. Thus, we have a reinforcement of the role of the author, but of an author in absence. Up until now I have presented the concept of the creator-poet from Leibniz’s and Wolff’s aesthetological tradition, which, when brought to its hyperbole, leads to Baumgarten’s mundus poetarum [world of poets]. In terms of judgment, the issue is to evaluate the concept of the project, the teleology of the hypertextual structure, that is, the
essentially numerical. Unlike fundamentally analogical techniques, numerical images do not participate in the real.”39 Numerical images participate in it indirectly through the process of Aesthetics of the Virtual Body 9 digitalization, which is circularly made possible by those same techniques. Therefore, virtual bodies should not be understood as representations of reality, but rather as realities that are constructed in a way essentially different from those [realities] coming out of the
altered. The images are not more illusory: when becoming interactive they are operational agents and effectual implementations within the software system and its transmission.” See Stelarc, “From Psycho-Body to Cyber-Systems: Images as Post-Human entities,” in Virtual Futures. Cyberotics, Technol ogy, and PostHuman Pragmatism, ed. J. Bradhurst Dixon and e. J. Cassidy (New York: Routledge, 1998), 121–22. 33. A reconstruction of this can be found in Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin,
provided that they maintain an appropriate level of interaction.6 In this way, having overcome the problem of mimesis as true copy for the medium of perceptual analogies, the issue becomes one of objectivity as credibility: What makes an environment credible as an objective environment? More generally, “What is it that causes something (object, event, world) to be perceived as objective?”7 The question is relevant, if one can manage not to loosen the perception-objectivity structure, because it