Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
.my
Jonqthtlll trbry
Ro!:alintf Krauss
THE jFl j Pl,l
Horman Bryson
TNE GA.E
I,,M,
Jac.quellrte
mOlTED BY
VISION
AND VISUALITY
BAY PRESS
SEATTLE
1988
CONTENTS
PREFA C E
Martin Jay
Bay Press
[15 West Denny Way
Seattle, Washington 98 [ 19
Design by Bethany Johns
Typesetting by Sarabande, New York
Printed by Walsworth Publishing Company, Marceline, Missouri
Set in Perpetua
Library of Congress CotaloginginPublicatlon Data
\'01.
Hal Foster
Jonathan Crary
MODERNIZING VI SION
Rosalind Krauss
THE
1M / PULSE TO
SEE
2)
Horman Bryson
THE GAZE IN THE
EXP AN DED
F I ELD
Jacqueline Rose
SEXUALITY AND VISION : SOME OUESTIONS
GENERAL
D ISCUSS I ON
NOTE ON
THE SERIES
Hal Foster
texts. This book also reflects the careful production work o f Phil
Mariani, Bethany Johns, and Ellen Foos, and of Thatcher Bailey
at Bay Press.
We look forward to a series of events in 1988-89 centered
PREFACE
around criti cal discuss io n and to additional volumes of this publication se ries.
Why vision and visuality, why these terms? Although \-ision sugCharles Wright
Executi\'e Director
fact, the two are not opposed as nature to culture: vision is so-
cial and ru storical too, and visuality involves the body and the
psyche. Yet neither are they identi cal: here, the difference between the terms signa ls a difference within the visual-between
the mechanism of sight and its hi storica l techniques, between
the datum of vision and its discursive determinations-a difference, many differences, among how we see, how we are able,
allO\ved, or made to see, and how we see this seeing or the unseen therein. With its own rhetoric and represe ntations, each
scopic regime seeks to close out these differences: to make of its
many social visualities one essential vision, or to order them in a
natural hi erarchy of sight. It is importa nt , then , to slip these superimpositions out of focus, to di sturb the gi\'en array of dsual
facts (it may be the only way to see them at all), and trus little
book suggests ways to do this fo r the modern period. Thus the
general project in whi ch it partakes: to thicken modern vision,
to insist on its phYSiological substrate (Jonathan Crary) and on its
psychic imbri cation (whether this is seen in terms of \'icissitude
(Jacqueline Rose] or sub\'ersion [Rosalind Krauss]); to socialize
this vision, to indi cate its part in the production of subjectiVity
(all the authors) and its own production as a part of intersubjectivity (a dialectic of the gaze in which, according to one "paranoid" model, the subject is menaced by its other [Norman
Bryson]); and, in general, to histori cize modern vision, to specify its dominant practices and its cr iti cal resistances (Martin Jay
v Iii
ix
Hal faster
PREFACE
,-ision of bipo lar subject and object, to the model of the body as
and a call for an alternath'e to the sea rch fo r alternati\'c \' isual
regimes.
But ,,-hy this topi c, or these ta kes, now? This is more difficult to answer, for "causes" are
Martin Jay
",hkh separates subj ect and object, renders the first transcen-
thought, empiri cal science, and cap italist logiC all at once; or cri-
pri,-ileges the purely opti cal in dsua l art, to which formal prin-
tial ,-iewer but also, on the other hand , not to historicize the
produced.)
In her paper, Rosalind Krauss explores an optica l unconRosalind
scious
in modernism, here as tapped by Duchamp, Ernst,
Krauss
Giacometti, and others. This intuition about the visual is sensitive to its invoh-ement with corporea l desire; it thus runs coun-
ter to the relati ve rarefaction (or reifi cati on) of vision, ev ident
Crary
transparency, of pure se lf-knowledge." In effect, Krauss considers the ramificatio ns, for this countertraditi on, of the phys-
and Rose. In parti cular, she argues that there exists a beat, pulse,
xi
Hal Faster
Norman
Bryson
especia lly in the face of a repressi\'e right which taps the unco n-
No o ne set of preconditions goyerns this range of argument; there are, ho\\'ever, di scourses held in commo n. Certai nly
the entire discussion draws on analyses of the subject and the .
tivity and its spaces, fo r the concept ion of art and its techniques,
attention to the psychic imbri cation of the sexual and the visual
Jacqueline
Rose
PREFACE
Lyotard) present postmodernism in terms of a crisis in social totalit),; whether celebrated or lamented, this crisis is often figured
xii
Hoi Foster
However, the virulence in the Western metropolis of sexist, heterosexualist, and racist gazes, deepened by a reactive patriarchy
and a divisive political eco nomy, cannot help but inAect the discussion and inform its reception. The same is true of the visual
technorama which envelops most of us with new technologies of
the image and new techniques of the subject-in-sight ,
One last comment. The critique of perspect ivalism, the
concern with corporeal vision, the analysis of the gaze -these
things are not new. Decades have passed since Panofsky pointed
to the conventionality of perspective, and Heidegger to its complicity with a subject wi lled to mastery; years since MerleauPonty stressed the bodiliness of sight, Lacan the psychic cost of
the gaze, and Fanon its colonialist import. Yet Signifi cant differences distinguish the present discussionj one is its partial
questi oning of these prior ana lyses. Thus Rose asks what positi ve
terms are set up by such critique (e.g., do we want to seek an
alternative visua l realm in the unconscious if this is to pril'i\ege
psychic disturbance?), and Jay cautions against the celebration of
a postmodern Jolie du voir (e.g., what is lost with the distance
granted by per spective?). Such questioning is not intended to
cor rect modern analyses of vision but precisely to keep them
critical - to
nOl
x lv
VISION
AND
VISUAL I TY
Martin Jay
SCOPIC
REGIMES
OF
MODERNITY
Martin Jay
SCO P I C
REG I MES
OF" MODERNIT Y
discussed
oj Noture.
puhlished in 1979:
is represencotions
pli cations of sight in ways that are now only beginn ing to be ap-
it succeeded in becoming so because it best ex pressed the "natural" expe rience of Sight ,alori zed by the scient ifi c ,,orld d ew"
and the natura l world was disputed, so too ,\as the dominati on
can easily be faulted for their obvious d istance from the complex
rea liti es they seek to approximate" I am also not suggesting that
the three main visual subcultures I si ngle out for spec ial atten-
tion exhaust all those that might be discerned in the lengthy and
most significant"
Let me begin by turning to what is normally claimed to be
writer's interpretation of ancient ,isual knowledge-in the italian Quattroce nto. Brunelleschi is traditionallv accorded the
1946 that "the history of art during the five hundred years that
have elapsed since Alberti wrote has bee n little more than the
story of the slow diffusion of his ideas through the artists and
matica l regularities in opticS and God's will. Even after the religious underpinnings of this equation were eroded ,
favorable
rf In
famous metaphor, could also be understood as a Rat mirror reAecting the geometri calized space of the scene depicted back
viewing eye.
Significa ntly, that eye was singular, rather than the two
scientists would call " saccadic" jumps from one foca l point to
twent ieth-ce ntury art , although, as Rosalind Krauss has reminded us, Alberti's veil was assumed to correspond to external
visi on could be rendered on a two-dimensional surface by following all of the transformational rules spelled out in Alberti's
De Pirwra and later treatises by Viator, DUrer, and others. The
ing, and fixated, rather than dynami C, moving with what later
Gaze rather than the Glance, thus producing a visual take that
bodied. In what Bryson ca lls the "Founding Perception" of the
Cartesian perspectivalist tradition ,
the aaze
if disclosed presence;
if duration,
in
if view-
ina, the viewina subjea unites his aaze with the Founding Perception,
in a momene
Norlin Joy
tacle
"
I d .
"14
his book Word and Image call s the diminution of the discursive
poral order filled 'w ith natural objects that could only be ob-
that turned its targets into stone. The marmoreal nude drained
researcher.
cif Urbina,
the
ergy in the other direction. Only much later in .the histo,r y o,f
jeuner sur l'herbe and Otl'mpia, did the crossing of the vIewer s
gaze with that of the subject finally occur. By then the ra-
qualitatively
from its conte .. t and available for buying and selling. Separate
from the painter and the viewer, the visual field dep icted on the
but in time they seemed less important than the visual skill
shown in depicting them . Thus the abstraction of artistic form
Martin Jay
SCOP I C
REGIMES OF"
MOOERNIT Y
perspecth'a list epistemol ogy, For the mo nocular eye at the apex
tirely outside of the world it claims to know only from afar, The
uniye rsal - that is, exactly the same for any human viewer oc-
front of them , When the fo rmer was e.x plicitly tra nsformed into
the lat ter, the relati vist ic impl icat ions of perspect ival ism could
pernicious,
Looked at more closely, however, it is possible to discern
internal tensions in Ca rtesian perspectiyalism itself that suggest
was apparent to thi nkers like Lei bniz, alth ough he generally
sought to escape its more troubling implications. These were not
expliCitly stressed and than praised until the late nineteenth cen-
tury by such thinkers as Nietzsc he, If (' ,'eryone had his or her
the painter's \'i ew of the scene from that of the presumed be-
Ve rmeer, who represents for. . . him a seco nd state of pcrspect iyalism even more di sinca rnatcd th;-il that of Alberti, "The bond
fini te infinity,"lO Although artificial perspective was the dominant model, its competitor \vas never entirely forgotten,
Michael Kubovy has recently added the observation that
what he ca lls the "robustness of perspective"l l meant that Renaissance canvases could be success full y dewed from more than
with the ,'icwe r's physique is broken and thc \'ie\\'ing subject,"
he writes, " is now proposed and assumed as a notional pOint, a
non-empiri ca l Gaze, "13
What makes this last obse n 'ation so sugg:es ti\'e is the open-
de nt of Vermeer ab le to guarrel
10
interpretati on of
II
Martin jay
SCOPIC
FlE:GIME:S OF
MO DE:RNITY
context from the one we have been discussing. That is, we might
framed; one wich no clear!! siwated I'iewer compared to one with such
if distinauishina
I'USUS
the (extures
if the
wIth
haye anti cipated later visual models, however much it was subordinated to its Cartesian perspectivalist riyal. As we ha"e already
noted, a direct fi liation between Alberti 's velo and the grids of
If there is a model for Dutch art, it is the map ''lith its un-
can thus be located in the Dutch art based on the mapping im-
aHenrion to many small thinas versus a Jew larae ones; baht rllecred
Althouah the arid thor Ptolem), proposed, and those thal Mercator larer
cfJ objecrs
if
objects, their colors and textures, deah with rather chan cheir place-
12
if the
Renaissance perspec-
tive arid, they do not shore the positioned viewer, the frame, and the
13
'"
SCOP I C
defini tion
looks.
lVindo lV throu8 h
which an enema/I'jewel
in aeneral,
mUSt
rh'o f arid. Th e projecrion is, one miBhl say. viewed f rom nowhere. Nor
is it
(0
Secondly\ the art of describing also anticipates the visual experience produced by the ninetee nth-century im"ention of photogra-
of material surfaces in Dutch art and the fetishism of commodities no less characteri sti c of a market economy. In this
15
Marlin Jay 1
legi ble surfaces and faith in the material solidity of the world its
paintings map. with the baroq ue faSCination for opacity, unreadability, and the indeCipherability of the rea lity it depicts.
III
mto anyone coherent essence. Sign ifi cantly, the mirror that it
rationali zed or "analyti c" perspective, but rather the anam or-
phosistic mirror, either Concave or com'ex, that distorts the vis ual
or as W olffiin late r ca lled it, the classica l style, the baroque was
image-or, more preCisely, rnea ls the com'en tio nal rather than
"t '
f the mirror
.
"34
b
- aroq ue \'isual experi ence has a strongly
on paradox, and the Counter Reformat ion mystiCS su bmlsslon to "crtiginous expe riences of rapture might all
of 1984 and La folie du \"Oir of 1986,1.3 it is prec isely the explos i\'e
power of baroque \'isio n' that is seen as the most Significant alternati\'e to the hegemonic \'isual style we ha\-e called Cartes ian
perspectivalism. Celebrating the dazzling, disor ienting, ecstatic
meant that images were signs and that concepts always contained
an irredUCibly imagisti c component.
11
>
Martin Jay
SCOPIC REGIMES
OF" MODERNITY
physi cal forms, courses through the baroque scopic regime. The
body returns to dethrone the disinterested gaze of the disincar-
Still, if one had to Si ngle out the scopic regime that has fi-
nally come into its own in our time, it would be the "madness of
the viewer and the viewed in the flesh of the 'Norld, here it gen-
world).
A great deal more might be said about these three ideal
store rhetoric to its rightful place and accept the irreducible lin-
seems obvious.
that Cartesian perspectivalism has been dri ven from the field,
bit too far. In our haste to denaturalize it and debunk its claims
the situated context of a body in the world may not always see
scientific tradition may ha,-e only been made poss ibl e by Carte-
might argue that the \'isual practice with which it had an elec-
18
19
SCOPIC
Marlin Jay
former, and their general lack of indigenous scientifiC revolutions. In our scramble to scrap the rationalization of sight as a
pernicious reification of visual Huidity. we need to ask what the
costs of too uncritical an embrace of its alternatives may be. In
the case of the art of describing. \ve might see another rei fication at work. that which makes a fetish of the material surface
instead of the three-dimensional depths. Lukacs's critique of naturalist description in literature, unmentioned by Alpers, might
be applied to painting as well. In the case of baroque vision, we
might wonder about the celebration of ocular madness, which
may produce ecstasy in some, but bewilderment and confusion
in others. As historians like Maravall have darkly warned, the
phantasmagoria of baroque spectacle was easily used to manipulate those who were subjected to it. The current vision of "the
culture industry," to use the term Mara,'all borrows from
Horkheimer and Adorno in his account of the seventeenth century, does not seem very threatened by postmodernist visual experiments in ul a foli e du voir." In fact, the opposite may well be
the case.
Rather than erect another hierarchy, it may therefore be
more useful to acknowledge the plurality of scopic regimes now
available to us. Rather than demonize one or another, it may be
less dange rous to explore the implications, both positive and
negative, of each. In so doing, we won't lose entirely the sense of
unease that has so long haunted the visual culture of the West,
but we may learn to see the virtues of differentiated ocular experiences. We may learn to wean ourselves from the fiction of a
"true" vision and revel instead in the possibilities opened up by
the scopic regimes we haw already invented and the ones, now
SO
REGIMES OF
M OOER N ITY
Notes
I.
TM
Th
3. Donald
M
'c HiSIOty
"'
P
19'8Lo)\',
... go ress,
2 , p. 26.
...
,.
f Bollt8eais
am n gc: Camnridgc
'.
or"",'
....-
IC e
oucau t, Discipline ond Pu sh Th B' h {
trans. Alan Sheridan (New Yo rk: Vintage Books
. e '" ? the Prison.
lhe S i d
UI Debord Socierr of
pte'OCC, reL C (Detroit: Alack and Red 1977)
.
'
.
6 Ch' . . .
'
.
I'
Metz, lhe Imaginal')' Signifier: PI".rchoonalj"SiJ ond lhe Onemo trans
.
Ind'lana University Press, 1982). '. 61. .
C
7 e la Tltton
. et al . (8100 mmgton:
. Jacquelme Rose. 5exuoJir) '
pp, 232-233.
in
V P
I;
21
20
Marlin Jay
SCO P IC REGIME S
Editions Galilee, 1984) and LaJo/it du 1"Olr: de J'esrhili'lue baroqut (Paris: Editions
Galilee, 1986).
34. Rodolphc Gasche, The Taln rf Ihl! Mirror: Derrido and the Philosoph)'
(Cambridge, Mass.: Har\"3rd Unh'ersity Press, 1986).
of Rif/tcfion
IS. For a discussion o f the gender implications o f this work, see S"etlana Al-
pers, "Art History and its Exclusions," in Feminism and An H iswr)'= Questionina
impulse in the baroque, See La Jolie du \oir. p. 80, where she identifies that impulse with Gracian and Pasca l.
cd, Nonna Bro ude and Mary' D. Garrard (New Yo rk: Harper and Row,
1982), p. 187.
36. Sce Irit Rogoff, "Mapping Out Strategies of Dislocation. " in thc catalogue
16. Norman Bryson, Word and fmaae: Funch POimina f?fthe Anden Resime (Cam-
for Neustein's October 24-No\"embcr 26, 1987 show at the Exit Art gallery in
New York.
p.
39.
p.
109.
rf
fhe Avon/ - Gorde. See also her work with Jane lidngston, L 'omollr Jou: PhotO[Jraphy
Queslion
and Row, 1977). Heidcgger's most extensh'e critique of Cartesian perspt'"ct h'alism can be found in his essay " The Age of the World Picture," in the same
volume.
20. White, p. 208.
2 1. Kubo\")", chapter IV.
22 . Sarah Kofman , Camera Obscura, de I'ideo/asie
25 . Ibid., p. xix.
26. Ibid . p. 44.
27 . Ibid ., p. 138.
28. Ibid. , p. 43.
29. Aaron Sl,harf. Art and
\ 1- "
or Moder n
1981).
31. Heinrich WolflHn, Renai$SOnre and &roque. trans. Kathrin Simon (Ithaca,
N.Y.: Corncll Unin' rsity Pnss. 1966). Sn' also tht' syst{'matic dc\'e!opmcnt of
the t'ontrast in Principles f?[ Art
The Problem
t?[ the
Derdopment
f?f
in
La fer Art. trans. M. I) . Hottingl'r (London: G. Bcll & Sons. Ltd., 1932).
f?[ a
Historical Srructure.
33. Christ im' Bud-Glul' bmann, La raison baroque; de Boudcloire Ii lkn;amin (Paris:
22
23
DISCUSSION
ception of the political and to a particular noti on of the bourgeois subj ect. And I wonder ",hat happens to that politi ca l
Norman Bryson
scopic regime. It's true that, unli ke Mediterranean art, Dutch art
plicati ons of scopic regimes, but it can 't be done too reducti\'ely.
The perspect i\,al ist regime is not necessa rily complicitous o nly
Ne\'ertheless, one could also say that Dutch art is, so to speak,
used. And the same is arguable about any alternatives that are
prese nted.
The perspecti"alist regime may be compli citous with a ce r-
recogn ize its corporeality, its intersubj ecti\'ity, its embedded ness
modes has to do instead with the per formati,'e- the idea of per-
formance and the insertion of embod iment into the optical field.
I am thinking here of baroque art, but also of nineteenth-cen-
\'i ce of types of political self-understanding that depend on di stanciation- explanatory social-scientific models, for example,
the world and create.. at least the fiction of an objecti\'e dista nce
the bod ily into the frame-in the dsibility of pigment and gesture, in the rise of the sketch, and in bra\'u ra styles such as that
from it. Here I think of the com bination that JUrgen Habermas
self in
ences-a combination of explanatory and hermeneuti c understanding based largely o n a perspecti"alist hction of being
outside the object of inquiry. This hction is easy to debunk be-
Jay
24
25
O ISCUSSIO N
betwee n the disincarnated eye and the depicted sce ne that the
painting lacks the immediacy associated with desire. But this is
often ca lled into questio n by various aesthetic practices; I men-
grain of salt). As Lukacs descr ibes it, realism deals with typo-
crossing of gazes; in most nudes the figure does not look back at
Jrisson of reciprocity. wh ich was lost in the Cartesian p erspectivalist construction, and the result was de-eroticization.
than the two-dimensional surface of the canvas, Cartesian perspectivalism is reali st in this sense. Naturalism, on the other
hand. is interested solely in surface-in descr ibing its varieties
of forms without redUCing them to any symboli cally meaningful
ity. Maybe there are two types of erotic relationship, the one
our belief that rea lity is depth . the other by simply show ing sur-
faces. Both modes are also complicitous with a cer tain kind of
scientific thought; indeed, science has gone back and forth be-
twee n such Cartesian and Baconian notions of where rea lity lies.
But I think you are right: the third alte rnative calls both of them
Hal Foster Could you say a little more about how, in your way of
thinking, Ca rtesian perspecti\"alism de-eroticizes?
Jay The argument is that perspecti\'al ism creates such a distance
26
21
Jonathan Crary
MODERNIZING
VISION
50
vision and visuality are wedded to models that emphasize a continuous and overarching Western visual tradition. Obviously at
times it is strategically necessary to map out and pose the outlines of a dominant Western speculative or scopic tradition of
vision that is continuous or in some sense effective, for instance,
from Plato to the present, or from the Quattrocento into the
twentieth century, or to whenever. My concern is not so much
to argue against these models, which have their own usefulness ,
but rather to insist there are some important discontinuities that
such hegemoniC constructions have prevented from coming into
view. The speCific account that interests me here, one that has
become almost ubiquitous and continues to be developed in a
variety of form s, is that the emergence of photography and cinema in the nineteenth century is a fulfillment of a long unfolding
of technolOgi ca l and/or ideolOgica l development in the West in
which the camera obscura evolves into the photographic camera.
Implied is that at each step in this evolution the same essential
presuppositions about an observer's relation to the world are in
place. One could name a dozen or more books on the history of
film or photography in whose first chapter appears the obligatory seventeenth-century engraving depicting a camera obsc\.l.ra,
as a kind of inaugural or incipi ent form on a long evolutionary
ladder.
These models of continuity are used in the service of both,
"
JODalhan Crary
for lack of better terms, the right and the left. On the one hand
MOOERN I Z I NG
V ISION
spective and photography are part of the same quest for a full y
nearly t wo hundred yea rs, from the late 1SODs to the end of the
who see, for example, the camera obscura and ci nema as bound
an observer.
What I want to do are essentially two related things: ( I) to
the 1820s and 1830s-when it was displaced by radically different notions of what an observer was and of what constituted
vision. So if later in the nineteenth century cinema or photography seem to invite formal comparisons 'w ith the camera obscura,
or if Marx, Freud, Bergson, and others refer to it, it is within a
social, cultural, and scientific milieu in which there had already
been a profound rupture with the conditions of vision pres up-
For at least two thousand years it has been known that, when
posited in science, philosophy, and in new techniques and practices of visio n. Here I want brieRy and very sketchily to indi cate
a few important features of this shift.
First, a bit more about the camera obscura in the seven-
30
"
Jonathon Crary
MOOE:RN1Z1NG
VISION
slightly different image with each eye, was never seriously ad-
and ana-
title.2' Thus he adds onto the observer's passive role a more au-
mind." The secure positioning of the self with this empty inte-
rior space was a precondition for knowing the outer world . Its
server who was subjected to an inAexi ble set of positions and di-
tion,
visions. The visual world could be appropriated by an autonomous subj ect but only as a private unitary consciousness de-
sory ev idence that depended in any way on the body was rejected in favor of the representations of this mechanical and
doubt.
Monocular, not binocular. A Si ngle eye, not two. Until the
nineteenth century, binocular disparity, the fact that we see a
the human body, a term whose exclusion was one of the founda-
"
tions of classical theories of vision and optics as I have just suggested. One of the most telling signs of the new centrality of the
33
Jonothon Crory
MOOERNIZING VISION
if Colours,
published in 1810,
cial not for its polemic with Newton over the composition of
the exper iences associated with the retinal afterimage and its
tween inner and outer upon which the camera obscura de-
single immanent plane. The bipolar setup vanishes. Thirdly, subjective vision is fou nd to be distinctly temporal , an unfolding of
recall some of its stra nge intensity and exhilaration. For what
was often involved was the experience of staring directly into
the sun, of sunl ight searing itself onto the body, palpably disturbing it into a proli feratio n of incandescent color. Three of the
most celebrated students of vision of this period went blind or
permanently damaged their eyesight by repeatedly staring at the
sun: David Brewster, who im'ented the kaleidoscope and stereoscope; Joseph Plateau, who studied the so-ca lled persistence of
vision; and Gustav Fechner, one of the founders of modern
quantitative psychology. Fechner's biography prOVides an account
of the almost addictive fasci nation with which he persisted in
this activity. At the same time in the late 1830s and early 1840s
we have the visual expression of these attempts in the late paintings of Turner, in whi ch there is that piercing confrontation of
"
The subj ecti"e vision that endowed th e obser\'er with a new perceptual autonomy and product i\,ity was Simultaneously the result
of the observe r having been made into a subject of new kno\\'Iedge, of new techniques of power. And the terrain on which
these two interrelated obsen'ers emerged in the ninetee nth ce ntury was the science of phYSiology. From 1820 through the
1840s it was "e ry unlike the
camej it had then no formal instit utional identity and came into
being as the accumulated work of disconnected indi\' iduals from
diverse branches of learning. In common was the exci tement
and wonderment at the hod)', which no\\' appeared like a new
continent to be mapped, ex plored, and mastered , with new re-
35
Jonathan Crary
M ODERNIZI N G
VISIO N
cesses and mechanisms uncovered for the first time. But the real
a mapping of the human eye as an opaque territory \\" ith "a rying
these exper iments were Josep h Plateau's calcu lat ion, in the
ences that stand for the rupture that Foucault poses between the
disjunct ion between perception and its object and suggested new
gUi lhem has noted , for the new sciences in the nineteenth cen-
to work. 7
Even in the early 1820s the study of afterimages quickly
Goethe had gene rally done, they were studied as part of a com-
was a ser ious one. But what de\eloped was a notion of \'ision
prehensive quantification of the irr itability of the eye. Researchers timed how long it took the eye to become fatigued,
that was funda mentally quantitati\'e, in which the terms constituting the relatio n bet\veen percepti on and obj ect became ab-
how long dilation and contraction of the pupil took, and mea-
images led to his mathematizatio n of perceptio n, in which he established a funct ional relation between stimulus and sensatio n.8
stimulatio n. Vision became studied in terms of abstract measurable regular it ies, and Fechner's famous equations were to be one
the location of the blind spot. Classical opticS, which had stud-
"
"
JonolhDn Crory
iology in the first half of the nineteenth century was the gradual
MODERNIZING
VISION
the loca lization of brain and nerve functions, and the distinction
"truth" about the body which some have linked to the so-called
Muller shows that a var iety of different causes will produce the
world that is the object of his or her Sight, only that, because the
But in the first major scientific theorization of the separation of the senses, there is a much more decisive break with the
classical obseryer; and what is at stake is not simply the heightening or iso lating of the optical but rather a notion of an ob-
"The sensati ons of light and co lor are produced wherever parts
senses, Muller makes a comprehensi,'e statement on the subdivision and specialization of the human sensory apparatus; his fame
"
Jonothon Crory
MOOANIZING
VISION
netic phenomena _
tial ca paCity co produce experience for the subject. ironi cally the
notions of the reflex arc and reflex action, which in the se,-en-
cal nature renders identities unstable and mobile, and for whom
sensations are interchangeable_ And remember, this is roughly
connecting nerves, enabling the eye to see sounds and the ear to
was not just a new form of epistemologica l skepti Cism about the
ception and its objects_ The issue was not just how does one
know what is real, but that new forms of the rea l ,,-ere being
drained of the mea nings it once had for a classical obse n -er, or
40
41
Jonathon Crary
MODERNIZIN G
in either di-
VISION
tions, we can send relearaphic dispatches, rinS bells, explode mines, de-
of excicement
whose immense legacy will be all the industries of the image and
Far from the spec ialization of the senses, Helmho ltz is explicit
carnal denSity of the ohsen 'er loomed so suddenly into "iew that
and of its capacity for multiple connections with other age ncies
t?! poSSibility
both
myths that vision was incorporeal, verid ical, and " realistic." But
era obscura, its linear optical system, its fixed positions, its cate-
gOri cal distinction between inside and outside, its identifi cation
Holes
I. John Lockc, An &SO)' Concernina Human Undemondina (New York: OO\cr Publications. 1959), \'0 1. 2, xi, 17.
2. Ibid., \'01. 2, ii i, I.
"
3. Richard
Philosophy and fhe Mirror '?f ,vature (Princ<'Ion : Princeton University Press, 1979), pp. 4950.
43
DISCUSSION
(Cambridge, Mass.: The M IT Press, 1970). See my " Techniques of the Obsen'er,"
6. Michel Foucault, Tht Orotr rf Thi"85 (New York: Pantheon Books, 1971),
Nartln Jav I found your paper "ery rich, but I want to pus h one
pp.3 18-320.
7. Georges Canguilhem, "Qu'est-ce que Ie psychologie," in his Erudts d'hisIQlu et
aspect of it - the binary opposition between "er idi ca l and nooveridi ca l Sight - more than you did. It might be argued that the
de philruophit des scitncts. 5th ed. (Paris: 1- Vrin, 1983), pp. 377-378.
8. See Gusta,' Fechner, Elemems rf P.>ychophpics, trans. Helmut E. Adler (New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1966).
10. See Jo hannes Miiller, Handbuch dCl Physiologic des Mcnschcn (Coblenz:
Holscher, 1838); Elements rf Physiologic, trans. William Haly (London: Taylor and
Walton, 1848).
II . See Ka rl Marx, The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts
pp. 140-141.
..
"
DISCUSSION
Crary
talk about just what a "concept of sexua lity" would rnean at that
Rose
tive vision in the 1830s and 1840s-that is, of the subj ect's
and its lack of coherent in ference-is this model of " nerves and
Crary
No.
transformations.
NDrman Bryson
Jacqueline Rose
its negative renderings, contain a theory of sex uality or of psychic life, or was it entirely confined to the realm of perception
Crary
scious from
J.
Rose
41
DISCUSSION
kinds of questions art history has usually asked. Rather than let
eJfeCl of a heterogeneous net'work of discursiye, soc ial, technologica l, and institutiona l relations_ There is no observer prior
to this continually shifting fieldi the noti on of an observer has
mea ning only in terms of the multiple conditions under which
he or she is pOSSible.
Hal Foster Jonathan, on the one hand , you say that in the nine-
or course, you
49
Rosolind Krauss
sees fas ter than any livi ng human," Michael said. " His vision is
so fast that he ca n see the stitching on the baseba ll as it comes
51
Rosalind Krauss
o"er the plate. Ninety miles an hour, but he sees the stitches. So
THE
1 M /PULSE TO SEE
he hits the ball right out of the park. That's why Frank thinks
he's a genius."
its import. But it was the early '60s and I was in the grip of a
into which one can look, can travel through, only with the
eye."l
moder nism.
If at this moment the image does not come across with the
since the g rip modernism has on our intuitions has begun for
which the eye and its object made contact with such amazing
the spher ical substrate of the ball. Vision had, as it were, been
cond ition with no before and no after. But in that very motion-
dom. And perhaps the pl easure for us at that moment in the '60s
pure se lf-knowledge.
through a baseball player was just this insistence on the seri ouspess of thi s very sense of play.
Now the beat, or pulse, or throb I want to focus o n works
52
"
medicine, anthropology, geology, La NalUre was particularly obsessed with optical de,ices - the fruit of recent psycho-
physio logical resea rch. IneV itably, in these pages, the de\'ices
important to this resear ch were lifted from the neutral confines
if rakillB
of the laboratory, to be incorporated into the condi tions of public spectacle, as the stereoscopic slide was visualized, for in-
popular cultu re. As was the case in many of the compone nts of
his collage noyels- this one as well as La Femme 100 ceres- the
magazine of
54
illustrations still make available, an experience that not only conjures up the effects of a given illusion but also exposes to view
the mea ns of this illusion's proc!.ucti on.2 So that the acknowledgement that goes on in these pages is that the spectator will
55
1910.
nist within and viewer outside the screen of his or her own vi-
the ste reoscop ica lly distanced stream, or the bobbing gest ures of
inside and ou tside the zootrope that Ernst appeals in this image.
From ou tside the revolving drum, peering thro ugh the slits
beat or pulse that cou rses through the zootropic field, the flicker
"
59
Rasillind Krau ss
THE
1M/ P ULS E T O
SEE
network of the body's tissue, this force wells up within the density and thi ckness of the carnal being, as, tied to the conditions
of figure and ground - the beat could , from the point of view of
a modern ist logiC, never be anything more than an interloper
the life of neryous tissue is the life of time, the alternating pulse
the temporal ca n ne\'e r disrupt the visual from within, but only
beat of desire - of a desire that makes and loses its object in one
and the same gesture, a gesture that is continua lly losing what it
centric. Yet the power of the works that interest me here -in
has found because it has only found what it has already lost.
tical logic depends. The beat itself is, in thi s sense, figural-but
62
To discover and theo rize this order is part of the task JeanLyotard set himself in the work Discours, HaUTe. There
II
Rosalind Krauss
he argued that below the "seen" order of the image (that is, the
consciwril:e illlermls
object bounded by its contour) and below the '\'isible but un-
rire distances
c1 discourse,
if rhe
constiw-
C?f representacion. 7
seen" order of the gestalt, which we could ca ll the formal cond itions of possibility of yisualizing the object, there lies the order
of the "i nYis ible," to which Lyotard giYcs the name marrix. 5
the realm of the figural altogether and into that of time. That it
does not do so will beco me eddent from the example of the matri x that Lyota rd su bmits to analvsis.
, 8
"A Child Is Being Beaten" was the description gi,'en to
Freud by se"cra l patients who located this as an obsess ional
erotic fantasy.'} As we know, all that analysis could draw
the particular patient Freud descr ibes was another, more primi-
sciolls, Lyotard remarks, "places are not panes exrra panes; the
mation was that here the child the father was beating was not
the patient herself, but another child; and as for the patient , she
abandoned. "6 But this condit ion of super impositi on and simulta-
them is the total im'isi bility of one of its key terms, one that lay
were, puts its erot ic spin on it, ilwesting it with both its exci te-
ment and its anxi ety. It is the phase that the patient nne r artic-
ulated but which Freud vcntri l0'l uized as " I am being beaten by
the father,"
rather, it courts the transformation of e,'erything into its opSo that its second feature is that the elements of the matrix "do
But it is preCisely from the perspecth'e of th at intermediary phase-the one between "the fath er beats the child" and "a
in the producti on of the fa ntasy become apparent: the transir is nor because it orises fro m the intelligible,
if opposirion
1r is its characrerisric
to ho\'e man)' places in one place, and rhey block together whal is nO!
compossible. This is the secrer
..
if che fisuraJ:
the transBression
cf the
6S
Rosalind Krauss
THE
! M/PUL.S!: TO SE E
can be mapped ; for it is this form that can represent the rhythmic oppositions between contact and rupture. But Lyotard cau-
che SIOlcmenlS one can dccermine there which orBanize ,he Bool (to
beal). {he source (the anal zone), and {he object (the father)
if one
'1\ ch ild is beina beaten" - whose apparenc coherence aJ/olI's ,he psychic life
1.0
if incompossible
"sentences. " These do not form a syscem bur a block. Thus ,he drive
(0
The matrix's invisibility is secured, then, by the very activity of the changes it produces, of the constant nonidentity of
that an "on" will always follow an "off," this pulse inyoh-cs the
constant threat of interruption. The anxiety that is part of the
affect of "A Child Is Being Beaten," combining with its erot ic
pleasure, arises preC isely from the force of rupture that is recurre nt in the rhythm of the figu re, a rupture whi ch is not experienced as the o nset of yet another contact, but as an absolute
break, that discontinuity without end that is death. Thus it is the
death driYe, operating below the pleasure principle, that transcodes this rhythm -as it beats with the alternation behveen
the sa me. And this leads Lyotard to ask how this identity is se-
beating of the gull 's wings within the imaginary space, the beat-
ing of all those mechanical devi ces through whi ch the real ap-
pears to burst into life fro m the shards of the inorgan ic and
deathly still , and the parti cular form of the pleasure connected
that is not a good form, not a good gesta lt. Rather, as he shows,
of form ."I!
This form . which is that of on/off on/ofT on/off, is the alter-
beat, seems mil es away from that wholly different high-art prac-
"
67
THE
1M / PULSE: TO
SEE
is to see the way they fun ctioned as the armatures for a peculi ar
kind of pictorial production: the spinning out o f hundreds of
"preparatory studies" through which the given compositi on
could be thought to be vari ed over the time of the artist's creative attention, sustain ing and tracki ng the bursts of his imaginative energy. This is of course the way these studi es have been
descr ibed in the unbearably sycophanti c literature on Picasso, as
in the following passage where Douglas Cooper discusses the
sketches leading toward one of Picasso's versio ns of the Dej euner
sur l'herbe:
DuritlB the three days from the 7th to the IOlh
himself up to a period
of incense creoUI'e
oils. Th ese draWings reveal e"en more chan chose which preceded them
the concentration
pearedljr correa ina himself and slauina o8ain . . .. Th inas are changed
around ever so sliahtly [as] an arm or a lea will be mOi'ed Jor ehe sake
fr om the time of the Renaissance, "So much for the actua l draw-
practiti oner of the theme and variation. Indeed we could say that
the who le last peri od of his productio n, which is to say his
work's final two decades, is structured around the \'ariations he
did on old-master paintings -the Femmes d'A lger, the Meniiias,
the Raphael and the Fornarina, the Dejeuner sur I'herbe. To speak of
its being structured around these older works is not just to ac-
page -incised into its soft, thi ck paper with sharp penci led
lines- embosses its co ntours into the page below it, that new
"
"
Rosalind Krauss
page etching its own configuration into the succeed ing level of
the sketchbook, and so on. The mode of production Picasso
adopts here is not that of the successive upsurge of renewed in spiration but that of the mechanically reproduced series, each
member of which sustains those minute variations that seem to
animate the group as a whole. But this animation is not on the
order of the old organic metaphor applied to compositional unities. It is an animation that relates to the production of cartoon
draWings. And indeed in the explorat ion of successive layers of
the seCJuence-as peeling them back one fro m the next we see
the tiny anatomi ca l shifts and swellings-we have the impression
not so much of watching an idea in de,'elopment as of observing
gesture in motion. Thus CJuite unexpectedly, we feel ourselves to
be in the presence of a Aipbook.
Much of the energy expended by Pi casso's admirers, when
speaking of these compositions based on the work of others, is
focused on extr icating the master from the toils of the original-insisting that he is not caught in the trap of the earlier
modeL "A painter of genius," Coope r assures us, "seems to have
the capacity to surrender voluntarily to inspirat ion deriving
from another work of art and then, escaping from it, find his
imaginati ve strength renewed and capable of projecting an image
of his own."]4 T his discussion of surrender and capture, even
though it is ahvays cl imaxed by reassurances about the artist's
freedom, betrays, I would say, a kind of anxiety about Pi casso's
enterprise in these works, even while it utterly mistakes the nature of the "su rrender" involved, Fo r the surrender of the artist's imagination, the place in which it is caught by being given
over to pleasure, is the functio n of a voluptuous passivity: the
mechanism of the se rial animation of the Aipboo k's beat,
Nowhere is this voluptuous succumbi ng to th e unconscious
productivity of the device clearer than in the sketchbook Picasso
made as a kind of climax towards which all the others were
leading, the sketchbook of August 2, 1962, which both Cooper
10
T HE !M / P U LS!!:
TO SEE
I'ahlo
1962, I;
Studks for
Dljcllncr sur /'hcrlx d'opris II-lone!. AIm"t':
8, 1961, II.
ARS N,Y.lSPADEM , 1988)
8,
"
Rosalind Krauss
enacted seemed to have trapped him , and he c reated the metaphors of this capture. In 1964 he made some ce ramic tiles on
Notes
1988).
3. The zootrope illustration Ernst uses here appears in an article on JeanEtienne Marcy's chronophotographic recording of a bird in Right, from which
She includes this re mark in a section of her book titl ed " Picasso,
th e Moralist."17
"Picasso, the Moralist" could be the subtitle of almost
e\'ery book on Pi casso over the past fifty years, bringing to us
Ihe Domain if" Discourse. cd . Program in Crit ical Theory, University of Ca lifornia
(In'inc: University of California Press).
o,'e r and oyer again the message of art's assurance about volun-
5.
p. 283.
6. Ibid . p. 338.
7. Ibid. , p. 339.
8. The analysis of this fantasy is conducted under the chapter head ing "Fiscou rs
Digure," ibid., pp. 327-354.
the variations on the old maste rs [Picasso] systematizes the process; the work is the e nsemble of the ca m'ases on the same
theme and each o ne is onl), a link of the whole, a suspended
moment of c reation," one of the writers on this phase of hi s
work quotes him saying that what interests him "is the movement of painting, the dramatic push of one vision to the nex t,
eyen if the push is not forced to its conclusion ... I have arrived
at the point where the movement of my thought interests me
more than my thought itself." 18 The passiv ity of this inte rest
comes out in another remark, where he says, " I make a hundred
studies in seve ral days , while another painter might spend a
hundred days on a Single picture. In co ntinuing. I will open
windows. I w ill get behind the canvas and perhaps something
w ill happe n." 19 "Quelque c hose," he says, "se produira." The
w indow wi ll open and something will happen before the eyes of
the pa.inter who is caught there, fascinated - like the Wolf Man
for whom the window opens onto that beyond whe re something
takes place, as it di splays for him the matrix-figu re of a scene in
9. Sigmund Freud. "A Child Is Being Beaten" (1919), in Sewolil), cmd Ihe I's)"chol.
08Y if" Lort. ed. Philip Rieff (New York: Collier Books, 1963).
10. Lyotard, pr. 338-339.
I I. Ibid., p. 349.
12. Ibid., p. 350.
13. Douglas Cooper, Pablo Picasso; Lt:s Dijeuners (New York: Harrv N. Abrams.
1963). p. 19.
14. Ibid., p. 23 .
15. The sketchbook is catalogued as no. 165, in Je suis Ie (a hicr: The SkClchbooks if"
Pablo Picasso, ed. Arnold Glimcher and Marc Glimcher (Boston: Atlantic Monthly
Press, 1986), where two images from this sequence are illustrated.
16. Robert Rosenblum, "Picasso and the Anatomy of Eroticism," in Swdles in
Erolic Arl. ed. Theodore Bowie and Cornelia V. Christenson (New York: Basic
Hooks, 1970), figu re 198.
17. Hele ne Parmelin, Picasso; The ArtiSI and His Modd (New York: Harry N.
Abrams, n.d.), p. 153.
18. Marie-Laure Hernaclac, " Picasso, 1953-1973: La peinture commc modele,"
in Le dernier Picasso (Paris: Musee National d'Art Mode rne, 1988), p. 49.
19. This remark is used. although to support a wholly different argument, by
Douglas Cooper, La IUjl!uflt:rJ. p. 33. It originally appeared in Roland I>cnrose,
Picasso (Paris: Aammarion), p. 47.
14
75
DISC U SSION
beat, did you consider neoimpress ionism and the possibility that
other was 5eurat. The Mondrian part I can understand, but the
Seu rat part has always mystified me-and you haye just explained it.
Krauss I assume you are referring to the temporality of the narrative reconstruction of the fantasy . Now Lyotard insists on the
very figurative compactness of this fantasy, which doesn't seem
thinks of StraYi nsky in part icular. One might argue that this is
the work of Lyotard between concepts like "discourse" and " fig-
of form?
ception and identity. And that's where words like pulse, throb,
etc., could then he pulled in the direction of concepts like that
16
71
GENERAL
DISCUSSION
what becomes of the piece of wax in the Meditation: all the information that one gets through the senses is fa lse, is never reinstated ___And even in the Optics, in his theory of perspect ive (as
Merleau -Ponty reads it in "The Eye and the Mind"), one doesn't
see anything at all , one judges. The mind may survey the brain
and then generate a perspective-effect-but not really by sig ht
so much as by mathemati cal judgment. In fact , Descartes even
uses the metaphor of the text: that one reads the brain.
Martin Jay This is an excellent question; it gives me an oppor-
78
"
GENERAL
D I SCUSSION
rhetori cal and lingui sti c exp lanations that take us away from a
is almost always done in the sen ' ice of a st rong notion of mental
am not sure I agree. The baroque did not possess our category
representation where onc sees (as he puts it) "with a clear men
tion (which Merl eau-f}onty, with his emphasis on the body and
Jay
sion for her own purposes is a valid one, but I think she has also
the end was to suggest that " madness" is neither good nor bad
"
81
fills these pages are endless sketches, and no one (as far as I
know) has mentioned that they are done in an animation-stand
manner where the trace of the image etched onto the page below is used to produce the next image and so on. That process
Jonathan Crary
in late Picasso, of
nineteenth century. Perhaps the Single most impo rtant achi e\'e-
Audience
Krauss
how the body was rendered continuous with its fi eld, making
classica l observer.
Audience
Rasalind Krau ss
82
rect position. Whereas the invisibility that arises within modernism is not so obv iously physical: it is tinged or affected by
"
GENERAL
DISCUSSION
Joy
me see what this might mean in these two cases. First with the
if
idea of anamorphi c vision, as is Lyotard in Discours, Fig ure (signifi cantly, both use the Holbein painting The A mbassadors, with
its anamorphi c skull , on their title pages). In Lacan's discussion
\ ",
85
NDrman Brvson
.".
1
EXPANDED FIELD
In this paper I wi ll be examining a term that has become important in contemporary discussions of painting and of visuality: Je
reBard, "the Gaze." First of all I will do what I can to trace the
concept of the Gaze as it passes from Sartre to Lacan, from
Sartre's description of the Gaze of the other in Being and Norh<
MormDn Bryson
aUy retained; the resu lt of that resid ual centering upon the
standpoint of the subject is that
is portrayed as menaced
watcher is in t urn watched: obspr \'ed of all obse n -ers, the \'iewe r
whi ch had conve rged on the center of the watcher's li\'ed hori-
zon t urn , re\'erse, and reconve rge on the space of the intruder
fro m the ho rizon towards the watcher in the park; now another
perspective ope ns up . and the lines of Right race away from the
himse lf sta nds at his own center of things, and draws towards
tange nt, not a ce nter, a vanishing point, not a \' iewing point, an
\vhi ch still colors Laca n's account of the subject's visual c.x peri-
Everything reconvergesJ
the Gaze and in the expanded field of fiin)'alo or " blan kness";
truder beco mes a kind of dra in which sucks in all of the former
plenitude, a black hole pull ing the scene away from the watcher
ture, the Raphael Sposalizio would ill ustrate its general for matio n
II
(Figure 2). In one sense all of the architectural spaces tu rn towards the viewer, displaying their adve rtent aspects to one who
the piazza turns towards a place where the viewer does not and
the vanishing pOi nt, All of the orthogonal lines across windows,
the occu pancy of the self as foc us of its visual kingdom, But in
par excellence, the viewer is not. The hnes of the piazza race away
peace is brought abruptly to an end: into the park and into the
..... C - .
sou rce of this strangely empowered look back? Laca n's account I
depends, not on the irruption of another persona l vie",'er but
the irruption, in the visual fi eld, of the Sign ifi er. When I look,
what I see is not simply light but intelligible form: the rays of
light are caught in a rets, a network of meanings, in the same .;.
way that flotsam is caught in the net of the fi shermen. For human beings collectively to orchestrate their visual expe rience
together it is required that each submit his or her retinal
experience to the socially agreed descr iption(s) of an intelligible eo
world . Vision is socia lized, and thereafter deviat ion from this social construction of visual reality can be measured and named,
va riously, as halluci nation , misrecognition, or "visual distur-
bance." Between the subj ect and the world is inse rted the entin,)
sum of discourses wru ch make up visuality, that cultural con-
.l-i
t--.,
Vt., I
struct, and make \" isuality different from vision, the notion of
91
Normon Bryson
unmediated vi sual experience. Between retina and world is inserted a screen of signs, a screen consisting of all the multiple
discourses on vision built into the social arena.
This screen costs a shadow: sometimes Lacan calls it a
scotoma , sometimes a stain. For when we look through the
screen, what we see is caught up in a network that comes to us
fr om the outside: mobile'-tesserae of signification , a mosaic that
-'
/'
'--vi
--
sight. Its terms are points of signifi cati on, chains of signifi ers,
Figure 3. Hans Holbein. The Amboswdon. 1533. London, National Galle ry of Art.
(Courtesy SNA RK/ Art Resource:, N.Y.)
)
if/"
Uf..,r
\
N'
speech. W hen I speak, I may try to fill each word I utter with
that, in the social arena where I speak, the words I utter have to
rain . The speake r did not create these, nor does the speaker
ence and art, fashioned in their social mili eu; but their visual
control them. In the same way, ...vhen I see, what I see is formed
field is cut across by someth ing they cannot master, the skull
whi ch casts itse lf Sideways across their space, through anamo rphosis (Figure 3).
"
"
HormDn Bryson
---
ti ons of o ntology, of subject and object, from within the srandpoint oj the subject. 6 Nishitani remarks that the Sartrean je is
( (,k'
E X PANDE D FIELD
the je whi ch does the doubting. For example, when the je full y
fines it, forces the speaker to recognize that the words she or he
to locate an authenti city of the self from whi ch ethi cal action
can emanate directly: when the forms of ethics pass into the
Psychoanalysis
is that exnever reach the locus of desire or fear. -/"-7__......_____
d ismantles them, but does not dismantle the je, the self which
hearted: Sartre places the uni'erse around the self on the field
across the visual domain. Vision unfolds to the side of, in tan-
of nihility. yet the self gathers force there, and uses the blank-
gent to, the field of the other. And to that form of seeing Lacan
the Gaze.
III
I \vant now to pass from the current of thought of Sartre and
Lacan to another current, the one which passes from Europe
into Japan by way of the most influential Japanese philosopher of
the twenti eth ce ntury, Nishida , and which passes on from
Nishida to the writer who, at the level of translation , is much
short of the stage at which this menace to the subject would pass
94
"
"". ,
Norman Bryson
i:-J subj ect. Sartre's watcher is objectified by the other's gaze, just as
place and one place onl),. It ex ists (ii ) independently of the objects around it, whose ex istence the subject is free to doubt,
without that doubt entailing that the subject come to doubt its
is as though both the watcher in the park and the intruder who
olVn ex istence. And the subject (iii) rema ins itself despite trans-
disturbs its peace were suppli ed with opt ical frames- binocu-
the entity whi ch the subject shares with its object world , the
0,')
ter, around which the obj ect world clusters or co nverges as the
subj ect can su n';l'c such a gaze, and survive more strongly for be-
ing exposed to thjs "alterity" which may menace the subject but
whi ch does not in any sense actually dissok e or annihi late it.
thi s anthropocentric subj ect, but his critique differs from theirs
" rad ica l imperma nence," "blankness," and "ni hility."ij The en-
wider frame.
IV
Like
makes a cue from the fie ld and immobilizes the cut within the
and fix ity. The subject, from its position of center amidst
not be cut anywhere. If the obj ect is, say, a Aower, its existence
world of things, looks out on its objects and percei" es them _as
separate entie ies. That is, obj ects manjfest to the subject as com-
plete beings hayi ng (i) stable location in a si ngle place; (ii) inde-
at no point does the object come under an arrest that would im-
symmetrical with them. Like them, the ubject exists (i) in one
.+
..
/
/(
,)
91
(.
,M,
Norman Bryson
THE
GAZE IN
THE
form of the Rower, and the Rower is already becoming dust. The
nate his text in the same way that the parables of the invaded
park and the Roati ng sardine can illuminate the texts of Sartre
and Lacan (if one "gets" the aphorisms one has g rasped the core
argument). T\vo key aphorisms are: "fire does not burn nre ,"
and " water does not wash water."9
It would seem to be the essence of fire that it burns; if it
does not burn it is not fire. Yet fire cannot burn itself; it cannot
it lacks all the prope rties of the entity. Rather, the word is co n-
burned, but the one thing fi re cannot burn is fire. For nrc to be
fi eld, in this case all the other words in the language. In the
rounding fie ld, and o nly when its roots travel into its surround
wash e\erything that exists, and if it does not wash it is not wa-
ter. Yet the one thing water ca nnot wash is water: it ca nnot exist
inside the self-enclosure of the entity, circumscri bed by a boundary or outline, in a Single location that excl udes the surrounding
fie ld. For water to be water it must percolate through that
boundary and infi ltrate the entity's dry surrou_nd , enter into the
not the meani ng of that one word, but other v.'Ords, synonyms.
mid -sentence means until one reaches the end of the sentence,
and that sentence in turn changes as one moves to the next sen-
..
Normon Bryson
not be cut out of the tota l surround, Singled out, and be made to
represent the totality of the viewer's being. What enabled that
Nishitani's ana lysis of vision works in terms that are very dif. ferent from those of Sartre. In Sartre, the object is what appears
which appears within the framing apparatus- perspective, pic( ture frame, camera- exists: the viewer on one side, the object
r;.'t.
,; .,
.
( framing which always produces an obj ect for a subject and a sub-
that wraps its way round behind the spectator's head and behind
found to exist, not at the other end of tunnel vision, but in the
total field of the universa l remainder. The object opens out om-
sides.
fi nes itself negati vely and diacritically. The viewer who looks out
at the object sees only one angle of the global fi eld where the
sphere of light spreading out from the object into the global
terms of the
envelopment.
In the same way that Nisrutani takes the object away fro m
the framing apparatus-the pi cture fram e, the legitimate constructi on-a nd places it on the expanded field of blanllless or
or the
viewer still has his or her eyes open: the uni verse does not disappear. But the viewe r is now a being that ex ists through the ex istence of everything else in the universal fie ld, and not just as
the subj ect-effect of the object that appears at the end of the
\iewing tunnel. Let us say that the viewer's eyes look out at a
segment of the total field that surrounds the viewer omnidirectiona ll),. This small secti on (or cone, or pyramid) is in fact only a
fr action of the field of unive rsal surrou nd i this partia l view can100
101
E X PANDED F'IEL.D
Norman Brysan
E:XPANOEO
F'IE:LO
faster than the hand can control it, and to areas of the paper or
breaks fre e from the subject who controls it, and from scriptural form. The framework of script and calligrapher is cut
emptiness that subtends the entit ies of scribe and script and an-
"---
'-
--- --
Lacan's de-
it is in the irruption of the symboliC order and. of sigthat human subjectivity is precipitated, and slllce the
Laca n says far more about the subject's initial inse rtion into the
symboli C than about the subject's subsequent life there. That
VI
In Lacan, something cuts across the space of sight and darkens
i t: the Gaze. And in the Rying of the inks there is an entry into
o-
the visual field of something totally dark and opaque that stands
for absolute alterity: the otherness of the rest of the universe: a
surrounding field that decenters the subject and the subject's vi-
the subj ect's initial formation (in childhood). Yet Lacan's descriptions tend to privilege the genet ic and formati\'c moment, not
the long and diverse elaborations of adult life. This conce ntra-
may indicate ways in which Sartre and Lacan still operate from
'04
105
Norman Bryson
THE
G A ZE IN THE
EXf'ANOI!:O I"IEL.O
eye and pure form. From these and related activiti es has
way of the skull in the Holbein, and the flung ink in e h 'a n. T he
skull appears in and as the protest of the Imaginary aga inst its
own decentering, as the menace of death; the flung ink fig ures
instead the subject's acceptance of decentering. The skull represents the subject's fear of disso lution, the flung ink embodies in -
by signs; and that these signs are soc ially co nstructed, as are we.
"[he rea l discovery here is that things we took to be pri -
a field of radical emptiness where the last rema ins of the coaita
are rendered null and void, literally cast out on empty air. What
gives the Gaze. Let us say that it is a bit easier, si nce Lacan, to
ica lly speci fic fashion. If so, then it is that analysis which itse lf
Laca n seems to me, at least , to view the subj ect's entry into the
\voma n might well experi ence ter ror. And what of the begga r in
under the gaze of colo nialism? Terror comes from the way that
Sight is constructed in relation to power, and powerlessness. To
'06
'01
\(_ \:
Norman Bryson
I
D I S C USSION
Norman Bryson
of them, of
\ I
alit),. And also of how power disguises and conceals its opera---"
and Nishi tani . The illustrations I used are simply diagrams of ar-
guments; I'm not mak ing historical claims about the East and the
West and their traditi ons. But since Sartre uses the visua l sce-
( I. Jean- Paul Sartre, Beina and NOl hinBness. trans. Hazel E. Barnes (New York:
Philosoph ical Library, 1956), Chapter I, section 4, pp. 254- 302.
2. Jac'Iues Lacan, The Faur Fundamental Cancepu
j\lain Miller, trans. Alan Sheridan (Ne\\" York and Londo n: W . W. Norton,
1978), sect ions 6-9.
3. Ibid., p. 95.
4. Ibid., pp. 85-90.
5. Works by Kitar6 Nish ida (1870-1945) al'ailable in English include: Intd/iBibiliry and ,he Philasoph;'
Rosalind Krauss
if NorhinBness.
Printing Bureau of the Japanese GOI"Cr nme nt, 1960); and Lasr Wriring': NorhinBnc.lS and rhe ReliBious t-\i1rldl'ic lI". trans. David A. Dilworth (Honolulu: University of
c! Perception
that \'ision is
Hawaii Press, 1987). On the rele\'ance of Nishida in the context of poststr uc-
turalism and postmodernism, see W illiam Haver, "The Body of this Death:
te rit)' in Nish ida-Philosophy and Post -Marxism ," Ph.D. d isser tation, Uni\'ersity
or Chicago, 1987.
'f..... 6.
Kciji Nishitani (b. 19 14), ReliBion ond ;Vorhin8ness, trans. Jan Van Bragt
9. Ibid., p. 116.
Bryson
if
Pont)', but the practi ce of Aung- in k painting is ob\' iously different from that of Cezanne. The emphasis is far more on a
radi cal decenter ing of the subject , and I think th at points to a
difference bet wee n Nishitani and Merleau- Ponty, although in the
thematic of the invisible the), are close. In Merleau - Ponty there
seems to be not a nI), a desocia lization of the body but also a
simplification of the bod),- a simplification because it is st ill regarded as the center fro m whi ch one looks out onto the world ,
and it is exactly this center that is cast out in Nishi tan i.
108
".
OISCUSSIO N
very important transit io nal figure between Sar tre and Lacan , not
talks about the body. In his last writings he actually cites Lacan
(" the unco nscious is structured like a language"), and there are
such harmony of the body in its world is preC isely what isn't
tion with the West from the outside-it might have seemed as
But Merleau-Po nty also introduces elem ents whi ch lead us to-
not the pure gesturalit), of the Japanese work but rather the re-
Bryson
Marlin Jay
"'
sou rce of a false notion of the integrity of the ego does reAect a
general hostility to the gaze as a source of ideological notio ns of
selfhood. But in the later Four Fundamental Concepts
if Psycho-
DISCUSSION
to amid making it black and white. But I think that Lacan must
be understood largely in the tradition critica l of vision. Althusser, too , when he talks about ideology as produced by the
think they arc all part of a larger story. Lacan gets it, as
which Pollock drips paint: the drips overlay one another to pro-
YO LI
Jacqueline Rose
Western and a non -Western tradition , and then you said you
YOLI
to ha\'c cho-
abi lity of the image as the immediacy and ava ilability of the body
of the woman.
Bryson
of what images could gi\'e the best form to these arguments. There
Crary
If a Franz Kline had been shown. what would one ha\-e sa id?
Bryson
There is an esse ntial difference between Po llock and the Rung ink
112
Jacqueline Rose
SE X UALITY AND
SOME
VISION :
QUESTIONS
Jacqueline Rose
biOlJrophy
td' 0
that metaphor, holds onto it preCisely in the face of its histori cal
demise (the feminist version of the celebration of the end of all
also paranoid, and the image for this too is one of distortion in
visual space: "the glass skin repels the city outside; a repulsion
and thereby ach ieve a certain aggressivity and power over the
'--
this absorbing of sexuality into the visual field closes off the
ment or an epoch when vision was direct and possible, when the
ate as the form of postmodern subject ivity, but they have been
man subjects who peopled it. To stress this can be seen as the
tates the disorder into place. This is in one se nse an old story,
sion at the very same moment that the sexual dimension is also
but it might nonetheless be worth noting the form of its repetition here . Jameso n states quite explicitly that he .is detaching the
sentat ion there is, perhaps more cruCially, the relegation of psy-
ing idea lization of psychic life. The use of the psyche as meta-
of both
nal metaphor from the account, For a feminism whi ch has seen
116
the psychiC and the sexual, that is, a loss of the psychic
117
Jacqueline Rose
haps be contrasted with the configuration and delineation of fantasy positions which Rosalind Krauss, follO Wing Lyotard, also
described). For this realm of the not-yet symbolically coded, of
representation which is not yet, or no longer wishes to be, tied
to the centering of subject and vision, is the place of the partobject, the projectile, the place of splitting, not only of the ego,
but also of the drives -all dimensions which, as Norman Bryson
has argued, are indeed general characteristics of the visual in
Lacan, if not also in Freud, but which start to fade from the image when it is in the name of a radical other ing of vision that
the reference to psychoanalysis is being deployed. The phYSiol ogy of vision that Jonathan Crary so graphically describes may
well be an attempt to give a figure to that space, but I would
still suggest that in so doing it refines-can only refine - some
of the most diffi cult and unmanageable, for theory as for subjects, aspects of the psychi c dynamiC it evokes. What body are
with here? What desire? (Compare again the terms of
taday's discussion - "voluptuous succumbing," " desire as erotic
and metaphysical ," " a charge and discharge of pleasure," "the
body as thickness.")
Another way of putting this would be to say that Jameso n
pushes back into a psychOSiS of the visua l field, whereas these
other accounts remain more in the framework of a neurosis of
vision. In the first, therefore , aggressivity without the sexual
structure; in the seco nd, the form of desire and its othering, but
without aggressivity and its defense.
Furthermore, how much can we invest in those concepts
when we noti ce the forms of sexual differentiation in which they
so readily and repeatedly find themselves caught? Thus in Tradi-
"'
Jacqueline Rose
SOME OUI!:STIONS
tation and its doubling on a girl trapped within its space, or the
with a disrupted and disrupting body and desire. But today that
and then the fundamental copulatory pair -ar e each brilliant ex-
creasing force against, and defin it ion of, "terro rism," the assau lt
on telev ision vio lence) and desired (the Falklands war and the
quest ion of the unconscious and polit ics si nce nobody would, I
and the visual image may have got caught in the terms of its own
loid of our culture ("sex and violence" being its chief objects of
concern), then we have recently pr ivileged-sought indeed to
more general shi ft taking place in the way that psychoa nalysis
first over the second. For good reason, since violence does not
ideology of mastery. for which the visua l field was seen as the
present itself for polit ica l asserti on and mobil ization in the same
\Nay. It might also be the case that this problem simply reveals
the limits of any psychopo liti cs based on an assertion of the un conscious -or on the unconscious as counterasserti on -as such.
In relation to visual analysis, the unconsc ious of the image, or
what has come to be read as the unconscious of the image, has
yet to take on the more negative and troubling under face of its
own category of desire.
I have already mentioned that both of the theories I have
concentrated on here-the postmodern " loss" of subjectivity as
the end of political space, and the politics of visual space as the
very same demise or self-undOing of the subject-recognize a
fu ndamenta l loss of innocence, or of reference, in relat ion to the
121
Jatquellne Rose
as the loss of a needed integration of selfhood or as the fundamental misrecogn itio n of the subject who persists in his cOIl\'ic-
garde film, and it is what I want to end with today.8 (We should
makers and theorists in relation to the idea of a polit ica lly avant-
note here the e,ent organ ized by Y,onne Rainer, which took
was the set of analogies and differences in the way the problem
the ego any more than its opposite, as if the one could in fact
ha,e "subjects such that the ego he absent," his work must
If there ca n be no ideal ization of the unconscious, therefore, it is not just because of the negative of its contents, but be-
itself. Yet, for more than reasons of the impasse to which this
has led, feminist and other form s of political cinema have not
nition and cri tiqu e. This means that femin ist fi lmmak ing is
Western subject. But that unconscious? Or that body " in all its
fetishist's cinema, "':,I must, as I read it, deploy the very fo rms of
persa l of su bjectiv ity across visual space ('..vhile paranoia then be-
cor ru pt. The problem is brilliantly focused by Peter Gida l's film
which Peter Gida l is best known and then doubles it over, at the
therefore, can we take one half of that dial ect ic in the search for
122
123
Jocqllellne Rose
.... ND VISIO N :
SOME QUEST10NS
race. It was argued by Paul Gilroy, opening the event , that the
current forms of racism base themselves on cultural rather than
takes up these two issues, and then mixes the surreal and verite
and yet it was also argued that the imperial image most urgently
she interrogates both the spectator and the male comrade who is
tion of this image was the basis of the slide-tape SiBns if Empire
made by the Black Audi o Film Co llective, one of the films shown
quite expli citly that deco nstruction ; and then the documenting
as domestic and soc ial detail of urban black life, the politics of
ference, and yet rests on that difference as the only place fro m
which it can construct polit ical solidarities, the only place from
if Remembrance,
fashi oning of the young girl s. This is a film whose political forc e
stems from this inmixing, from its refusal to settle the question
if Empire or in
story to be told alo ngSide the radical distrust and undOing of the
retrieve.
fo rms of antagonism within the visual field of the story or narrative as such. It seems that the sexual and politica l identification,
above all else. To suggest that would be to disavow the fact that
priate these films, but rather to note how the introduction of ra-
124
125
Jacqueline Rose
ing Norman Bryson's terms, tradition and des ire. I also wanted
to end with this because of where I am talking, the Dia Art
Foundation, which seemed an appropriate place to introduce
these films. 10
To sum up the t ..vo points which I have been arguing today:
First, that the use of psychoanalysis in relation to the visual image is in danger of evacuating what is most psycbkally difficult
from the concept of the unconscious and desire. This seems especially important insofar as it is these very aspects of the un conscious which seem to be mobili zed by the worst of right..."ing fantasy in our wider contemporary political life. Secondly,
that this is the precondition of a reification of the unconscious
6. Roland Barthes,
York: Hill and Wang, 1972).
p. 287. The quote continues: "It is an ideal of analysis which of course remains
virtual. There is ne\'er a subject, a fully realized subject, without ego, even
though it is what one should aim to obtain of the subject in analysis" (translated
by Sylvana Tomaselli, The E80 in Freud 's Theory ond in rhe Technique cif Ps),choonalysis
[Cambridge: Cambridge Uni\'ersity Press, 1987]).
8. The papers and discussions at this event ha\'e been published in a special issue of Undercur, entitled Cu/ruro/ldemiries (no. 17, Spring 1988), edited by Nina
Danino and published by the London Filmmakers' Coop.
9. Felicity Collins, "A (Sad) Song of the Body," Screen 28, no. I (Winter 1987):
80 (special issue entitled deconsrfuclina 'ddforence'),
10. For other discussions of Passion cif Remembrance and of the work of Sankofa,
sec "An Inten'iew with Martina Attille and Isaac Julien of Sankofa," in )oun8,
Black, ond British: A MonOSraph on Ihe Work qf SankaJo Film ond Video Callecril'e and
BJack Audio Film Colleelit'e, by Coco Fusco (Buffalo, N.Y.: Hallwalls, 1988).
Notes
I. Fredric Jameson, " Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism,"
2. Fredric jameson, "Postmodernism and Consumer Society," in The AmiAestheric: &says on POl/ modern Cu/rure, cd. Hal Foster (Port Townsend, Wash.: Ba),
( 4. See Jacqueline Rose, "'The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat' or 'A
Wife Is Like an Umbrella' -Fantasies of the Modern and Post modern, " in Identity: The Reol
\ 6, 1988); also In UnirersoJ Abandon? The Polirics qf Posrmodernism. ed. Andrew Ross
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988).
"
'
5. Norman Bryson, Tradition and Desire: From Dat'id ro Delacroix (Cambridge: Cambridge Unh'ersity Press, 1984), pp. 136-137.
d'
11.
121
D I S C U S SI ON
War, the Falk lands, capital punishment, the Bomb, South Afri ca,
of medium subjecti vity might be; rather, I want to ask where are
this, though it is clear that with Deleuze and Guattari and others
the Aashpoints of the soc ial and the psychi c that are operating
mirror stage, you take it out of the contex t of the paper next to
which are neither utopian and filled with a plenitude that is easy
to dismiss nor somehow equivalent to all the types of non-
possible because that other half of his argument has been dis-
make rusc riminati ons. We ought not fall into the either-or of a
I think you are pointing to some very deep rhetor-
Norman Bryson
This is a g reat task, and I don't have any so luti ons. But I won-
make them idyll iC and to take all of the diffi culty out of them.
ical tropes that cut across all of us. One of these has to do with
And a re\'ised, neutralized unco nscious is one of the idylliC fi ctions that result. To what ex tent would a revival of Merleau-
for two reaso ns: one is because there is a ce rtain feminist inter-
est in pre-Oedipal forms of sexual ity as that whi ch we can juxI didn't th ink people wanted to red ve hi m. I thought the
Rose
idea was that at the "ery point where one thinks one has got
128
".
GENERAL
DISCUSSION
/"
It is the
)
-l
ifests distinctions within itself which the t ypology can then es-
outside the speci fic proposals that you made; it lies instead in
example, to fold these different ideas back into our own Western
tradition, to define objects w ithin this traditi on and to understand the ways in whi ch t he elements represented by this typology play themsel\'es out in anyone of them. It is not necessary,
it seems to me, to have gone to a Japanese Heideggeri an to disco\'er ideas which are finally quite Western ideas, or whic h are
not altogether d iffe rent from quite classical Western types of
thinking immane nce, for exam ple.
Let me then ask these two questions. First of all, would
you like to comment on the historical antecedents of this typology already at work in Western painting, espeCially modernist
painting? One could, for example, elaborate a theory of modernity based on this t ypology. It would consist in showing the shi ft
in emphasiS or mixture that one finds in t he twentieth century
as different from the mixtures one finds be fore the n. It seems to
me that in some such approach one might find - to address your
question, Jacqueline-a n alternati\'e to the search for alterna-
'"
J,
131
G ENERAL
OISCUSSION
tives, not from outside but, precisely with the aid of this applied
typology, from within, where one can see the field as constantly
li ke, shifts and changes and mixtures within some kind of mod-
vis ion, each with their own correlative space, that you wanted to
distinguish,
Bryson
Lacan, Nishitani .
Kwinter
find analogies, but Ch 'an is an independent philosophical t radi tion in its or igins,
Bryson
t ion-and here a step not "ery far outs ide because those conKwinler
sophical tradition,
Bryson
Audience
don't see where I'm mobili zing typologies that wou ld make one
mi cro-examples or large total iti es, It's not an argument that has
Kwinter
132
sistance that wc ha,'e to the O riental obj ect that was shown is
CONTRIBUTORS
ind icat ive of a whole theater of magic that we get into when we
dea l \vith the other-and this other is not char much other of
an other.
Norman Bryson is the author of three books, Word and Imoae (Cambridge UniYersity Press), Vision and Paint ina: The Laaic
cf the Gaze
of the
of Peler
of Children's
of Vision (Verso), and editor (with
'"
'"