s estimation risks insanity (Ruskin and Nietzsche come to mind). The mental picture or vision implied by pure visuality collapses antinomies in the same fashion that Walter Benjamin considered the photographic image "dialectics at a standstill."12 Sublimities of the image are, therefore, like linguistic shadings, "borrowings" (subtle and often frightful), and as often as not connote, per Louis Marin, the arcanian realm of the tomb (the inside/darkness/subjectivity/Caravaggio) versus anything arcadian (the outside/light/objectivity/ Poussin).13 DRAFT 07/19/10 4 Yet all of this regards "reading," as images still must be read as perilous, compressed critical moments. For Gerhard Richter, painting is a series of negations, a negative dialectics of seeing, even when he is painting as a photographer, and most especially when he is painting over photographs (ca. 1989). The actually existing Sils Maria, and the series of photographs (landscapes) effaced by paint, double the elemental force in mimesis bringing into play the very reason Nietzsche, in 1879, found in the mountains and lake in the Upper Engadine of Switzerland the perfect embodiment of a supernal "limit": "the same direct exposure to the laws of Nature that he had experienced in his artistic creation to the basic principles of morals and aesthetics; these laws completely reshaped his concepts, forms, images, and comparisons."14 The Eternal Return of the Same is the supernal limit par excellence. The force of visual knowledge has repeatedly been eclipsed by exegetical exercises in criticism and literal readings of the image. The often deranged discursivity of such exercises did not begin with Roland Barthes. Yet New Criticism and its reliance on formal properties of the artwork in/for itself in many ways sponsored the antithetical readings that indulged the reader‟s subjectivity. New Criticism (an AngloAmerican school of literary criticism), from the 1940s to the 1970s, relied on a form of formalism that bracketed subjects given over to unitary disciplines (for example, history and politics), a process that in turn contaminated art criticism. Suffice to say the reaction came in the 1970s and 1980s in the irruptive form of the return of the repressed (contingency and the abject subject). This New Historicism in turn, and
s estimation risks insanity (Ruskin and Nietzsche come to mind). The genial movie or vision implied by arrant visuality break down antinomies in the same manner that Walter Benjamin considered the photographic image " dialectics at a deadlock. "12 Sublimities of the image are, consequently, like linguistic shadings, " borrowings " (subtle and often atrocious), and as often as not connote, per Louis Marin, the arcanian realm of the tomb (the inside / darkness / subjectivity / Caravaggio) versus anything arcadian (the external / light / objectivity/ Poussin).13 DRAFT 07/19/10 4 Yet all of this involve " reading, " as images still must be take as perilous, compressed critical moments. For Gerhard Richter, painting is a series of negation, a negative dialectics of seeing, even when he is painting as a photographer, and most especially when he is painting over photographs (ca. 1989). The actually existing Sils Maria, and the series of photographs (landscapes) effaced by paint, double the elemental force in mimesis bringing into gambling the very reason Nietzsche, in 1879, discover in the batch and lake in the Upper Engadine of Switzerland the perfect embodiment of a celestial " limit ": " the like direct exposure to the laws of Nature that he had have in his artistic creation to the basic principles of morals and aesthetic; these laws completely reshaped his concepts, forms, images, and comparisons. "14 The Eternal Return of the like is the celestial terminus ad quem par excellence. The force of visual knowledge has repeatedly been eclipsed by exegetical exercises in criticism and literal reading of the image. The often deranged discursivity of such exercises did not get down with Roland Barthes. Yet New Criticism and its reliance on formal properties of the artwork in / for itself in many ways sponsored the antithetical reading that indulged the reader‟s subjectivity. New Criticism (an AngloAmerican school of literary criticism), from the forties to the 1970s, relied on a form of formalism that bracketed subject given over to unitary disciplines (for example, history and politics), a process that in bend contaminated artwork criticism. Suffice to say the reaction came in the 1970s and eighties in the irruptive form of the return of the repressed (contingency and the abject discipline). This New Historicism in turn, and
s edtimation risks insanity (Ruskin and Niejzwche cmme to mind). Thd mental picture or vision ilpoied vy pure visuality collxpses antpnomies ib tht same fashion thef Waltev Bennwmin ronsidered the khotographic image "dialecthcr ct a standstill."12 Sublimities of the iiage arr, hherefore, like linbtistjb whadings, "borrowings" (subtle ans often frightful), anc as often as not connote, oer Pouis Marin, the arfanian realn of rhe tomb (the inside/darkness/subjectjvity/Caravaggio) versus anything arcabian (the oujsjdf/night/objectmvity/ Ioussin).13 DRAFT 07/19/10 4 Yet anl of tnis regards "resdiig," aw images still must bx read as perilous, cjmpressed cxitical moments. For Gwryard Tichtar, pxuntkng ix z serifs kf negatiohs, a negatice dialectics of setind, even when he is payneing as a photographer, and most especianly when he is painting ovwr photographs (ca. 1989). Thg actually existing Sils Maria, and the series of photographv (lanvszapts) effazwd by paint, double the elemental force in mimesya nrpnging into play bhe very reason Nirtxsvre, in 1879, found kn the mohntains and lake ij the Ukper Ebgadine os Swotzerland the perfect embodument of a slperbal "limit": "the same direct expusurg to tne laws of Nature that ke had experiencef in his zftistic creation to tve basic principles of morwls and axsthecics; there lsws coipletely rfshapcg his concepts, forls, imcges, dnd comparlsons."14 The Eternal Return of the Same is the sopesnan limit 'ar exgellence. The fowce of visual lnowledye has repeatedlj been ecnipsed by evegetical exesfises in crivicism anq lirerao readives of the imagr. The oftvn derqnged discursivity of auch exercises bnd not begin with Rouanq Hacthes. Fet New Crithciso avc its reliance ok furmak properties of the drtwkrk in/for itself im iany wayw sponsowed the antitnetical readings tjat iidulgev the teaqer‟s subjectivity. New Criticisj (an AngllAmcrican school of oiterary cricicism), from the 1940s to the 1970s, relied on a firm of formalism jhat bracketed subjecjs niven over tp unieary dischplines (for example, yistory and politlcs), a process that in furn cmntamlnated art criticism. Suffice to say the reaction came in the 1970s and 1980s in tye irrnpeive form or thr retlrn pf the repcersed (contingency and the abject subject). This Nex Historichsi in turn, and
s estimation risks insanity (Ruskin and Nietzsche mind). mental picture vision implied by the fashion that Walter considered the photographic "dialectics at a standstill."12 Sublimities of image are, therefore, like linguistic shadings, "borrowings" (subtle and often frightful), and as as not connote, per Louis Marin, the arcanian realm of the tomb (the versus arcadian outside/light/objectivity/ DRAFT 07/19/10 4 Yet all of this regards "reading," as images still must be read as compressed critical moments. For Gerhard Richter, painting is series of negations, a dialectics of seeing, even when is as a and especially he is painting photographs (ca. 1989). The actually existing Sils Maria, and the series of photographs (landscapes) effaced by paint, the elemental mimesis bringing play very Nietzsche, in 1879, the mountains and lake in the Switzerland the perfect embodiment of a supernal "limit": same direct to the laws of Nature that had experienced in his artistic creation to the principles of morals and aesthetics; these laws completely reshaped his concepts, forms, images, and comparisons."14 Return of the Same the supernal limit excellence. force visual has repeatedly eclipsed by exegetical exercises in criticism and literal readings of the The often deranged discursivity of such exercises did not begin Barthes. New Criticism and reliance on formal properties the in/for itself in many the readings reader‟s New (an AngloAmerican school of criticism), from the 1940s to 1970s, relied on a subjects given over to unitary disciplines (for example, and politics), a process that in turn art criticism. Suffice to say the reaction came in the 1970s and in the of the return of the repressed (contingency and abject subject). This New in turn, and
s estimation risks insanity (RUskin and NiEtzscHe cOme To Mind). the mEntal picture or VIsioN implied by pure visualitY collApSEs anTInOmies In the saME fASHioN tHaT WaLtER BEnjamIn cOnsiderEd the photoGraPhIc image "dialeCTiCs at a standStiLl."12 SublimitieS of The imaGe Are, THerefOre, Like lInguisTIc shadIngs, "borroWiNGs" (subtLE and oftEN FrIghtFul), and as often as noT CoNNote, per Louis MaRin, the ArCAnIAN reAlm Of the tomb (tHe InsidE/DarknesS/SuBJECtiVIty/Caravaggio) Versus anythINg aRcadiaN (tHe oUTside/lIght/oBjECtiVity/ Poussin).13 dRAFt 07/19/10 4 Yet all of This reGArds "reaDIng," as imAges stIll MusT be rEAd As PerIlOUs, cOMpResSEd cRitical mOmEnTs. For gerhARD rIchtEr, pAintIng is A series of negaTioNs, a nEGatIve diAlectIcs oF sEeing, Even whEn he iS pAinting as a photoGrapHer, and mosT esPeCiaLlY when HE is paiNtiNg oVer photOgraphs (CA. 1989). ThE aCTUAlLy existing Sils MariA, aND ThE series oF photoGRaPhS (LandscapEs) EffAced BY Paint, DoubLE tHe elemenTal forCE iN mImesis bRiNging iNtO plAy tHe verY ReasOn NietZsche, in 1879, fOund iN The mountains anD Lake in the UppeR enGADiNE of SWitZerland the pErfeCT embOdimENt Of a SUpernAl "limIt": "THe SAme direct exposure to ThE laws oF NatuRe that he had exPerienced iN HIS artistiC creATiON to the basic priNciplEs of morals ANd aestheTics; tHese laws CompletelY REshaped hIs cOncEptS, foRMS, iMages, and compaRISons."14 thE EternaL ReTurn of tHe SAme Is tHe sUpErnal limiT par exceLlEnCe. thE foRce of VIsual knoWlEdgE hAs rEpeatEDly beeN ecliPsed By ExEGetIcal exeRCiSES in cRiTiCism And LiTeral ReadINgs Of the imAge. The oftEn dERangEd DiScursivIty of such exerCiSes did not bEgIn wIth RolAND Barthes. yet New Criticism and its reLIance on ForMal prOperTies of the ArtWork in/For ITself iN many wAys spOnSorED The anTIThEtiCaL readings tHAT inDulgeD tHe reAder‟s suBjectivity. New CritiCIsm (An AngloAmericAn sChooL OF lIteRArY CriTiCIsm), FROm the 1940s to the 1970s, relIed on a form Of FOrMalism that BRacKeTed subjEcts givEn oveR To unitaRy disciplInes (for exAmPle, hISTorY and politiCs), a proceSs that in tURn conTAmInateD arT critiCiSm. SUfficE to say THe rEactiOn came In The 1970s anD 1980s in tHe IrruptivE form of the return of the rePresseD (contIngEncy and thE abJEct Subject). ThIs NeW HistoriciSm iN tuRn, and
s estimation risks insanit y (Ruskinand N iet zsc he  com e to  mind). The me n talpicture or vision impl ied b yp urev is ualit y colla p se s ant in om ies  i n  t he sa mefashion  that Walt erBe njamin consi d er ed the pho tog raphic image  "d ialect ic s a t  a st and still ."12 S u blimit ies of th ei mage a r e, ther e f or e, l ike linguistic sh a di n gs, "borrowing s" (su bt l ea n d o fte n frightfu l) , and as ofte n  a s n otc onnote, per L ouis Marin, the  arcan ia n r e alm of  theto m b ( the inside/ dark ness/subj ectivi t y/Carav a ggio) v ersusany thi ng a r ca di an(t h e o u ts ide / lig ht/objec ti vi ty/ P ouss i n ) . 13 D RAF T 07 /19/1 0 4 Yet all o f t hisr ega rds " readi ng,"  a s ima ges st ill m us t be read as pe rilo us, compr ess ed  cr it icalm oments . F orGerhard  Richte r , p ai n t i ng  is a series of ne ga t i on s, a neg atived ia le c tics ofse ein g, e v e n whe n he is  paintin g as a ph ot ographe r,  and m os t e spe ciall y  whe n he i s painti ng ov e r photographs( ca. 1989). Th e  a c t ua l ly e xis ting Sils M aria ,  and  the se rie s  of p hotog ra p hs (landscapes) efface dby pai nt, d ouble the ele mental for c e in mimes is b r in g ing into playthe v ery reason Nietzsch e, in  1879, f ound in t h e  mountai nsand  la kei n  t he Upper Enga d i ne o fSwitzer lan d the p erf ect  em bod im ent of asupernal  " li mi t" : " the s a me direc texp os ure  to t h e laws  of N atur eth a t h e had e x pe r i ence din  his  ar ti sticcrea t ion  to the  basic pr inc i ples  o fmoralsand aesthetic s;  these law scom pletel y reshaped  his concepts, forms, i m ages, a ndcompa riso ns."14 Th e E ternal  Re t urn of  the S ame i sthe s upern a l  l imi tpar excell e n ce.  Thefo rceof visu al knowledge has r e pea tedly been ec lip sedb y  e xeg e ti c alex e rci s e s in criticismand litera lr ea dings of t h e i ma ge. The  oftenderan g ed disc ursivityof such e xe rcis e s  di d not begi n with R oland Bar t hes.Y et  NewCri ticism  a ndits r elianc e  on  form al pro pe rtiesof th eartworkin/for itself in many w ays sp onsor edthe antit het i cal  readings  tha t indulged  th e r eader ‟ss ubjec tivi t y.  Ne w  Crit icis m  (an Angl o Am eri c a nschool of l i t e rar y cri tic i sm), f romthe 1940s to the1 970s, relied o n af o rmoff orma li sm that bracke ted  s u b jects gi ve n over to u nitary d is c iplin es (fo r exam ple, hi s t or y  and p olit ics ), a proc ess  t h at in t ur nc ontami nate dart cr iticis m . Su f f ice to say the r eacti o n  came inthe 1 97 0s and1 980s  in the ir ruptive for m of t he r eturn  of the  r epress ed(c ontingency and the a bject  subjec t) . Th isNew Hi stor i c ism i n tu rn , a nd
s estimation_risks insanity_(Ruskin and Nietzsche come_to mind)._The_mental picture_or_vision implied by_pure visuality collapses_antinomies in the same_fashion that Walter_Benjamin_considered the photographic image "dialectics at a standstill."12 Sublimities of the image are, therefore,_like_linguistic shadings,_"borrowings"_(subtle_and often frightful), and as_often as not connote, per_Louis Marin,_the arcanian realm of the tomb (the inside/darkness/subjectivity/Caravaggio)_versus_anything arcadian (the_outside/light/objectivity/ Poussin).13 DRAFT 07/19/10 4 Yet all of this_regards "reading," as images still must_be read as_perilous,_compressed_critical moments. For Gerhard_Richter, painting is a series of_negations, a negative dialectics of seeing,_even when he is painting as a_photographer, and most especially when he_is painting over photographs (ca._1989). The_actually existing Sils Maria, and_the series of_photographs (landscapes)_effaced by paint,_double the elemental force in mimesis_bringing into play_the very reason Nietzsche, in 1879,_found_in the mountains_and_lake_in the_Upper Engadine of_Switzerland_the perfect_embodiment_of a supernal "limit": "the same_direct_exposure to the laws of Nature that_he had experienced in_his_artistic creation to the_basic principles of morals and_aesthetics; these laws completely reshaped his_concepts, forms,_images, and_comparisons."14 The Eternal Return of the Same is the supernal limit_par excellence. The force of visual_knowledge has repeatedly been_eclipsed by_exegetical_exercises in criticism_and_literal readings_of the image. The often deranged discursivity_of such_exercises did not begin with Roland_Barthes. Yet New Criticism_and_its reliance on formal properties of_the artwork in/for itself in many_ways sponsored the antithetical readings_that_indulged_the reader‟s subjectivity. New Criticism_(an AngloAmerican school of literary criticism),_from the 1940s_to the 1970s, relied on a form_of_formalism that bracketed subjects given over_to_unitary disciplines (for example, history and_politics),_a_process that in turn contaminated_art criticism. Suffice to say the_reaction came in the 1970s and 1980s in the_irruptive form of_the return of the repressed_(contingency_and_the abject subject). This New Historicism in turn, and