22 With Kiefer, as with Richter, and denoting a certain excess in painting that has come over to photography, we have a form of hyper-realism that draws its inordinate fire power from the representational (transcendental) field of the "given" (or, arguably, "the real real"). Richter is best understood as a "conceptual" painter, having worked through the stages of demolishing ideology in the pictorial regime of art, both as provocateur and as artist-coroner. "Paintings are statements about ideas for paintings – almost tautologies but more evasive and unsettled."23 Straddling "the divide between conceptual and perceptual art – art as analytical method and art as the material expression of intuitions and emotions,"24 Richter‟s perpetual peregrinations between fields of forces in art (representation) and nature (the real) consist of a dialectical crossing back and forth between the frontier that marks the penumbral zone in two contiguous but distinct categories of mimesis – the ideological (which is essentially the anthropomorphic) and the figurative (which is, oddly, the realm of the copy and the realm of purely formal agencies given to representational systems). It is this latter formal agency – in figuration – that returns in the most telling ways in the series that leads to and away from landscape. On the one hand, there are the photo-realist and defaced figurative paintings, and, on the other, there are the so-called Abstract Pictures. Richter‟s rebellion against the twin exigencies of abstraction and expressionism (and his "cool" approach to Abstract Expressionism per se) favor, in ways that are concealed in the multiple means of effacement, works that approach the pure other in landscape (and, in turn, reveal the purely visual excess of forms of mimesis). That he comes at this through photography (through photo-realism and through over-painted photographs) also suggests that photography and painting quietly share an august and austere (perhaps ancient) colloquy regarding figuration proper, an unnamable something that resides at the frontier between something and nothing. The dialectical fuse within Richter‟s pictorial regime is reducible to a series of antitheses: "faith versus skepticism; hope versus pessimism; engagement versus neutrality; self-determination versus fatalism; imaginative freedom versus ideology."25 The biases produce a material force in all of the works that underscores the
22 With Kiefer, as with Richter, and denoting a certain excess in painting that has come over to photography, we get a human body of hyper - realism that draws its inordinate ardor power from the representational (transcendental) field of the " given " (or, arguably, " the actual real "). Richter is best understand as a " conceptual " painter, having worked through the stage of demolishing ideology in the graphic regime of art, both as provocateur and as artist - coroner. " Paintings are statements about ideas for paintings – about tautologies but more evasive and unsettled. "23 Straddling " the watershed between conceptual and perceptual art – art as analytical method and art as the corporeal expression of intuitions and emotions,"24 Richter‟s perpetual peregrinations between fields of force in art (representation) and nature (the real) consist of a dialectical crossing back and away between the frontier that score the penumbral zone in two contiguous but distinct categories of mimesis – the ideological (which is essentially the anthropomorphic) and the figurative (which is, oddly, the realm of the copy and the realm of strictly conventional agencies feed to representational system). It is this latter formal agency – in figuration – that returns in the about telling way in the series that leads to and aside from landscape. On the one hand, there are the photo - realist and defaced figurative paintings, and, on the other, there be the so - called Abstract Pictures. Richter‟s rebellion against the twin exigencies of abstraction and expressionism (and his " cool " approach to Abstract Expressionism per se) party favor, in way that are concealed in the multiple means of effacement, works that border on the pure other in landscape (and, in turn, uncover the purely visual excess of forms of mimesis). That he fall at this through photography (through photograph - realism and through over - painted photographs) also propose that photography and painting quietly partake an august and austere (perhaps ancient) colloquy involve figuration proper, an unnamable something that resides at the frontier between something and nothing. The dialectical fuse within Richter‟s graphic regime is reducible to a series of antitheses: " faith versus skepticism; hope versus pessimism; engagement versus neutrality; self - determination versus fatalism; imaginative freedom versus ideology. "25 The biases grow a material force in all of the plant that underscores the
22 Wihh Kiefer, as with Richtev, and denoting a certaii excesa in paivting that has come over to 'hotigrapyy, we have a form of hhper-realidm that eraww its inordmhate fivz powsv frok the representstional (trdnscendental) fheud of the "given" (or, arguably, "the real weal"). Rivhher is best unqersuooq as a "conceptual" painter, having workes throujh the stages og demolishing ideology in hhe oictorial regime ov art, both qs pwivocateur ana as artisu-cmroner. "Paihtings are statements about idexs fox paintings – qlmlvt tautologmes bun more evasivc and utsettlec."23 Straddling "tme ditide between conceptual aid perceptual art – att as analftncal method and art aw rhe mdterhal dzprdssjoi or intultikns and emktions,"24 Richrer‟s perpetual perebrybations betwesn fiejdf of forces in art (representation) and ndtude (the real) consist of q dialectical crossinh back anq forth between the frontier that marks the penumtral vove nk gqo contiguous but distinct categories of mimesif – uhe ideological (wmich is essentiallu hhr anthropomorpfic) anb tge figurative (whicj is, odqly, tye realm jf tne copy and the realm of pueely formal cgebcies given to repxesentationau syxtems). It is this latter formcl agehcy – in figkration – ffat returns in tfe kovt telling ways in the seryes that oeadx to ana awsy froi landscapf. On bve one hand, there wre tke phmto-realist and defaced figurative paintinjx, and, on the odheg, there axe the so-called Abseract Pictures. Richtex‟s rebdllion agapnst the vwin exigencyes of abstrawjion and exprxssionism (and his "cool" aooroach to Absttact Exprvsfionusm per se) favor, ik wayr that are concecutd in the multipke oeags oh effwwement, works thag aolroacf the pure igher in landscape (and, in turh, reveal the purelu yisual exxess of sorms of mimexis). That he comes wt thms thruugh lhojography (through photo-realism ahd througj oyer-painted phjtogvaphf) also sugyests that photography and painting quievly share an august and austere (perhaps aneitnt) colloquy cegardyng figurdtion proper, an unnanable something tmat resides at the frohtier tetwefn something and nothing. The dialectical fuse within Richter‟s pictorial rwgime ms reducible fo a serivs jy antitresed: "faith versus skvpticism; hope versus pessimism; eigagement eexsus neutrality; self-determinayiun versus fatxlism; imaginative freedoj versus ideology."25 The biases produce a katerial force in all of the worjs thzt undvtscures the
22 With Kiefer, as with Richter, and certain in painting has come over form hyper-realism that draws inordinate fire power the representational (transcendental) field of the (or, arguably, "the real real"). Richter is best understood as a "conceptual" painter, worked through the stages of demolishing ideology in the pictorial regime of art, as and artist-coroner. are statements about ideas for paintings – almost tautologies but more evasive and unsettled."23 Straddling "the between conceptual and perceptual art – art as method and art as material expression of intuitions and Richter‟s peregrinations between of in (representation) and nature real) consist of a dialectical crossing back and forth between the frontier that marks the penumbral zone two contiguous categories of – ideological is essentially the the figurative (which is, oddly, the copy and the realm of purely formal agencies to representational It is this latter formal agency in figuration – that returns in the most ways in the series that leads to and away from landscape. On the one hand, the photo-realist and defaced paintings, and, on other, are so-called Pictures. Richter‟s against the twin exigencies of abstraction and expressionism (and his "cool" to Abstract Expressionism per se) favor, in ways that are the means of effacement, that approach the pure in (and, in turn, reveal visual of That comes this through photography (through and through over-painted photographs) also that photography and painting austere (perhaps ancient) colloquy regarding figuration proper, an something that resides at the frontier between and nothing. The dialectical fuse within Richter‟s pictorial regime is reducible to series of versus skepticism; hope versus pessimism; engagement versus neutrality; versus fatalism; imaginative freedom ideology."25 The biases produce a material force in all the that underscores
22 With Kiefer, as with Richter, anD denoting a CertaIn eXceSs In paIntiNg that has come oVEr to Photography, we have a form Of hypEr-REaliSM tHat drAws its iNOrDINatE fIrE poWeR FrOm the RepResentaTional (tranSceNdEntal) field of THe "Given" (or, argUabLy, "the real reaL"). RiChter iS bEst UNdersTooD as a "cOnceptUAl" painTer, having WoRKed thrOUgh the sTAGeS of dEmolishing ideologY In THe pictorial regIme of aRt, BOtH AS prOvoCateur and aS aRtist-COroner. "PAInTINGs aRE statements abOut ideas for PAinTings – aLmOst TAutoloGies bUt MOre Evasive and uNsetTled."23 StradDling "tHE divide BEtween cOnceptUal And PercEPtUaL arT – aRT as ANaLytICal Method anD aRt As the MateRIAL ExprEssIon oF intuItions and emotIonS,"24 RicHTer‟S perpEtual PereGrInatiOns betWeen fIeLds of forces in arT (repResentatiOn) aNd NatUrE (the rEAl) consIst Of a DialectIcal croSSinG bACK AnD forth between the frOnTIEr That markS the peNUmBrAL zone in tWo ConTiguOUS but dIstiNCt CategoriEs of miMEsIs – The ideoLoGical (wHiCh iS esSentiALly tHe anthRopomorpHic) anD The figurative (wHIch is, oddly, the REaLM Of THe coPy aNd the realm oF purELy foRmal AGeNciES giveN to rePrESeNTational systems). It is ThIs lattEr forMal agency – in fiGuration – thAT REturns in The mOSt TElling ways in thE seriEs that leadS To and awaY from LandscapE. On the one HANd, there aRe tHe pHotO-reALIsT and defaced fiGURatiVe PaintinGs, aNd, on the OthEr, tHerE arE tHe so-calleD AbstracT PIcTuReS. RiChter‟S RebellioN aGaiNsT thE twin EXigencIes of AbstRaCtIOn aNd expreSSiONIsm (aNd HiS "cooL" apPrOach tO AbsTRacT ExpresSionism peR se) FAvor, In WaYs that aRe concealed in ThE multiple mEaNs oF effacEMEnt, works That approach the pure otheR In landsCapE (and, iN turN, reveal thE puRely viSuaL Excess Of formS of miMeSis). tHAt he cOMEs At tHiS through phOTOgrAphy (tHrOugh Photo-reAlism and through oveR-PaiNted photograpHs) aLso sUGGeSts THaT PhoToGRapHY And painting quieTly share an AuGUsT and austerE (PerHaPs ancieNt) colloQuy reGArding fIguration Proper, an uNnAmabLE SomEthing that Resides aT the frontIEr betWEeN someThiNg and nOtHinG. The dIalectICal Fuse wIthin RIcHter‟s pIctorIaL regime iS reducible to a series of anTithesEs: "faiTh vErsus skepTicISm; hOpe versus PessImism; engagEmeNt vErsus NeuTRalitY; selF-DeTerMInatiOn veRSus fataliSM; iMagINAtIve freedom vERSUs iDeoloGy."25 THE biaseS proDuce a material forcE In all of the workS thaT UNdeRscORes tHe
22 With Kiefer, as with Ri chter, and  deno tin g a  c erta in e xcess in paint i ng t hat has come over to p hotog ra p hy,w ehavea formo fh y per -r ea lis mt ha t dra wsits ino rdinate fi repo wer from the re presentati ona l (transcend ent al) fi el d o f  the"gi ven"(or, a r guably , "the re al real") .  Richte r is  bes t understood as a "c o nceptual" pain ter, h av i ng w ork edthrough th estage s  of dem o li s h i ngi deology in th e pictorial reg ime of  a rt, both a s pro vo c ate ur and as a rtis t-coroner . "Pai n tings a r e state mentsabo utidea s  f or  pa in t ing s  –  al m ost  tautolo gi es  butmore e v a sive  an d un settl ed."23 Stradd lin g "t h e d ivide  betw eenco ncept ual an d per ce ptual art – art  asanalytica l m et hod  a nd ar t  as th e m ate rial ex pressio n  of  i n t u it ions and emotions, "2 4 Ri chter‟sperpet u al  p e regrinat io nsbetw e e n fie ldso fforces i n art( re pr esentat io n) and  n atu re(ther eal)  consi st of adiale c tical crossing back and fort h  b e t we e n th e f rontier tha t ma r ks t he p e nu mbr a l zon e intw o  c o ntiguous but distin ct  categ ories  of mimesis –  the ideol o g i cal (whi ch i s  e s sentially theanthr opomorphic )  and the  figu rative ( which is, o ddly, th e r eal m o f t h e  c opy and the r e a lm o fpurelyfor mal age nci esgiv ento  represen tational  s ys te ms ).It is this lat te r f or mal  agen c y – in  figu rati on  – tha t retur n si n  the  m os t te lli ng  ways  int heseriesthat lead s t o  and  a wa y fromlandscape. On  t he one han d,  th ere ar e the phot o-realist and defaced f i gurativ e p ainti ngs,  and, onthe  other , t h ere ar e theso-ca ll edA b strac t Pi ctu re s. Richter ‟ s  re belli on  aga inst th e twin exigencieso f a bstraction an d e xpre s s io nis m  ( a ndhi s  "c o o l" approach toAbstract E xp r es sionism pe r  se )favor,in ways  that are con cealed in  the mult ip le m e a nsof effacem ent, wor ks that a p proac h  t he pu reotherin  la ndsca pe (an d , i n tur n, rev ea l thepurel yvisual e xcess of forms of mimes is). T hat h e c omes at t his thr ough phot ogra phy (throu ghpho to-re ali s m and  thr o ug h o v er-pa inte d  photogra p hs ) a l s osuggests th a t pho togra phy and pa inti ng quietly sharea n august and a uste r e  (p erh a ps a nc ient) colloquy  re ga r d ing figu ra tion proper , an unn am a ble s omethi ng tha t resid e s  a t  the f ront ier  betweensom et h ing and  n ot h ing. T he d ia lectic al fus e  wit h i n Richter‟s pict orial r egime isreduc ib le to a seri es of anti theses: "fa ith ve rsus  skep ticism;  h ope ve rsu spessimism; engagemen t ver sus neu tr alit y;self-d eter m i natio n ve rs usfatalism; i ma g in at i vefree dom v er susideology. " 25 The b ias e s produ ce  am a terial fo r c e in all o f t he wo r k s that und e rsco r es the
22 With_Kiefer, as_with Richter, and denoting_a certain_excess_in painting_that_has come over_to photography, we_have a form of_hyper-realism that draws_its_inordinate fire power from the representational (transcendental) field of the "given" (or, arguably, "the_real_real"). Richter_is_best_understood as a "conceptual" painter,_having worked through the stages_of demolishing_ideology in the pictorial regime of art, both_as_provocateur and as_artist-coroner. "Paintings are statements about ideas for paintings –_almost tautologies but more evasive and_unsettled."23 Straddling "the_divide_between_conceptual and perceptual art_– art as analytical method and_art as the material expression of_intuitions and emotions,"24 Richter‟s perpetual peregrinations between_fields of forces in art (representation)_and nature (the real) consist_of a_dialectical crossing back and forth_between the frontier_that marks_the penumbral zone_in two contiguous but distinct categories_of mimesis –_the ideological (which is essentially the_anthropomorphic)_and the figurative_(which_is,_oddly, the_realm of the_copy_and the_realm_of purely formal agencies given to_representational_systems). It is this latter formal agency_– in figuration –_that_returns in the most_telling ways in the series_that leads to and away from_landscape. On_the one_hand, there are the photo-realist and defaced figurative paintings, and, on_the other, there are the so-called_Abstract Pictures. Richter‟s rebellion_against the_twin_exigencies of abstraction_and_expressionism (and_his "cool" approach to Abstract Expressionism per_se) favor,_in ways that are concealed in_the multiple means of_effacement,_works that approach the pure other_in landscape (and, in turn, reveal_the purely visual excess of_forms_of_mimesis). That he comes at_this through photography (through photo-realism and_through over-painted photographs)_also suggests that photography and painting quietly_share_an august and austere (perhaps ancient)_colloquy_regarding figuration proper, an unnamable something_that_resides_at the frontier between something_and nothing. The dialectical fuse within_Richter‟s pictorial regime is reducible to a series of_antitheses: "faith versus_skepticism; hope versus pessimism; engagement_versus_neutrality;_self-determination versus fatalism; imaginative freedom versus ideology."25 The biases produce_a material_force in all_of the works that underscores the