scholarly journals O roli i znaczeniu przypadku

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edyta Mąsior
Keyword(s):  
Blow Up ◽  
Robert Rauschenberg

Artykuł przybliża poszukiwania oparte na tematyce sceny tenisowej przedstawionej za pomocą tekstu, filmu i technologii, równocześnie nakreślając rzeczywistość przybliżoną za pomocą różnych mediów. Kontekst badań odnosi się do przykładów zaczerpniętych z dzieł sztuki z lat 60. i 70. XX wieku, to jest z filmu Blow-Up w reżyserii Michelangelo Antonioniego (1966), opartym na poetyckim dziele Julio Cortázara Las babas del diablo (1959) i meczu tenisowym, jak go przedstawia Robert Rauschenberg w dziele Open Score (1966). Te dzieła sztuki łączy wyjątkowy świat. Interesująca jest dla mnie relacja medium–działanie–mechanizm rozgrywanej akcji, szczególnie w odniesieniu do technologii i nowych możliwości. Celem tych badań i analizy – wynikających z początkowej, pierwotnie empirycznej obserwacji – jest utrwalenie i opisanie tożsamości (charakteru) tego, co jest obserwowane (przedmiotu), oraz obserwatora, jak również interakcja między tym, co obserwowane, a obserwatorem. Jak pokazać, że „grać granie” to część gry? Przyczynkiem do poszukiwania była własna praca artystyczna związana z przemysłowym przedmiotem, jakim jest balon, który został przeniesiony w obszar działania twórczego. Pierwsza część pracy teoretycznej dotyczy zagadnienia roli i znaczenia przypadku, druga balonu w sztuce.

Positive solutions for a quasilinear system Via blow up

1993 ◽  
Vol 18 (12) ◽  
pp. 2071-2106
Author(s):  
Philippe Clément ◽  
Raúl Manásevich ◽  
Enzo Mitidieri
Keyword(s):  
Positive Solutions ◽  
Blow Up ◽  
Quasilinear System

Screen Presence

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Monteiro
Keyword(s):  
Contemporary Art ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Popular Media ◽  
Andy Warhol ◽  
Film Culture ◽  
Artistic Practice ◽  
Popular Film ◽  
Robert Rauschenberg ◽  
Mona Hatoum ◽  
Source Materials

Cinema plays a major role in contemporary art, yet the deeper influence of its diverse historical forms on artistic practice has received little attention. Working from a media and cultural studies perspective, Screen Presence explores the intersections of film, popular media, and art since the 1950s through the examples of four pivotal figures – Andy Warhol, Robert Rauschenberg, Mona Hatoum and Douglas Gordon. While their film-related works may appear primarily as challenges to conventional cinema, these artists draw on overlooked forms of popular film culture that have been commonplace, and even dominant, in specific social contexts. Through analysis of a range of examples and source materials, Stephen Monteiro demonstrates the dependence of contemporary artists on cinema’s shifting applications and interpretations, offering a fresh understanding of the enduring impact of everyday media on how we make and view art.

: The Blow-Up . Michelangelo Antonioni .

1967 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 28-31
Author(s):  
Max Kozloff
Keyword(s):  
Blow Up ◽  
Michelangelo Antonioni

Instability and Collapse in Discrete Wave Equations

2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-241
Author(s):  
A. Carpio ◽  
G. Duro
Keyword(s):  
Continuum Limit ◽  
Wave Equations ◽  
Numerical Solutions ◽  
Blow Up ◽  
Theoretical Predictions ◽  
Initial States ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Continuum

AbstractUnstable growth phenomena in spatially discrete wave equations are studied. We characterize sets of initial states leading to instability and collapse and obtain analytical predictions for the blow-up time. The theoretical predictions are con- trasted with the numerical solutions computed by a variety of schemes. The behavior of the systems in the continuum limit and the impact of discreteness and friction are discussed.

The Life of Guy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan Metcalf
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Blow Up ◽  
Lower Class ◽  
Just In Time ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Second Person ◽  
Person Plural ◽  
Plural Pronoun ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Gender Neutral

This book is about the name “Guy” and its slow, mostly unnoticed development over four centuries since it began on November 5, 1605, with the suddenly famous Guy Fawkes, who was arrested just in time just before he could light the fuse on 36 barrels of gunpowder to blow up the House of Lords. During those four centuries, “Guy” became “guy,” the name for an effigy of Guy Fawkes burned at bonfires every November 5 since. The effigy was called a “guy,” so that more than one effigy would be “guys,” Then, slowly, “guy” extended its signification into a name for a ragged, lower-class male, then any strangely dressed male, then a neutral everyday word for just any male, a “guy.” To top it off, the 20th century extended the plural “guys” or “you guys” to include all human beings, even women speaking to groups of women. None of these developments were made deliberately; the word just quietly slipped by, except for opposition from some Southerners and feminists who objected to it on the grounds that it wasn’t “y’all” and it wasn’t gender neutral. It has become all the more entrenched because now it’s the standard second-person plural pronoun for most of us who speak English.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document