As a team, we were intrigued by the question of image and
representation, especially in relation to the old prohibition on images and to
religious imagery. We bounced theological ideas in which Gods reproduced /
represented themselves in us, and we in turn represented them in our icons. In
this case, the prohibition may be interpreted as a monopoly on images for the
Gods and we humans are playing God by representing ourselves, and even more so
in our attempts to digitally recreate the human.
Other members of the team viewed the prohibition of images
differently, positing an inherent danger in the image. Images grant ideas with
credibility: they make them feel more real. However, images are not quite true:
they are representations. Here, the prohibition stems from a fear that the
representation will overshadow the real; that the imitation will be held as the
truth. We were able to relate this idea with contemporary issues, like the use
of the icon of Jesus by far-right Christians, or how photoshopped photographs
of models have invaded our ideas of how humans should look.
We also advanced that we represent ourselves to understand
ourselves better. Images are a powerful form of communication that connect us
to our unconscious and allow us to communicate without words. The creation of
images is a means to communicate with the parts of us we cannot access. With
this we returned to theological interrogations: did Gods create us to understand
themselves better? Did we humans create Gods to understand ourselves?
No comments:
Post a Comment