Presentation: “Art as Technique”

From Victor Shklovsky’s “Art as Technique”

If we start to examine the general laws of perception, we see that as perception becomes habitual, it becomes automatic. Thus, for example, all of our habits retreat into the area of the unconsciously automatic; if one remembers the sensations of holding a pen or or speaking in a foreign language for the first time and compares that with his feelings at performing the action for the ten thousandth time, he will agree with us. Such habitation explains the principles be which, in ordinary speech, we leaves phrases unfinished and words half expressed. In this process, ideally realized I algebra, things are placed by symbols. Complex words are not expressed in rapid speech; their initial sounds are barely perceived. Alexander Pogodin [in a 1913 work] offers the example of a boy considering the sentence “The Swiss mountains are beautiful” in the form of a series of letters: T, S, m,a,b.

This characteristics of thought not only suggests the method of algebra, but even prompts the choice of symbols (letters, especially initial letters). By this ‘algebraic’ method of thought we apprehend objects only as shapes with imprecise extensions; we do not see them in their entirety but rather recognize them by their main characteristics. We see the objects as though it were enveloped in a sack. We know what it is by its configuration, but we see only its silhouette. The object, perceived thus in the manner of prose perception, fades and does not leave even a first impression; ultimately even the essence of what it was is forgotten. Such perception explains why we fail to hear the prose word in its entirety (see Leo Jakubinsky’s article) and, hence, why (along with other slips of the tongue) we fail to pronounce it. The process of ‘algebrization,’ the over-automatization of an object, permits the greatest economy of perceptive effort. Either objects are assigned only one proper feature – a number, for example – or else they function as though by formula and do not even appear in cognition.

I was cleaning a room and, meandering about, approaching the divan and couldn’t remember whether or not I had dusted it. Since these movements are habitual and unconscious, I could not remember and felt that it was impossible to remember – so that if I had dusted it and forgot – that is, had acted unconsciously, then it was the same as if I had not. If some conscious person had been watching, then the fact could be established. If, however, no one was looking on unconsciously, if the whole complex lives of many people go on unconsciously, then such lives are as if they had never been. [Leo Tolstoy’s Diary, 1897]

And so life is reckoned as nothing. Habitualization devours works, clothes, furniture, one’s wife, and the fear of war. “If the whole complex lives of many people go on unconsciously, then such lives are as if they had never been.” And art is to make objects “unfamiliar,” to make forms difficult, to increase the difficulty and length of perception because of the process of perception is an aesthetician end in itself and must be prolonged. Art is a way of experiencing the artfulness of an object: the object is not important.

MY TAKE ON THE ABOVE:
It seems to me Shlovsky is arguing that art can be absolutely anything at all, provided it gets one’s attention–and if one slows down in the presence of an object, surely this means that one is paying attention, right? Here is the related assignment:

Put together a short presentation (3 mins. MIN.-7 mins MAX.) describing the application of Shklovsky’s ideas about “defamiliarizing” (making the stone stony) to a non-literary form of creative endeavor of your choice(dance; filmmaking; automotive, building, roller coaster design; virtually whatever you wish, but do stick with visual forms). You must show the form as it currently exists/ is done and, following that, show how you would change it to make people see, hear, feel, experience it anew.

Here’s what to do: using POWERPOINT (or a similar platform), show an object as we all see it, something that you believe we have stopped really noticing–because, as Shklovsky thinks of it, we have started using kind of shorthand for it. (See his concept of “algebrization,” above.) Then showthe object altered in some way; change it in anyway you see fit that will allow us to see the object again–indeed, as if for the first time.

Your presentation need not to be “realistic”; I don’t care if you hang shiny ribbons on the sun, as long as you get our attention (nope; you can’t use this sunset idea)…

For inspiration, and illustration of this idea, take a look at Christo and Jeanne-Claude’s wrapped bridge artwork, which feels pretty Shklovskyian to me. They took a bridge everyone was used (“Bridge? What bridge?”), covered it for a time, and then removed the cover (“ooo: bridge!”).
Https://christojeanneclaude.net/artworks/wrapped-bridges/

You need not do any research, but for any ideas you do use, remember to give credit. You should refer to Shklovsky, but unless you go outside the essay above, you need not include a Works Cited entry for him. The same goes for other sources, but do at least mention the name of the person, or the titcixle of the essay, you are citing.

Last Completed Projects