{"id":441,"date":"2016-01-07T10:23:30","date_gmt":"2016-01-07T10:23:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/?p=441"},"modified":"2016-01-07T10:29:51","modified_gmt":"2016-01-07T10:29:51","slug":"all-form-is-a-face-looking-at-us","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/all-form-is-a-face-looking-at-us\/","title":{"rendered":"All form is a face looking at us"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>If as Serge Daney writes, &#8220;<em>all form is a face looking at us<\/em>&#8220;, what does a form\u00a0 become when it is plunged into the dimension of dialogue? What is a form that is essentially <em>relational<\/em>? It seems worth while to discuss this question taking Daney&#8217;s formula as a point of reference, precisely because of its ambivalence: as forms are looking at us, how are we to look at them?<\/p>\n<p>Nicolas Bourriaud, Relational Aesthetics<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"alignnone size-large wp-image-442\" src=\"http:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/Bourriaud-01.jpg\" alt=\"Bourriaud-01\" width=\"457\" height=\"667\" srcset=\"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/Bourriaud-01.jpg 457w, https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/Bourriaud-01-206x300.jpg 206w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 457px) 100vw, 457px\" \/> <img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-443\" src=\"http:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/Bourriaud-02.jpg\" alt=\"Bourriaud-02\" width=\"462\" height=\"288\" srcset=\"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/Bourriaud-02.jpg 462w, https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/Bourriaud-02-300x187.jpg 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 462px) 100vw, 462px\" \/><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>If as Serge Daney writes, &#8220;all form is a face looking at us&#8220;, what does a form\u00a0 become when it is plunged into the dimension of dialogue? What is a form that is essentially relational? It seems worth while to discuss this question taking Daney&#8217;s formula as a point of reference, precisely because of its [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[51,67,69,68],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/441"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=441"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/441\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":446,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/441\/revisions\/446"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}