Responses to Karmel and also Flusser's articles

 

Karmel and also Flusser's articles

 

Thomas Demand works in a replica of the places that he heard about them by books, history, and media. For example, Demand's re-creation of the military conference room, the united states president room, and other his works are not a real place. They are fake locations that are not real for him and his audiences, and neither of us believes it. From my point of view, authenticity and mystifications are those meanings that he is looking for in the concepts of history.

He is challenging with stillness and reproductions meanings. He tries to show stillness and presents all moments simultaneously, without human. Even in the assassination’s moment in the Hitler office, his work has a paradoxical meaning with history and we can see the peaceful time, not the explosion mass. We have two groups, first people who see his artwork in the gallery and people, like me, who see the work by websites, and in this scenario, we are in different levels of understanding.  Second, we all are on the same page and our understanding of the Hitler office came from text and old footage. It is possible to say the concepts of Hitler office for all of us is fake.

Original sculptures or stages objects by Thomas Demand are unique, but after taking photos they are become fake for both of us, for him and the audiences. They look different from how they look on the computer screen and websites, in one word, reproductions distort. Even his facsimiles in the gallery are fake too. Look at his works in the gallery by websites, what you are seeing is still not the original. Even the people in front of it can not say they are seeing the original. Then his photos can not be authentic until we consider it as an object. Now his photos for viewers in the gallery are real but internet surfers are still fake. The meaning of authenticity links to our definitions of objects.  In Flusser's articles, he tries to have a classification by definitions of objects. It is about a prediction of artworks in the future. In the not far inaccessible future, images will become pictures showing up on electromagnetic screens. They will delineate a future culture of unadulterated, insignificant data, one in which society will be occupied with expounding what is presently called 'programming'. 

Finally, Uneducated people, until they are educated out of it and are forced to accept mystifications look at images and interpret them very directly. The connect any image whether from comic, news, advertising directly with own experiences. So I sowed them some works of Thomas Demand and they told me it might be a page of furniture’s advertising.