Page 1


Foteini Makri



Foteini Makri BFA Koninklijke Academie van Beeldende Kunsten, The Hague

68 Introspection 62 The birth of the reader


54 I Κάθαρσις

Graphic Design : Malik Saïb-Mezghiche

46 II Empathy

Tutor : Alexandra Landré

40 The expression of the individual 32 What is the psychological or emotional bond to unfamiliarity in which was once familiar? 24 I against I 16 Conclusion 8 Notes 7 Bibliography 010



It is so hard to describe the different, we cannot refer to it as bad nor good but we can definitely say that it is not the same.


Introspection Different is also the unfamiliar towards our comfortknowledge. It is the unknown that we as a species have always wanted to understand and justify. Maybe it is also our need to try to evolve and assimilate controversial opinions in order to have a spherical point of view on a matter. I often like to approach a matter by giving it a character. It is similar to how you start working on a creation, the idea needs the sense of visualization and formalization. The idea sometimes could be based on uncertainty, when you have a feeling that you do not know how it is going to turn unless you follow it until you discover it through intuition and see where it leads. The character has a very strong posture in between the act of thoughts. The uncertainty and the instinct are the tools that apply on this figure. I believe cinema had always been an influential link on how I look on something or how I imagine things could be. The sense of time but also the visual aspect that embellishments and wrap a character are by far the extend of this chain. In other words, character is one way of looking in a personal view the different that we can embody and see how it can grow by it’s own.

How can fiction be manipulative towards emotions in the extend where we can actually have empathy or identify ourselves? Where does the need come from and how can we relate to? In the following chapters I will examine the empathy of the creator to his character but also viewer’s towards the character. I will question the creative process, more specifically the development of characters and how certain choices can affect the viewer. I will focus on examples where mystery is embodied in the aesthetic experience thereby allowing the imagination of the viewer to play a considerable role. Get to know the effect that the character can allow the spectator to have, find the line where we can actually intervene in this state and how our emotional level values as an impact.

The Birth of the Reader

A creation has three components: author-object-viewer. Which one causes empathy? The work alone? The artist? Or the viewer?


The birth of the reader What does it mean by saying the author, is it a modern way to express the metaphorical ‘patriarchy’ work wise? The artist expresses or states a question and proceeds to act on it. Once the work comes together an interaction between the object and the environment will take shape. At this point, the artist is the director who uses his technique in order to help his object form his own voice and transfer it’s abstraction into a cathartic experience that will consume the spectator. In Sarrasine’s story Roland Barthes tried to describe the birth of the reader. And while doing this he metaphorically declared the death of the author. Being in the position to declare the power of the text or any kind of art which sets forth a series of stories or allegories in which are incorporated by symbolism. It is worth mentioning that in the text of Barthes we are slowly narrated his account about the ‘birth’ of the reader and the significance of the author that changed over the years but yet, as a figure is still present and vigorous. In the theory of Barthes the author is basically a collector rather than an actual creator, he is the brain which composes and combines a variety of style writings, ideas and philosophical subjects and eventually sews them together in a structural way. But that’s not all, as a matter of fact, the core of this theory pinpoints the existence of the authenticity in

which the text is well distant from the ‘mastermind’ of the author. As a consequence, it breaks the giant Colosseum idea of the writer and gradually attempts to rise a postmodernism view, leaving behind the conservative and used connotation of the writer as superior or in other words, as the God. Nevertheless, there were more writers who spoke about writer’s autocracy, such as, Stephane Mallarme who tried to demolished what was already known as ‘author’. Through his work he tried to exclude the word I from his texts in order to allow language to express itself effortlessly. ‘’What is an author’’ by Michel Foucault was a text that bared resemblance with that of Barthes despite being contradictory. Foucault starts his essay with a straight aim to debate and criticize the use of the author and explain that interpretation will always remain an eternal discussion. He then elaborates that the valuable thing about the center of a work is not the subject itself but the way the author has ‘orchestrate the instruments in order to produce the melody’. The author is indeed the major principal involved in producing a piece but he is not to be idolized.

By examining a piece in it’s format and not in it’s relationship with the author Foucault explains that if a creator’s motive constitutes an art piece it is unavoidable to commit himself and it will restrain the extent to which the author died (death of the author). Before further analyzing any work the creator’s background should be acknowledged for there are always additional connections depending on his or her life which could make him equal of his ‘title’. Foucault mentions Aristotle as an example that illustrates how the knowledge of the author is important. When one connects a work to the reputation of a specific author one can understand more specifically the span of knowledge which is conveyed within the work. In the case of Aristotle, by using his name we can relate it with different pieces that are part of an extensive framework. Furthermore, this connection with ‘a body of work’ amplifies the impact of an author’s work. In retrospect, the author regroups all of his works in order and is defined in relation to his opposition to the others. We must draw a line between the author who is unaware of his own context but still entitled himself as an author with the one who has full knowledge of the context in which he operates. The meanings conveyed by an author can be compared to the wires of the operating system of a computer. There are multiple inputs that reach the motherboard.

Another important point is that the narrative of a text necessarily separates itself from whatever the needs of the creator. I would suggest that like in Greek tragedies, the predominate quality that bursts out of the text is so fierce that it is this effect that becomes the actual author that directs the piece and declares it’s own independence. Cultural status can become independent of the authors’. It changes according to an interpretation, it is always shifting. Science as a form becomes autonomous. It establishes it’s own origins while literature is chained to the function of the creator. The reader is the primary reason of being for any form of art. Relevance within an art work is fundamental in maintaining meaning and allowing complexities to expand from within each word or image that is shown. In a systematic hypothesis, the primary expression is the one that will be felt in between the words. Even though the methodology must be acknowledged and deeply involved it is not alone in the construction of a creation. The process therefore takes on a ‘voice’. ‘’A text is not in it’s origin, it is in its destination’’1. Although the origin can be decoded, it drowns in the destination.


The birth of the reader When a text is no longer ruled by any authorship Foucault says it transitions into ‘’Pure romanticism’’2. As long as the work contains the values of the paternal creator the origin of the authorship will withhold it from an expanded destination. The significance and input of the reader depend upon he or her active participation. Everything stares in this direction of the matter. Creator and reader are two parts that are bound to each other. An art piece is inextricably linked to its roots (creator) and there also lies its power and dynamic. But I am of those who think that it is a mystery why the intimacy and emotional impact of an artwork can become more or less present according to each reader. Is it due to the completion of the final image by the traces of the one who signs an art work? Although there may be obscure arguments in favor of not searching for the context of the author it is wise to do so as it can allow an entry into the personality of his language and a more detailed view of how he approaches a subject.

From the moment when I detect that I have been fascinated by something until the moment when I give the time to exploit it, I depart from myself. It is a personal decision to take into account the author because no matter what has been explained about his role nothing can be absolute. The viewer also has his own voice to choose from. In the end this voice, this manifestation will fuse with the already existing art piece and set the reality of the whole experience. And the unity between ‘viewer’ and artwork cannot be manipulated by the writer or artist or however we wish to call him.

I Κάθαρσις

‘’Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action of high importance, complete and of some amplitutude; in language enhanced by distinct and varying beauties; acted not narrated; by means of pity and fear effectuating its purgation of these emotions.‘’ 3


I Κάθαρσις Tragedy stimulates the emotions of an audience by encouraging sympathetic feelings towards a character that suffers from either unluckiness, sin or fate within the plot of a story. From the safety of a distance, an audience is able to empathize and see the purity of a character’s soul while emotionally reacting to the unwrapping of fate. From the safety of a distance spectators can perceive the purity of a soul but they are unable to do something. They are powerless. Catharsis is a state that is felt from both sides of the creative circle. Once a character’s agony comes to an end and his pride is restored, the viewer can finally feel satisfied and relieved for the restoration that was just witnessed. In the extensive spaces of tragic and mythic proportions the Sublime experience is evidence of our capability of becoming as light as a feather. The instant when you are taken over by compassion is the moment when you realize your humanity. The state of catharsis reflects our mirrored way of interpreting and experiencing reality. Designating you into a better you.

Aristotle was the first to use the word catharsis, referring to the soul being separated from the body. At the time that it was introduced it was connected between the medical-science and the theological fields. In modern Greek it could be translated as cleansing, such as, practical cleansing, but what about the psychic cleansing?

The title 4.48 a.m. is the time when she used to wake up during the peak point of her depression. To this day it remains unclear to me whether the monologue is meant to be for one voice (actor) or more. Kane did not provide any information regarding her intentions and shortly after she finished the play she committed suicide.

When I first got in touch with Sarah Kane’s play 4.48 Psychosis I felt trapped in between every single word that was written. It is a monologue that takes place in a hospital and expresses the character’s (Sarah Kane) suffering of depression. It is both raw and honest, reaching to the marrow. The inner fight of Kane contains a lot of questions and answers that she directs towards herself. . This self-reflective experience can be seen to be metaphorically translated in her struggle with mental health, the doses of drugs she receives along with the talks she has with her doctor. She does not hesitate to face what she feels and to express it aloud her personal and fragile perspective of life from her own eyes.

While reading the text I caught myself being overcome by feelings of tragedy and pain. Pain for her and also for me. Knowledge of the mechanism of a depression swallowing life and strength leaves a bitter taste. From the start of the monologue I kept noticing the development in the style of writing as it progressively became heavier and tougher- communicating her struggle with the difficulty of continuing to perform this task. In the end, the composition translates a loss of energy to fight, and simply being defeated by the disorder I wondered how I would have experienced the play had I not been aware of the author’s clinical depression or any additional contextual information. None. Many questions remained unanswered.

Was she indeed in a hospital? Did the conversation with the doctor really take place or was it a side effect from her depression?. In my opinion knowledge of the condition of the writer and the focus of her body of work allowed me to have a richer experience by adding an authentic details and gravity to her words. However I do not think that without this knowledge the play would be less emotional and genuine. Kane’s overwhelming emotions of anger, passion, frustration and even self distraction build up to a a state of absolute lack of control that can be felt in everyone’s soul. The state of catharsis and empathetic emotions are effective no matter how much information about the author the reader has prior to experiencing the text and even being in an uncomfortable position it has been communicated into the final phrases:


It is myself I have never met, whose face is pasted on the underside of my mind.

please open the curtains

Sarah Kane4

II Empathy

In pathos or in passion. To be drowned in passion. An act that causes the other to suffer. Yet if one can identify with the other there can be empathy and this can become an act of compassion.


II Empathy In the Greek language empathy has the exact opposite meaning of what it now means. The Greek word has evolved and changed into συμ-πάθεια (together-passion-compassion) 5, which implemented itself in the English language through Latin, sym-pathy, the positive emotional view of someone. However, εν-συναίσθηση (en-consciousness), can be translated by the ability of one to feel further than himself. Empathy is thought to be a vicariously experience that allows one to experience an impact on another person. It is a human feature that can influences one’s behavior towards another. It is a personal stance towards ethical social behavior. This human capacity (or faculty) forms a decisive factor in prosocial behavior. It brings a great importance in understanding the functionality of a vicarious experience and how much the social cognition is involved in an empathetic awareness. In a more simplistic way, by the use of our imagination we guess and engage. Empathy as a group of neurons helps us place ourselves in other people’s shoes and see beyond our own way.

In the book Handbook of: Developmental Social Neuroscience, empathy was defined as an ‘automatic transformation of other people’s behavior (actions or emotions) into the neural representation of one’s own behavior, and provides a functional bridge between first- and third-person perspectives, culminating in empathic experience’.6 Another element of study related to empathy is the topic of personal stamina– the way we position ourselves once we try to associate to on another. How much our idea of the ‘others’ feeling has been socially constructed? This may seem philosophical but it is relevant in understanding the social and political footprints relations that contain such phenomenons. Our behavior towards society is the result of our educations and experiences. From a young age our family, school and society teach us how to behave and communicate. Of course, in this regard as adults, we have more choice then when we were minors. Yet we continue to be shaped by information all throughout our lives, social media for example, now dominates and bombards us with new tendencies, proposals and ‘’honesty’’ about how life rolls. Such sources of information like it or not shape our judgment and perception of the world. To put it in another way, the further our generation advances through time the more competitive we become.

We absorb new ways as each era brings a new brick to be implemented in the construction of society. Our role, if we want to build our lives in conformity, is to follow and progress alongside the system, to give into this spiral of ‘evolution’. I would describe this form of growth as a bubble, where all elements are interfering with one another in a struggle to expand and advance. A bubble symbolizes the repetition and closure of a microorganism that after all is slowly penetrates the ideas and rules required for you to adjust in order to coexist.

Holding on to the fact that empathy, despite the communal influence remains an attribute that shows a willingness to understand and commiserate. It can be comforting to step ahead of our supreme I and to pay attention to the differences between every individual personality. Knowing that, I ask the question, why is empathy not born from objects that are psychically not alive? Like a text, a melody, or an art piece? It is much easier to relate to fellow humans then to tangible objects. Is it peculiar to notice these other forms of behaviors? - Or maybe not.

This means that our practice of empathy that has less or more a personal qualiy is determined by how our community educates us emotionally. The level of empathy of a community can say a lot about the grayness, urbanization and stress of the society in which it is a part of. Creating a new model to substitute and observantly appear to be lack of full empathetic consideration.

Emotions are the weakest state of our existence, our Achilles heel.

In compassion and in great acceptance.


The expression of the individual

How does an object (character) that was given birth take its own means of expression as an individual?


The expression of the individual Having discussed the silhouette of the creator and after having shed light on the shadow he casts onto his work, I cannot speak less about the work itself. The character that I have mentioned before transforms itself according to the context in which it is involved. If I would speak of the creator in the perspective of literary theory I would probably end up with the same conclusions Barthes or Foucault. But the beauty and range of forms of art are diverse and their roots do not exclude one from the other. I consider the author the past of his work. When a work is completed a presence faded out. Can a text really be meaningless without the reader? I know that the comparison of a literary essay of the 20th century with an art piece cannot necessarily yield many common points. Nonetheless, it could generate a bridge that would supplement the information used to examine the relationships between those three characters. Seen through another perspective, essence of a work can be perceived as a collection of thoughts and facts. I will focus more on the character as form of communication and autonomous unit. A character can be used as a word mostly in the cinema or in a play. When we hear a word we already formulate a clue about its position. In cinematography, the communication does not need to be expressed vocally, emotion is conceived as reliable and can sustain its core without exemption.

Movements and facial expressions can amplify an emotional state and demonstrate the echo of what is happening through the surrounding space or the main character. How much sound and sight upgrades the level of intimacy? Cinematography is a domain in which every director has his own distinctive way of approaching the image and a way of setting a stage where a story is narrated and a character is given birth. Silence, simple and as a light black as what the blind people see, the presence or the absence of a light in a room. Flat and undistinguished that is given in a way where everybody can relate and explain to it in their own way. Honesty does not need words to exist but relies on simplicity. It stands on the manner by which integrity is displayed. Even absurd words can somehow be spoken with truth by the manner in which they are told because they speak the language of the mind and not of logic.

A certain level of concentrated visual language and composition can drown you inside a character’s body. Andrei Tarkovsky achieved this by condensing much matter into textures. He considers the depiction of the real world a major element in his films. He succeed by applying a microscope onto everything that the character interacted with or the other way around. He isolates a sound that has been heard in our lives countless times before- it feels natural when it is being isolated and embraced in complete silence. This allows it to grow. An exchange of roles takes place when either the character becomes ‘nature’ or nature becomes the main character. It is so intriguing that sound completes the expression of the body– an expression that comes from beyond itself. Once Tarkovsky stated that ‘’ It’s a great virtue to be able to listen and understand.. That is, after all, a first principle of human relationships: the capacity to understand and forgive people their unintentional faults, their natural failures’’ 7

Making it real makes it relevant but being able to understand does not mean you are consent to it The silence in his films brings anticipation and agony. Probably something similar to what Hitchcock wanted to achieve during the moments when the character is vulnerable in the eyes of the viewer. Atmospheric but still with no further symbolism the voice of the character settles in the particles that encompasses the expression of the individual. Of course silence in the cinema is a tool that amplifies a state however it also purposefully increases the impact that the atmosphere of an environment narrated by a character. We search for answers in a scene but a scene is what it is. In the end the hypostasis of the character is mostly formed by the question of his existence and the contradictions that form the complexity of a lived life. It is our human nature to wonder and seek answers, on one hand why can a film be so strong in taking the position of cause the abandonment of reality yet on the other hand so weak in fulfilling the truth? Is it a contradiction to try to dismember reality by twisting what was once familiar? To reverse it. For example, a working man wakes up, goes to work, finishes his shift and returns home. What if instead he would wake up, go to work and at the moment when he would arrive in front of the building he would not enter it 38

The expression of the individual but would go back to his house and repeatedly do this for the same amount of time he would have spent working his shift? It does not make sense. But it does not matter if it does not make sense. I believe that maybe, not always, but most of the times even the absurdity has it’s own logic. It is not about giving you the answer but it is about causing your brain to function through the process of searching for an answer The inability to grasp the truth is the failure and disappointment of our own mind to successfully understand true meaning. But ‘truth’ is such a broad word, what is truth and what underlines it? I believe truth is the guts– the honest and liberated voice spoken from the mind. It shares similarities with intuition but the difference is the moment and when decides to come. Has it been thought beforehand or did the exact moment come forward on its own? Following the scenes that have been seen from the eyes of a main character it almost feels like we have come closer to the character and how he experiences a moment.

Even though we acknowledge the separation between our perspective and his own, we can understand. It is impossible to be completely devoted to the same emotion.

What is the psychological or emotional bond to unfamiliarity in which was once familiar?

To begin with, familiar in a broader meaning is the field of environmental representation.


What is the psychological or emotional bond to unfamiliarity in which was once familiar? As stated by Evans, Pezdek, Thorndyke and HayesRoth, a familiar environment is represented in allocentric way (collectively positioned, is an idea of something that has occurred and has been followed by a group, that does not include a personal point of view) which is linked with experience and memory of the environment. On the other hand, unfamiliar, has a self-infatuated way. It uses the representation and references adjusting a context to re-position. To re-locate, re-construct and re-demonstrate. We can see this in a lot of art forms, where the creator is using a general stated knowledge interpreted in his way while he can manipulate the context across the space of realism and mind-set to accomplish unfamiliarity. A great example of the ‘’Penetration’’ method is the filmmaker David Lynch. He once quoted that ‘’I don’t know why people expect art to make sense when they accept the fact that life doesn’t make sense.’’ 8

This is a director who enriches his films through the duality of familiarity, and has been working with uncanny representation in cinema. ‘Enigmatic and very uncertain’ signifies his technique by entitling the way unfamiliarity is rotating in the majority of his scenes. He takes the time to bring the viewers in close proximity of the character, this is where the viewer can witness his true personality.

As I have mentioned before, like Tarkovsky’s view, the articulation of the outside frame beyond the existence of the character is a vast territory that shapes the temper and contraindication for him. Clearly, in Lynch’s angle, outdoor sound is enhanced similarly and the audience takes a better glimpse of how character’s acts are escalating, and how the exterior is conducting the noxious.

‘Bizarre and unpleasant’ the characters break and explode in a state of madness or anger, filth or agony, ultimately it is awkward to follow and apprehend since the context is unclear and not justified. Details of a character’s body are barely seen but even their brief exposure to the camera reveals that there is something not right. This is a taste for us to see how mystery awakens fantasy in our thoughts. Facial expressions are equally as important as the sound of the voice from the character, firstly by exaggerating and secondly by discomforting. ‘Extravagant and loud’ he confronts the environment by expressing what the character is feeling from the inside out.

Weirdness that is brought up is unexplained and at times surrounded by horror or moments of fear. He may have wanted us to stay alert and remember that nothing is going to be settle just as life. With this method, where the viewer is constantly confused and aware of this nonsense flow we do feel Lynch’s skill is moulding us through his allegories. Bare in mind that this narration of unfamiliarity radically opposes the parallel paradox of reality, the one that is being lived and the expectation that us, us as humans always seek fulfillment and this inevitably causes a collision. David Lynch said that before he starts a script he is using fragments of his unconscious, that afterwards will progress by themselves. He does not believe that the author should explain what the work means, simply because it is usually up to the viewer to find their way in this artistic journey.

Trying to order chaos in a space where everything appears to be a puzzle reminds me a lot of how art works are. I suppose art is about raising questions that can never fully be explained, but the aim is to put the spectator in the position of opening up and embracing it. Art is a place where it awakens our senses and unconsciousness to participate and create a dialogue. I believe that every artist has an external way to express himself through different directions of the environment that surrounds them. It makes sense that some things are of more value to some certain individuals than of others, and hence this selection could be a stepping stone for an action that wants to be focused on in a higher level or searched for. The object itself has the power to unveil it’s own story and debate this idea itself. Giving these points, the psychological bond to the familiarity and unfamiliarity appears to be deeper that the actual meaning of these words, by unfolding the intimate levels of a personality and discovering when a story bridges the subject with the audience. An odyssey that from the unconscious point of the creator or author, that they intend to disguise visually and broadcast the raw imagery in the back of the mind with the hope that this will be seen through the viewers own personal deepest unconsciousness. 30

What is the psychological or emotional bond to unfamiliarity in which was once familiar? So what I shall ask is, how is our own personal view of the real world seen and how does the idea about ourselves influence the way we sympathize such an unorthodox portrayal? Which is the need that primarily drives us to twist the familiar? I assume that this can never be entirely explained, maybe is just an instinct that our species want to search for. This is the difference that separates us from animals, the power of the will.

Everything begins from the idea of ourselves. For something more than what we see, to explain the unexplained.

I against I

I saw a man falling but I had no time to make a wish Giannis Aggelakas 9


I against I Inadequacy for our less incompetent desires and for our very unfulfilled egocentrism. I, the greatest and the favorite of all. I, the worst and the most contemptible of all. We are born to learn things, we are also born to confound them. Rational integration and unsatisfied revival, are much supplemented in the unbearable issue of being. The power and the need to rule over someone, more than your self, becomes delightful and desirable. The seconds that are being put aside are the ones who have felt eternity. Is the word ‘I’ more disappointing than the meaning of it? In a psychological sense of the exclusive I, likewise Nietzsche’s Will to Power, the aspect of human desire to rule over someone or something, mastering and dominating is by far a vital instinct. According to Nietzsche, authoritative power is the only power on earth that concludes them to fight and unite against each other. His further explanations of his theory about power are undoubtedly connected with politics.

If we could illustrate the levels of society we could take as an example Karl Marx’s pyramid about the class theory, every being has a different power which means that nobody is equal, hence, this world is a place of hierarchy, where someone has to be on the top (the one who possess the power) and one at the bottom (the one who is under control of the superior). On the top of the pyramid mostly humans who throughout history fought, and demanded to be the superior amongst nature and his own people. Consequently he points out that competition is a feature that is part of each and every one of us. Nonetheless, for Nietzsche, the greatest will to power was something beyond this, and that would be the spiritual one. Intelligent people that will be the creators of a new world, with new values that through their devotion of spirituality will try to change the system for the good. Nietzsche introduces the idea of Nihilism, it comes as a necessity, as a fate and as a destiny. An notable fact about this concept is that it disregards fate, but the concept is meant to be fate itself. Based on thoughts that are opposed to each other, Nihilism is a fact that will come to be the final destination through degradation.

What does it means by saying psychic and logical Nihilism? What would be the reason to turn to Nihilism? In ‘The Will to Power’ the realizing of the true value is to experience Nihilism, which will lead to full awareness. So the whole concept of deconstruction is basically not as random since in order to declare something, first, you need to understand and consciously ‘’demolish’’ it’s structure. The deconstruction, or zero point could be a disappointment for a will, or a motive to power. In a political context, once society’s values are torn apart,the result will be to reevaluate, question the values and life’s functionality. This will break through the conservative class system and will bring freedom and change. Philosopher Nietzsche says in order to succeed this specification he uses Christianity as an aspect to trigger the radical way to express that God is dead. Religion was an idea created centuries ago and still has the same influence as before. The paradox of this notion is the need for us to explain something through the idea of a God. Corresponding to this, evolution and the new age are still based on old fashioned ideologies, that stands as boundaries in the true evolution of the mind.

Nihilism, is a request of defeating such obstacles. Insisting that new orders and values will make us stand up to the world and our existence for what it is, and to not invent a God who will submit us to his will. Humans should be confronted by their idea of the ‘’superhero’’, in Greek Tragedy, god from the machine, whom in the middle of the scene, where the actor is in trouble, will magically appear and give the answers. The acceptance of the inevitable uncertain can be translated as a moral criticism, the will to be practical, to disconnect from the past and to determine the act through your own voice. Be brave to take the responsibility of an action and liberate yourself. I am not going to stand with Christianity as a religion, but I will stand by the distorted values we share according to the beliefs we know. It is fascinating to react in this theory, what will happen if we place this in the art estate? How much does our values decide our will to dominate the image we see? If we demolish our values would it be different from what it means, and will the meaning of the image have no hypostases what so ever? Ego, action reaction, the translation of the image we see is a reflection of our own self. We react upon our own individuality, our beliefs and values for justifying an action, these ideas are combined with collective interpretations. 22

I against I Basically, the dynamic of Nihilism starts from the human essence, what makes us who we are. Then, after a deep analysis of these facts, it suggests a metaphorical death and rebirth. For both the creator and viewer I come to question their worth towards the ‘I’, the ego, which applies in their determination of how they identify themselves in a context bigger than their perception. Obviously, it is an elusive jigsaw, which varies from one individual to the other. Art is a platform where the creator is arranging a composition of his reflection about humanities issues, a reflection of the personal ego.

I know why they never shoot in the legs, in the mind is the target. Katerina Gogou10 We become blind and numb, it is easy to espouse others opinions and harder to defy our negative insight. If we could consciously take into account psychological and logical Nihilism maybe we could reach a higher lever of intimacy and truthfulness relating to our existence and others, as Gogou said, shoot in the mind.

We were looking for guns we knew that everybody dies but there are some deaths which their weight is heavier because they choose themselves the way. And we decided the death of the death because we love too much life. Katerina Gogou11

In the same way of Nietzsche’s viewpoint, loosing something that we are used to is the recognition of it, the understanding of how significant it was. Self criticism as self defeat, a capitulation to your own beliefs, which creates and evolves the way you are living. Naming it hypnagogia, half asleep half awake, with and without will to power. Putting it differently, I believe that as time passes we are drowned in our egocentric minds, we are hypnotized by whatever we see and hear without digesting and finding our own voice.



- Silence is louder than I expected it to be.


Conclusion As I stated from the first chapter, The Birth of the Reader, my main goal was to research on three points, author – object -viewer. However, in order to do so I circled around it, thought every link within and outside of one. In this way the flow of my writing would expand with a wider source of information. Exploring the fragments of these complex names, I understood the importance of their composition. What does this composition want to say and what is the meaning of it? To begin with, the man who delivers and signs the work is being overthrown by the greatness of his titled. It is not anymore about the label in a practical or authoritative sense but it is about his presence, defining a genre he represents and constitutes. Regardless of this, and since it has already been put under a microscope of his atomic principals, it still remains an unfinished discussion that could be answered by the one who seeks to know more about him. In this chapter, there is a contradiction between author and reader, elaborating a revival of the one who is in touch with the work as a third person and turns to support and utter its purpose. Balancing both eqaully, their participation is considerable significant for the flourishing of the composition into a meaningful and visual splendor.

Empathy and Catharsis are sentiments that complete an art piece since they respond to the need of a character or an image we see. They come to be crucial links through the process of disconnection to re-connection, from the very primal stage of looking at something. They grow as the character grows and they relate as the spectator recognizes characteristics that could reflect on him. In the meantime, The Expression of the Individual is a part that investigates the work itself as a form of character, the emergence of it from the womb of the creator that possesses its own distinctive persona. Far removed from the author and in a cinematic atmosphere the existential intentions of the character are allowing the audience to participate by presenting elements of their surroundings that emphasize with their emotional state. Later on, my aim was to concentrate on the aspects of the emotions, Empathy and Catharsis, along with the character by deviating through a different route, a division of reality, corresponding with the unfamiliar. A technique that demands a distortion of the known living perspective to achieve curiosity and controversy. An enigma that lays on the unconscious rather that the actual meaning of the word. At this instant, there comes the last of my chapters, I Against I, beginning with the establishment of the theory of Nietzsche for the inner human power to dominate and arrive to a broader question of the ego.

All in all, there are a lot of questions but no specific answer, for me diving deeper in to subjects that have been circulating within my head, intentionally or not, made me wonder more. No man can be certain about a collective issue, only for his personal viewpoint. I do not think it requires a concrete definition, it is wise to search, think, and do not dwell on the silence.


-Our head is too loud, louder that the actual noises of reality, beyond what exists.

Notes 1. Barthes, Roland. The Death of the Author. The American journal Aspen, 1967, pp. 6. 2. Foucault, Michel. What is an Author. Bulletin de la Société française de Philosophie, 1969, pp. 14. 3. Potts, L.J. ‘’Chapter 6.’’ Aristotle on the art of Fiction. Cambridge University Press, 1968, pp. 24. 4. Kane, Sarah. 4.48 Psychosis. 1st ed., Bloomsbury Publishing, 2000, pp. 35. 5. Wright, M. ‘’SYMM.’’ A Greek and English lexicon, on a plan entirely new. Forgotten Books, 2016, pp. 412. 6. Den Haan, Michelle, and Gunnar, Megan R. ‘’Imitation as a Stepping Stone to Empathy.’’ Handbook of: Developmental Social Neuroscience, The Guilford Press, 2009, pp. 147. 7. Tarkovsky, Andrei. ‘’Introduction.’’ Sculpting in Time. University of Texas Press, 1986, pp. 10. 8. McKenna, Kristine. ‘’A Real Multi-Media Kind of Guy : David Lynch, artist in many forms, tells his tales of Hollywood after ‘Blue Velvet’.’’ Los Angeles Times, 20 Aug.1989, entertainment/ca-1327_1_blue-velvet/4.


Bibliography Books Barthes, Roland. The Death of the Author. The American journal Aspen, 1967. Foucault, Michel. What is an Author. Bulletin de la Société française de Philosophie, 1969. Kane, Sarah. 4.48 Psychosis. 1st ed., Bloomsbury Publishing, 2000. Tarkovsky, Andrei. Sculpting in Time. University of Texas Press, 1986. Coventry, Kenny R., and Olivier, Patrick. ‘’Information Mediums and Mental Representation.’’ Spatial language: Cognitive and Computational Perspectives. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002, pp. 235-237. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The will to Power. Penguin Classics, 2017.

Articles Aggelakas, Giannis. Πως τολμάς και νοσταλγείς τσόγλανε;. Λιβάνη, 1999. Gogou, Katerina. Το ξύλινο παλτό. Εκδόσεις Καστανιώτη, 1982. Gogou, Katerina. Τρια Κλικ αριστερά. Εκδόσεις Καστανιώτη, 1978. Potts, L.J. ‘’Chapter 6.’’ Aristotle on the art of Fiction. Cambridge University Press, 1968. Den Haan, Michelle, and Gunnar, Megan R. ‘’Imitation as a Stepping Stone to Empathy.’’ Handbook of: Developmental Social Neuroscience, The Guilford Press, 2009.

Ross, Alex. ‘’Encrypted.’’ The New Yorker, 11 Apr. 2016. https://www.newyorker. com/magazine/2016/04/11/ stephane-mallarme-prophet-of-modernism Petrides, Antonis. ‘’Wordpress, Εισαγωγή στην Τραγωδια: 2. Ο αριστοτελικός ορισμός της τραγωδίας.’’ Antonispetrides.Word Press, 19 Sept. 2015. https://antonispetrides. tragedy_intro_2_aristotle-on-tragedy/ Berzins McCoy, Marina. ‘’Tragedy, Katharsis, and Community in Aristotle’s Poetics.’’ Oxford Scholarship, 2013. acprof:oso/9780199672783.001.0001/ acprof-9780199672783-chapter-7 Fraser, Bruce. ‘’The Influence of Greek Tragedy.’’, 2009.

Babiniotis, George. php?lid=1&pid=22&catid=1&apprec=6# Can, Vincent. ‘’Hitchcock: The agony is Exquisite.’’ The New York Times, 2 Jul. 1972. hitchcock-the-agony-is-exquisite-hitchcock-the-agony-is-exquisite.html Chen, Nick. ‘’ How a lost David Lynch script explains the divisive Dougie.’’ Dazed, 3 Aug. 2017, article/36961/1/how-a-lost-lynch-script-explains Lim, Dennis. ‘’David Lynch’s Elusive Language.’’ The New Yorker, 28 Oct. 2015, david-lynchs-elusive-language Hadden, Richard W., Wallace, Ruth A., and Wolf, Alison. ‘’Marx’s Theory of Social Class and Class Structure.’’ University of Regina, Sept. 29 1999,



Interviews Lynch, David. ‘’Meditation, Creativity, Peace; Documentary of a 16 Country Tour.’’ YouTube, uploaded by DavidLynchFoundation, 17 Mar. 2016. Lynch, David. ‘’David Lynch - Complete interview.’’ YouTube, uploaded by CreckBenton, 12 Oct. 2014. watch?v=VX6vVMyxwpg Lynch, David. ‘’ Where do ideas come from?.’’ YouTube, uploaded by BAMorg, 8 May 2014. Tarkovsky, Andrei. ‘’Meeting Andrei Tarkovsky: «Cinema Is A Mosaic Made Of Time».’’ YouTube, uploaded by FilmKunst, 13 May 2016.

Tarkovsky, Andrei. ‘’Tarkovski interview part1.’’ YouTube, uploaded by getrotal, 21 May 2007. watch?v=gy1DpCOON6Q Tarkovsky, Andrei. ‘’Tarkovski interview part2.’’ YouTube, uploaded by getrotal, 21 May 2007, watch?v=2MoVQr1t8kU


0 Denial, passive aggressive Control, gradually increasing but also non existing Denial, for the absence of choice but also for the control Lie, non hidden just non mentioned Avoidance, effortless Shame, being an inevitable turn nothing incompatible also for this relentless doubt Denial for the non doubtfulness Domination of anarchy discipline through submissiveness non compulsive freedom suppression of consciousness zero, denial


Psychosis ordinary and inattentive her fury with no accomplice logic compensation, everything becomes zero in front of postponement or multiply hence a need simple and immeasurable



Nothing, an emotion immobilized non existing willingness emotion of a necessarily patience forced or moral without further conjectures nothing over powers 1

Profile for fotinimakri3