Can Aesthetic Journalism succeed?/Response to Ch.5

"Every work of art, even though it is produced by following an explicit or implicit poetics of necessity, is effectively open to a virtually unlimited range of possible readings, each of which causes the work to acquire new vitality in terms of one particular taste, or perspective, or personal performance." If every work of art is open to an infinite number of interpretations, are the efforts of aesthetic journalism to highlight what is essentially hidden by mass media and suggest a different web of truths basically futile? Is it enough that aesthetic journalism fuels a new way of thinking, despite lack of control over shaping that new interpretation? Perhaps, if we (artists) believe that "any aspect of knowledge is not simply received, but also performed," then we could facilitate viewers' performance of truth rather than focusing mainly on the one-sided presentation of truth. "Mental constructions of events are more effective than factual documentation and transcriptions. In this regard, it is crucial to bear in mind the performative aspect of the spectator's reading or seeing." I think that the quote is about an idea that aesthetic journalism needs to be more than a re-presentation, a rearrangement, of information. But what exactly will it take for an artist to impress a mental construction of an event/topic onto the viewer and ultimately affect viewers' performance of knowledge? Also, is there a point in pursuing what is real, an idea of truth, if we were to accept "the uncertainty of representation as the core element of any representation"? Paradoxically, this chapter outlines a call for aesthetic journalism to deliver a specific perspective and also to submit to the inherent failure of representation. -- Michelle