https://www.dailyserving.com/2009/04/julieta-aranda/ an international forum for contemporary art Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:18:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.13 https://www.dailyserving.com/2009/04/julieta-aranda/comment-page-1/#comment-321 Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:44:54 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=870#comment-321 Of course! Glad you are part of the discussion.

]]> https://www.dailyserving.com/2009/04/julieta-aranda/comment-page-1/#comment-320 Fri, 10 Apr 2009 06:45:03 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=870#comment-320 Well put. Very interesting work. Thanks for the post.

]]> https://www.dailyserving.com/2009/04/julieta-aranda/comment-page-1/#comment-319 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 20:53:50 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=870#comment-319 You’re right DC, certainly we recognize that time in scientific terms (ie: “the rough period or span it takes for a human being to walk 100 meters”) is unarguably objective. I was approaching this piece through a voice with the same sort of deliberately arrogant human perspective that breeds the inclination to assume, without a larger understanding, that everything in our world is subjective, and ultimately at the mercy of our whims. I think this is what Aranda was investigating in response to Kiribati, and her work playfully straddles the realms of objectivity and subjectivity, trying as she might to stretch the rules.

]]> https://www.dailyserving.com/2009/04/julieta-aranda/comment-page-1/#comment-318 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 15:21:43 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=870#comment-318 But isn’t time rather a *phenomenological* part of life, and an *integral* part or continuum of space? And wouldn’t it be better to say that our arbitrary means of recording and demarcating time are subjective concepts (hours, minutes, datelines, etc…), but that time itself (for example, the rough period or span it takes for a human being to walk 100 meters) remains functionally constant, and objectively measurable? Let’s not confuse our cultural delineations of time, with time itself. Just sayin’…

]]>