SESSION III: Contemporaneity

Time and nature have always been a concept and a dilemma, us humans have tried to grasp. To set the record straight, we've tried to define them with words such as; Contemporaneity. When we think about it, in itself it doesn't hold much meaning. It's used to describe many things that don't necessarily fit with each other. Some examples are: a timeline, a process, or any field of art such as architecture, dance or music. To say something is contemporary, most people assume its because it was created recently or not so long ago, when in reality we should question what timeline is considered recent and what group of things should be docked down by the same categories in which time (an ongoing topic) is essential. On his essay What is The Contemporary?, Giorgio Agamben helps us explore different definitions of this term, to set chronological decisions for ourselves and decide what really should be characterized together. Meanwhile, Lydia Kallipolity also has a certain point of view on the matter, described on her essay Pluralism vs. The Cloud.

Agamben reflects upon the notion of " the contemporary" proposed by Nietzsche. This would be ill- timed or in a timeframe that is mismatched. To understand this, you need to acknowledge the fact that time never stops running; because of this, a work of art, a house, even a person cannot be contemporary ever if it's fixed under a category in a certain time period. In relation to this, he proposes a new definition: " contemporary is something that is aware of the darkness shrouding their time". He utilizes this metaphor eluding to Osip Mandelstam's poem: My Century; in which that darkness is described as the "vek". In other words, this analogy refers to humans response to darkness, the acceptance of the present as is, and the future as pure light in which to look upon, even if it's unattainable as we strive to get through to it. At some point, our present was the light the future held, but seeing it as a never ending loop, to understand the term as Agamben stated, one needs to set timeframes (contradicted by the same concept, yet again).

Following this train of thought, in which contemporaneity cannot be defined by timeframes, but is subjected to them; Lydia presents her essay. Timelines ARE, and will always be essential when studying design and art, yet they need to be malleable in order for them to work. She brings her own perspective by presenting two examples. The first one is Charles Jenk's Evolutionary Tree to the year 2000(1971). It was very useful because it was a malleable art timeline, utilizing logic to document while thinking about the future, certain adjectives, and designer's names with their respective design movements.

The other example she brings is Adrien Meyer's timeline in his book Synoptic Vision: Example of an Evolutionary History (2008). This example is also important because it brings another perspective into pluralism. In itself, pluralism is negative towards society. The reason for this is that if it fits works into categories, as previously mentioned, they are being reduced, as opposed to accepting their differences. It should all work in a space of constant collaboration, based on analytics and statistics. This would allow a bigger picture, rather that being led a stray by historical bias.

The two present different ways in which they analyze time, but as humans we should be able to comprehend and develop a contemporary awareness. Lydia does this with chronological division and reasoning, while Agamben utilizes diversity, as well as fact-based evidence. There will always be some uncertainty in which we can all agree will never be fixed, because as time, it never is. It is our duty as citizens to keep exploring about what this "in the air" concept is and to find perhaps, in a far future, yet closer present an end to this time loop.

References:

• Agamben, G., Kishik, D., & Pedatella, S. (2020). What Is the Contemporary? In "What Is an Apparatus?" and Other Essays (pp. 39-54). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

• Kallipoliti, L. (n.d.). Turtles Do Not Successfully Mate with Giraffes: Pluralism Versus the Cloud. Retrieved September 15, 2020, from https://www.academia.edu/23132953/Turtles_Do_Not_Successfully_Mate_with_Giraffes_Pluralism_Versus_Cloud

• Wagner, K. (2019, October 28). Charles Jencks Tried to Make Sense of Architecture in a Messy Time. Retrieved September 17, 2020, from https://www.metropolismag.com/architecture/charles-jencks-mcmansion-hell/