jueves, 9 de octubre de 2008
lunes, 6 de octubre de 2008
During the XXth century a debate arose in philosophy that divided in two big sectors the artistic world of the plastic arts. With Henry Bergson – Nobel Prize of literature, despite being a philosopher‑ we we all became more conscious that what it imports in expressive terms, it is the immediate information of the conscience. But the XXth century came to raise something more.
The big worry was that of if it exists or not the thought without images. For some, the thought comes from the imagógico, he is a son of the ensoñación and the fantasy and he cannot exist without the images eleáticas that serve him as support, For others, the thought is a linguistic derivation of the words and it exists only by virtue of the syntactic structures and oracionales that offers the language to communicate.
The debate might have stayed in the mere discursive banality of a lot of philosophical meaningless polemic, if it was not because the plastic arts and the painting of the XXth century, anything came to say on this matter, from the futurism, to the cubism, of the neo impressionism and his search of the snapshot in the perception, to the abstract one and the post modernism.
Ell artist of the XXth century is already figurative, modern, hyperrealistic or of constructivista, it tries to transmit from where he feels, fenomenológicamente, the process of designing and of conceiving as base of one to think facing a world that it presents him to him as his only interior truth.
Here Cabral attracts attention of the simple observer; on the one hand, the comprehension of which the form is not a mere academic formalism – something that is learned as requisite then to forget ‑, but earlier well, on the contrary: the form is the key of the real thing, it is the eleático in the sense of Parménides, which it can defy to the time and his risks, because it does to the fundamental process of perceiving the chaos of the senses, in a ruled cosmos, normado and understandably. “ It saw nobody spending two times the same river ”, was saying Heráclito and Parménides, was answering him: " But river is a river, and not another thing. ”
On the other hand in Cabral one appears of constructivismo – the sense of which a perception is not destroyed, but preparing it in secondary terms ‑ in the frame of an eager search of the abstract one that is towards where he has thinking about the process what Sigmund Freud calls a “ secondary formation ”, this is, the aptitude to one himself be seen from out and to understand us in the process of understanding. The works of Cabral give to think, to reflect and look again