0.5
1 cm
CEZANNE STRZEMIŃSKIEGO
73
by the dialectic of Aufhebung. In a wider context, this situation illustrates the mecha-
nism of the reception of the work of art which is based on a distance between the
image and the world - the visual and the written - determining the medium of
painting. The mechanism of this split introduces the ambivalence of the meanings of
reception, which reveals itself through the possibility of simultaneous affirmation
and negation - the interplay of undecidables. Approaching the problem from another
angle, we might say that the ambivalence of the meaning of the work of art creates
“favorable” conditions for any attempts to subject it to various “powerful” discourses
(e. g. a subjection of the work of Cezanne to the historical perspective of the avant-
garde).
73
by the dialectic of Aufhebung. In a wider context, this situation illustrates the mecha-
nism of the reception of the work of art which is based on a distance between the
image and the world - the visual and the written - determining the medium of
painting. The mechanism of this split introduces the ambivalence of the meanings of
reception, which reveals itself through the possibility of simultaneous affirmation
and negation - the interplay of undecidables. Approaching the problem from another
angle, we might say that the ambivalence of the meaning of the work of art creates
“favorable” conditions for any attempts to subject it to various “powerful” discourses
(e. g. a subjection of the work of Cezanne to the historical perspective of the avant-
garde).
