Search
Search Menu

Introduction

Might we reconcile with the riches of nature such as they are found in its laws, and the use of matter upon which we depend every day? Can we imagine that matter, everything that includes matter, like another name for nature, will never again be ignored or submitted to a desire for control in order to satisfy a certain number of problems? It would be a point of departure to rethink the strange rupture between nature and culture, transcendence and immanence, through the complexity itself of the objects in the world, and the strange, “blinding closeness” of the matter that makes up all of us. Simply put: matter, not in terms of function, but rather of existence with and in which we act, the communicator of energies and source of metamorphoses.

My research is comprised of the analysis and comprehension of the construction of certain images: microscopic imagery and new technologies that permit the creation of images of objects at different scales. The techniques used for the creation of these images are often very far from classic photography, which captures images via sensitivity to visible light. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish a blended image from a microscope image (atomic force microscope or bubble chamber, for example) and even from some diagrams. I am interested in the passage that is produced from a conventional image that reproduces or prolongs the eye (in other words that captures the light and interprets it) to the use of other physical phenomena for a similar result: a surface of nuances or colors along the length of visible waves, in a frame, testimony to the material existence of an object. The objectives are to understand the implications of the desire to make everything visible in the face of the materiality of the world, of the possibilities to make images from them, to integrate them or to doubt them. Through these images, my research questions the tensions between deep attention to matter and the daily disregard for the use of resources. The attitude is not the same but the notions that are reflected in it are common. However, one must ask if these attitudes are fundamentally different, or if they come from a similar tendency.

The construction of images seems, in the aforementioned efforts, to demand that nature show herself. This stands in opposition to the epistemological crisis in which quantum theory plunged those who tried to interpret it, and which showed the intelligibility of microphysical entities and the impossibility of understanding them through ordinary language and images. At the same time the new images, of atoms for example, constitute a new approach to what might be an image.

The goal would be to transform or open up visual relationships, to initiate a sort of visual ecology. The images of new microscopic technologies are problematic. But they also, I believe, make this technology suitable for the rethinking of attitudes and aptitudes needed to represent the world’s matter.