Count of a mock representation Teodulo Lopez Melendez if the possibility of a new thought soaks in the image or its absence is an old discussion. Durand refers to the imaginary, while Deleuze argues us one without them. Click Paul Price for additional related pages. Other, more risky, argue that a structural relocation is required to provide vision. The image can be seen as deceit, deformation or opacity, old theme, but also as effect of reality or voracity posmediatica. On the cultural tradition that we move we walk about the expressible and the visible, on the all-powerful screen that allowed some build an empire of orders and laying on top of the publishers of printed newspapers. You can induce history from a fictional political reality and produce a science of imaginary solutions. We got to the point in which one could only think from the perspective of the present dictatorship. What was not allowed ever in the world of the newly fallen media Czar was a counter-thought who pulled the lost dichotomy of a political strategy focusing on failure towards the emersion of new attitudes and ideas.
This way your channel went to become the image of the permanent present, one insurmountable. This communicational hypertrophy ended with the possibility of entire look and, of course, with any recognition of a different opportunity. One that ended the use of Royal images becoming mere appearance. Thus, Venezuela was converted in an image between parentheses in a world desrealizado ever convertible in feasibility. Everything was happening on the screen, nothing outside of it. He became to the country, from his oblique gaze, a Chamber vacuum and decompression set. A simulation of reality was seen, with his favorite guests who repeated the need for voter turnout or that turned the images of the dictator pronouncing its contradictions in an optical illusion. That is, an obsession with the image in its artificiality into fetish.