"Perfect" angle for representation

I really enjoyed our critique last week of a strictly iconographic approach in interpreting art. Emanuela's comments about how we constantly strive to find that "perfect" angle to view art, be it in archaeological sites or museums, is an astute observation which I'd like to unpack here. So basically the argument is that we inhibit art's potential of communicating to us its inconsistencies, imperfections, multiple truths and textures. We try to "touch" it and find pride in being able to "touch" it the right way and yet we don't allow for it to touch us back. We don't perceive of our relation to art as something in flux or modifiable through our own performance around it. We concede to being passive spectators as opposed to assuming the position of the "actant." Emanuela also pointed out that despite the fact that we spent over an hour deconstructing the conventional iconographic discourse, the material she researched to present about Nevalı Çori and Göbekli Tepe also employed this discourse. How can we begin, then, to understand the hold of this discourse?

I think that this could be related to a "culture of representation" as Timothy Mitchell talks about it. In his article, "The World as Exhibition" Mitchell characterizes the "Western" world as one which is obssesed with representation. Mitchell describes the world exhibitions of late 19th century Paris as those which create reality as effects of representation. He achieves this critical reading of the exhibition mainly through two threads of Foucauldian anlaysis: 1) By talking about the "European gaze" in the creation of, for example Cairo within Paris and its portrayal as "real," and "authentic." 2) By talking about truth as effect of discourse achieved through dispersed power. What is important for us is the representation of a people and a city through an ideal lens, a *definitive* viewpoint which serves to console the passive public and assure them of the reality of the representation. European explorers who at the same time travel to Cairo seek this perfect angle in Cairo in order to grasp for themselves the image and representation of Cairo created and mainted through that ideal angle back home. This is how they end up on the pyramids or trying to climb up minareds.

I argue, in sum, that the iconographic approach is the reflection of a larger obsession with trying to view life (not just "art" with an assumed inherent aesthetic value) and especially foreign lives about which it is easier to arrive at essentialist claims, as something that must be represented for accurate comprehension and thus consumption. The need for accurate comprehension is justified in viewing artifacts that belong to ancient civilizations, just as it was legimitized in the Orientalism of 19th century Europe. Therefore, to introduce a phenomenological approach to rock art the way Tilley suggests, one must first rid oneself of the assumption that there is an underlying true meaning that is decipherable through perfect representation and available for an absolutely passive audience.