< Under construction... Never finished... but readable >

Digital images are unlinked to the support. Save it in another format. The same content is given to see different.

But it is always a bench of bytes and this denotes intelligence, implies the possibility of adding information to pixels.

In this sense, we can say that the picture now is made of information, does not transmit anymore.

Its documentary function is over because there is not any difference between the original and the copy.

Images had left their imago>imitare condition. They suppressed their etimologic essence.

They became second-hand originals.

No?

So, what's the difference between what u keep in your HD,  floppy disks, CDs or zip?

None.

They are identical resetting of the same informative code.

But they are not identical for the experience and this is the fascinating of the clone logic.

Its possibility of being identical being different.

However, something is disturbing...

They are as those of Wop Art (Wap+Op art). Made to be seen on the move, in moblie phones and PDAs, in accordance to entropy and acceleration logic.

And also according to a lack of logic of the market, which makes what it is seen a resultant of the pattern and quality of the monitor, of connection speed, browser...

Therefore, those images cannot enjoy the same status of the icon. Nothing assures its visual unit, that kind of unity that allowed to Mallarmé revolutionize poetry, trusting the materiality of the page.

Everything here refers toan imponderable situation: optic art (op art) accessible via mobile Internet in WAP (wireless application protocol) cell phones. It can be said that the situation is imponderable, not because of the medium's rudimentariness in 2001, but for the incompatibility between what is given to read and its reading context./strong>

The Op Art of the late 1950's and 60's is referential for a reflection on virtual experiences, since the image one sees, resulting from the optic effect, doesn't exist, but is realised as a potential of the original structure.

It is a form of virtualisation that depends on the reader's degree of concentration and introspection, but images conceived for mobile devices no longer relate to contemplation. They are made to be seen in traffic, in a state of dispersion, according to a logic of acceleration that makes introspection inviable.

It was not the case, therefore, of trying to adapt Op Art to cell phones, to create an optic series that could work as a "Tamagotchi" directed to a educated public, fetishising the device and contradicting the object, but rather to propose an ironic situation in which the friction between content and reception conditions sounded as an instigation: to face the novelty of another status of art fruition in entropic environments.

Art not to be seen as art, mixing with the communication devices and presented to reading interrupted by several other inputs...

From there the perplexity: Concrete poetry and op art do not have place anymore?

And what is pop art in a global culture, which means SEGMENTED culture, where there is not universality of the sign?

Are we under Unamuno's law?

" I am myself and my circumstances."

Art lost its contemplative function and this makes all the difference.

Life goes mobile...

Giselle Beiguelman, 2001

PS: Since April 10th 2015, Wop Art [wap + op art] is part of the collection of the Museum of Contemporary Art of the the Univesity of São Paulo (MAC-USP)