In relation to both the problems & the subsequent definitions which arise from the former, Jonathan Culler’s attempt to lengthen the dialogue on which “issues” are “crucial” to “theory” (although he specifically notes “theory” within the realm of literature, theory will be, in this response, reflexively/briefly used within the context of digital/non-traditional art) his decision to paraphrase specific bits of Judith Butler’s “performative” definitions of gender is, perhaps, a fairly effective buttress towards his own investigations as to what a performative piece of art entails
-
When he implores the reader that “… the relation between what language does and what it says” is “… the basic problem of the performative”, his interpretation of Butler’s (one of many) definition(s) of what the female gender is —- a continuously open-ended, evolving entity which does NOT depend on set, concretized, literal definitions which are wedded to patriarchy-based mores —- may be useful towards understanding what art (in this case digital art) can/could be, versus what it is/should be
-
Furthermore, when he questions the possibility of a “… harmonious fusion of doing and saying ” and whether such fusion presents “… an unavoidable tension that governs and complicates all textual activity”, he is ultimately questioning the validity of the current milieu we are mired in, the age of mass media; specifically, he uses the example of television viewers’ rigid belief in what happens on the screen, deeming such belief as something that “happens period” —- a belief that is a “… model of the performative” which toxically offers a demonstrative “… blurring between fact and fiction”
-
Whether or not we are in the age of mass media is unquestionable, but this particular part in Culler’s text may be arguably outdated, considering his text was published in 1997 and his definition of our postmodern epoch does NOT consider the internet as THE dominant medium of communication; additionally, within the same token, one can easily argue that the Internet’s domination contributes to the possibility that perhaps blurring fact & fiction has become a non-sequitur
-
In other words, in this post-post modern age, where the saturation of media has unanimously invaded humans’ consciousness & attention spans, fact & fiction may have negated one another & have thus, in confluence, birthed a new form of narrative which relies on the imbrication of reality & virtuality —- an imbrication which can only be validated by how many Facebook “likes” it procures