Gintautas Mažeikis

Two topics are discussed in the article: first, relation between corporeal experience of artistic criticism and artistic counterpropa­ganda, second, influence of artistic criticism to the building of perso­nal body of fantasy.

Artistic propaganda and counterpropaganda as forms of art could be manipulative and spontaneous, but in both cases the art of counterpropaganda is an ideological one. An ideological element could be formulated rationally and irrationally. In any way, artistic criticism influences subconscious of people almost always. An ideological element of artistic counterpropaganda (as a case of artistic criticism) exists as a work of art and could be interpreted in M. Heidegger’s manner. It means that an ideological art of work and the art of counterpropaganda could be interpreted by the same notions, metaphors and paradigms of Heidegger as a common artistic work (for example, painting, sculpture or architecture). In the case of ideological spontaneous works publicity and openness of an artistic work become quite paradoxical and show not only the truth of a human being but realize different manipulative ideas and simulacrus without any signifying of reality. The article of Vl. Lenin “Tolstoy as a Mirror of Russian Revolution” is considered here. Lenin sees artistic criticism in the works of Tolstoy as a beautiful mimesis of a Russian village’s consciousness in the period of 1905–1907 revolution. The idea that a art of work is not a simple mirror or mimesis but is a participant of an event is maintained in the paper. The symbolical world is constantly being changed and the same content of a work of art, for example, writings of Tolstoy, all the time is variated and depends on a different impact of historical (social, cultural) events or the reader’s capacity to interpret the work of art.

Propaganda in the issues of itself coincided with the shine in M. Heidegger’s sense. Persuasion is a pure publicity and the basic intent of propaganda is to show some ideas that could be obligatory for consumers. The showing depends on the shine, the idea and the aims. However, the shine is always ambiguous: the idea that shows itself only persuades spectators about truth but is not truth in essence.

Counterpropaganda and artistic criticism could be reflective (abstract or analytical), intuitive and vague. Intuitive artistic criticism is not an abstract knowledge and it influences a human body and impacts his fantasy. The development of the body of fantasy and transformation into the consciousness of a body is considered in the article. The story about the picture of Dorian Gray is interpreted there. Fantasy and desires under pressing of artistic criticism and different types of propaganda are formed and transformed into the body of spectators. Building of the body of fantasy and its transformation into habitus of a human being depends not only on a human’s existential and practical experience but also on the impression of art. The conception of a Fold ( Pli – French) of Gilles Deleuse is considered in the context of artistic criticism and experience of building of the body of fantasy.

The Fold is not a sign, it is a twofold of the Symbolical World (Heidegger’s Zwiefalt des Seins, Zwiefalt der Grundworte). Vague, unspecified criticism hasn‘t any propaganda aims and just simply disseminates the sense of an artistic work by different metaphors, textual strategies and so on. Dissemination (J. Derrida‘ s dessemena­tion) of the sense creates an ambiguous situation, prepares emancipa­tion without any aims, without teleology. Dissemination opens a pos­sibility for different games, various interpretations and unique buil­ding of the transgressive body of fantasy, for example, one of Queer.