Regarding the topic of the article, does this 'stylisation' imply finding a deeper truth beyond imitation, maybe like an algorithm's abstraction? Fascinating analysis.
That's a really interesting comparison. I hadn't heard of that kind of abstraction before, and had to look it up. I may not have fully understood the concept, but here are a couple of thoughts...
It seems like the abstraction of an algorithm does indeed aim at the same goals Camus is talking about in his references to 'style'. That is, it does not do away with the complexities (or the 'deeper truth', to use your phrase) below the surface, it just makes the crucial meanings accessible.
But perhaps the resulting abstraction is 'leaky' - those complexities cannot help breaking through, so that the abstraction no longer serves accessibility, instead it comes to seem like a kind of misrepresentation or hypocrisy. I think Antonioni is most interested in the leakiness of abstractions and the hypocrisies of 'style'.
Regarding the topic of the article, does this 'stylisation' imply finding a deeper truth beyond imitation, maybe like an algorithm's abstraction? Fascinating analysis.
That's a really interesting comparison. I hadn't heard of that kind of abstraction before, and had to look it up. I may not have fully understood the concept, but here are a couple of thoughts...
It seems like the abstraction of an algorithm does indeed aim at the same goals Camus is talking about in his references to 'style'. That is, it does not do away with the complexities (or the 'deeper truth', to use your phrase) below the surface, it just makes the crucial meanings accessible.
But perhaps the resulting abstraction is 'leaky' - those complexities cannot help breaking through, so that the abstraction no longer serves accessibility, instead it comes to seem like a kind of misrepresentation or hypocrisy. I think Antonioni is most interested in the leakiness of abstractions and the hypocrisies of 'style'.