L’oeuvre d’art et la reproduction technique : Recréation poétique et refiguration esthétique

الملخص EN

The invention of new technologies (cinema, photograph, numerical) drew away a mutation concerning the conception of a work of art.

Influence not only touched its poïesis, its devices of creation, but also its esthésis at the level of reception.

The literary text, following the example of a work of art, thinks it is opened on new forms, new speeches.

The act of reading goes about things by “Refiguration” who puts the emphasis on techniques from which a work becomes communicable, techniques that can be spotted in very work.

Grunts Roberts Jauss softens the concept of reading towards that of reception as criterion of the value of the work creating an aesthetic distance between waiting and experience.

What new relations are then forged between the aesthetic production of a work of art and its collective perception? Umberto Eco considers any text as incomplete to be updated: by opening with work, the author tries to grab a more shifty and more complex reality or even hard to represent the escape of sense and impossibility of seizure.

There is in this report a fundamentally critical dimension, to pretend to join form closed to make it better burst inside.

Having registered in the flux and the incompleteness cultivating even a doxographie as she is applied to admit the text and to poll confusion and abysses of sense, opened work loses insurance or solace which give the faces of discontinuity and of incompleteness (Paul Valéry).

However, fact to refuse its fence the text draws away the risk of nonsense.

He appert that the acts of writing and of reading of the text are founded on two pillars: collaboration and opening.

The collaboration rallies other linked authorities corrélativement in some structures which participate in the building of the text.

As for the opening, she is packed with complexity and with diffuseness: isn’t she generative of an épistémologique crisis as much as the immanence of the literary text, as in quite other form of work of art, became unable to assure its survival and its aura? In compensation this quarrel épistémologique around the status of the work of art in the epoch of technical reproduction does not make holes for these new forms of mediation in the field of the literary criticism? does not she reduce art, somehow, to a simple utilitarian object?