Framework and speculation of the present research constitute the dipole fragment andpart object.
The sense of fragment refers to rubbles, ruins, tearing to pieces, wound, injury, fragmentary, unmonumental, unfinished.
The sense of part object has as logical consequence its relation with the completed/finished object, the relationship between the part and the whole number, the non-conjunction of the parts, the connections that are never completed or constitute a unity.
The romantic fragment by G.B.Piranesi estimate the complicated/multifold rhetoric of fragment. It concerns gradual decomposion (breakdown) to cosmo-idol (cosmo-icon) and it refers to notional and literal reformation from mass of scattering traces, parts, fragments, or ruins.
The romantic is not identified with anti-classic, it is something that aims at becoming classic, something in progress, in development, before the classic, something dynamic, effective, which serve the crystallization of the second.
Romantic poetry is the poetry that cause second thought/reflection from the beginning, that is in progress timelessly with great representative in Greece, Dionysios Solomos and his work Eleytheroi Poliorkimenoi.
Solomos elaborated his work continually, at every turn, to achieve the absolute perfection in form, trying to release them from anything odd, unnecessary and superfluous, that could destroy the clear lyrical substance. For many lines/rhymes are saved many variations.
In anyone else romantic poet the fragmentality has that scattering pattern that appears in Solomos. Even the characteristic of fragmentality represents for Veloudis the expression of romantic aesthetics that apprehends the artistic activity like creative approach.
The relationship copy - paste, collage, comprises an extreme revolutionary formalistic innovation in art. Cubists, pioneers of collage, turn the picture into tableauobjet, a made object, a fabricated being, separate, independent, single, that recreates freely the exterior world.
Surrealists deified the power of instinct through the technique of collage. Searching the accidental, they adduced their personal fantasies, their dreams. Furthermore, collage was used in Popartand ready-made.
Assemblage, the developmentofcollage, arises as synthesis – composition – selection from dissimilar, heteronymous, unfitting objects, rather than something fabricated, as a product of massive production. Its vocabulary is allegory, metaphor, comparison, superposition.
Neorealists arrived in décollage, the process of unstick, detachment, ungluing. Lacerate surfaces from repeated layers, papiercollé, which expose/reveal the violence of the artistic action. Finally, Minimalists, in notional art, with mixed technique and mixed materials, indicated alternative approaches of collage.
The interjection of Solomos’ thoughts between the scriptures/text is extremely important. It is necessary for the comprehension/understanding of Eleytheroi Poliorkimenoi, as it corresponds to the belief of the Romantics in the conjugation between philosophy and art.
Interfering the poem, I try to attempt experimentation with a borderline experience of an interventionist step. This process is a bridge built in a utopian way between very different realities, proportional or alike, which sometimes are captured and immediately escape.
Two subjects/questions/points are posed concerning the choice of the interference and the insetting images. The prevention of war and the inability of an image to stop it despite the repulsion/detestation caused.
Images bring out intense storm and stress/upset, because they draw/reflect the destruction of flesh and stone with completeness, horror and disgust. But the super saturation drives/leads to corruption and limited ability of alertness of conscience. The culture of view cancel the moral (ethical) power of each image.
Nevertheless, it demonstrates the atrocity (savagery) through a rational pictorial protest against every war, just like a manifest against the violence.
In correspondence to Solomos’ poems, which are hardly ever in terminal completed form, Duchampdid not finish his readymades. He was always into a field of experimentation with various reproduction in figures and repetitions in shapes.
Both had chosen the repeat and the fragmentality inside the work they produced. Solomos with the sentiment of unsatisfied and Duchamp in possess of many proportional obsessions.
The biggest importance for them had the process itself. Obsessed in repetition, addicted to the return in the beginning, to flashback, to retrogressions.
The term monumental is related with massiveness, eternity, public significance/gravity. The neologism unmonumental has been created to describe anything is not against these values, but on purpose goes without them.
The unmonumental could be referring to ashes, remains, rubbles, ruins, debris, scraps, traces, unfinished, incomplete.
The fragmentary process of piece to piece, temporary jury-rigged, put together state give a literate sense of unexpected, uncalculated, non-potential, unlikely.
The artists are attracted by the discarded, the detritus, the remainder, the state of incompletion. In general by something not completed, by not finished product, by not finished work.
Eventually, which are the motives of this choice? For WalterBenlamin, thesecretmotivation of a collector is the fight/game against the separation (dispersion). The great collector from the beginning of the process is confused concerning the fragment – trace until the end of his work, that looks like it never ends, as it could never be completed.
The process of production and experimentation of an artist upon his work is timeless.
