Abstract The article aims at showing how far the technologies of audiovisual registration affect not only the ontology of images but also our sense of realism in politics and history. As argue Jacques Derrida and Bernard Stiegler, historical events have become “tele-events” after the birth of these technologies. Our handling with images has changed accordingly. As argues Pietro Montani, we no longer consider them as “copies” of real objects but rather as “occasions” for initiating processes of “validation” of history. Hannah Arendt’s opposition between the ancient concept of history being based on praxis and the modern concept of history as “fabrication” (poiesis) of the humankind must be therefore reconsidered. History is rather the negotiation between these two attitudes (praxis and poiesis): cinema might be one of the exemplary sources of this negotiation, as epitomized by the documentary work in the audiovisual archives conducted by Esfir Shub (1927) and Harun Farocki (1992). Representation (Louis Martin) becomes thus a dynamical power of imagination dealing with historical and political reality; consequently, the “ideal spectator”, just as the “ideal reader” for novels (Umberto Eco), is charged with a new task of actualizing the sense of images with regard to their historical and political references.

中文翻译：

---

雅克·德里达（Jacques Derrida）和伯纳德·斯蒂格勒（Bernard Stiegler）之后的历史现实与政治美学

摘要本文旨在说明视听配准技术不仅对图像本体产生多大影响，而且还影响我们在政治和历史上的现实感。正如雅克·德里达（Jacques Derrida）和伯纳德·斯蒂格勒（Bernard Stiegler）所说的那样，历史事件在这些技术诞生之后已经成为“电视事件”。我们对图像的处理也发生了相应的变化。正如彼得罗·蒙塔尼（Pietro Montani）所说，我们不再将它们视为真实物体的“副本”，而是视为启动历史“验证”过程的“场合”。因此，必须重新考虑汉娜·阿伦特（Hannah Arendt）在以实践为基础的古代历史观念与作为人类的“捏造”（poiesis）的现代历史观念之间的对立。历史实际上是这两种态度（实践和诗歌）之间的谈判：电影可能是这种谈判的典范来源之一，如埃斯菲尔·舒布（Esfir Shub，1927年）和哈伦·法罗基（Harun Farocki，1992年）进行的视听档案中的纪录片作品所概括的。代表性（路易斯·马丁）因此成为处理历史和政治现实的想象力的动力。因此，“理想的旁观者”和小说的“理想读者”（翁贝托•埃科）一样，承担着实现关于历史和政治参照的图像感的新任务。