A TV with its back facing us is a resignation from giving a gift, from giving the viewer a chance to get something. A kind of game with the viewer. Until now the viewer would find what he or she was oriented to; that’s universal for everyone. It’s not right to feel too confident nowadays. On the other had, one doesn’t want to provide for something like that. Today, every element may be a delusion or an oddly understood reality. One may state that an image is lying and the certainty should be maintained only for the “all-pervasive” mystery of the image. Blurring the border between fiction and truth gives rise to something new: a visual revolution, “the great mystery”, something spiritual that we may feel inside; this projection occurs inside us. Only that way one can reach more abstract meanings that unexpectedly lose their properties; only that way helps in finding the actual version. It may be more about redefining the phenomena being subject to cause-and effect rules, about choosing those that are elusive and hidden. A TV mirror is also a relic that is a transitional stage between a corpse and a symbol of community; we should try to extract the essence of symbol which had been hidden so far. A TV with its back facing us is not the same one (ego) that it used to be, it gets rid of it by turning its back on us. However, the obtrusive attitude of the viewers makes them watch another transition always from the same viewpoint of their ego. The occurrence of a new possibility means an introduction of a certain discord. Having the inert power of reality and time turned against the usual is like any “truth”, it’s only an accidental and uncertain appearance of a possibility of something that is timeless (gives a greater possibility of insight into the essence).
In the pathos of proximity (screen – mirror), there appears an ambiguous vibration spanning fear and delight. Finally we watch atrocities and destruction and cynicism so close. A discreet show is supposed to disturb the illusory devotion to mindless satisfaction. This division may look cunning and obscure. The situation is created by circumstances conducive to becoming a subject or rather being included in it. The mirror – or fidelity to the event – makes a real breakthrough in both the mental and practical order in which the events occurred. The “truth” is the real process of fidelity to the event. A movie being played, a document, a live coverage, anything on TV, shows, films, news, all the illusion and created vision that is reflected, the image in the mirror, becomes the truth in the mirror, “almost” without any “distance” for the maximum “fidelity to the events” and, as a matter of fact, due to the 1:1 fidelity, we get the truth, we get what said fidelity creates in a given situation. What we will call the subject will be something that maintains that fidelity thus supporting the process of truth. The process of truth shapes the subject.
The process of truth based on fidelity is an immanent breakthrough and each time it is reinvented anew. “The different” doesn’t make a difference; the difficulty is on the side of “the same”. “The same” is not actually what it is but what follows; the truth is indifferent to differences. (Ego) developing by means of identification with others as a reflection in the mirror strengthens us in the exterior of the different which constitutes ourselves perceived by ourselves.
The similarity between the different and the same requires it to be the guaranteed experience of distance, the covering of which constitutes “the principle of truth” (authenticity). And yet, nothing in this simple phenomenon provides such guarantee. It is so because the occurrence of the different in its finiteness may be mistaken for an imitation. The mirror effect paralyzes any intervention, anyway.