Re: [-empyre-] on meaningful articulations : strategies

"rherbst@journalofaestheticsandprotest.org" <rherbst@journalofaestheticsandprotest.org> · Sun, 6 Nov 2005 21:00:54 -0500

Christina U,

---"Robby - i tend to disagree with you, I think art does have the power to
change people's perception of things  and give us a very complex experience
of reality. Art can indeed be effective in the traditional art world.

I think I addressed this in my last post, but of course I hope that art (or
any other media) does have the power to 
change people's perception of things (I'd be a pretty cynical SOB to
believe otherwise). In my very first post I was 
responding to the great artist theory of history, and discussing the
importance of thinking of broader pictures. Here 
I will quote Ryan's earlier statement "a lot of critically engaged practice
has put much faith in the notion of tactics as 
a reactionary form of practice, whether of the direct action kind, or the
unconscious everyday method of coping. but 
i'm wondering if it's not important now to develop notions of strategy...
what would a "strategical media" look like? 
this is what i've seen as part of the journal's project."  

----" I think one problem that stands in the way of having a serious
discourse in
the gallery/museum system is the 'branding' of the individual artist/artist
group/ project and - along with it- the need for "product"[artist=product]
consistency/" and " I wonder -  what started out as a "confined" art
project is now an art
collective/cultural machine driving its own advertisement campaign with
spin-off projects in NY, shwag, events etc." and " I would argue that
Fallen Fruit is an example 
of a project that is in the process of commodifing/branding itself; the
question is -is  this sort of
production around the artwork an example of an"embodied" practice?
Or is it an example of an  effective marketing strategy in order to get the 
project into the Whitney  Biennale? Or is this commodification even 
necessary to be effective?"

First off, I would like to state straight fowardly that I find it very hard
to condemn any artists for trying to make a 
living. This may be percieved as cynical and counterproductive, however I
find it very unproductive to get into 
conversations about whether somebody has sold out or not. I may be
disapointed with someone who stops having 
an "embodied practice" but I am aware of how fucking hard it is for people
to try to live as an "artist"- especially an 
artists that doesn't make objects to sell. I think that the terms of this
selling out have been extremely well defined 
and debated in the last thirty years, and it is a discourse that I am not
interested in furthering (Unless it is about 
directly challenging lame institutions,). Capitalism's logic is
consumption, when someone engages creatively in 
America, this is always a vector that an artist can choose to manipulate or
not. We all have different descriptions of 
what vital and creative production is. 

Going back to Sekula, while I may find him irrelevant, there may be
somebody somewhere who finds his pictures 
captivating and able to deliver " a complex picture of reality". Likewise,
growing up, I found some of the most 
powerful statements and visions in some of the most branded places- classic
rock for chist sake. Now I don't think 
that CSNY, Yes, the Moody Blues, or the Who will lead us to the barricades,
however I think on a continuim of lame 
ass to cutting edge culture, I can place them as somewhere beyond mickey
mouse. 

Therefore, as to the question of how to measure the arc of a collective or
a mode of production, I am not so 
interested in consistency. If some one does lame work I can challenge them
and than I can just move on. Maybe it 
will blow someone's mind in Wichita.  As I stated earlier I am much more
interested in sewing a sweater than doing 
quality control on the yarn. Of course commidification is not neccesary to
be effective, but it is a very interesting and 
also potentially problematic sphere to engage. Just because it is
problematic doesn't mean that it shouldn't be 
engaged with. Some people think they can ride the tiger and beat it. I
think looking at the Ecology or Organics food 
movement might be instructive here. Would the world have been better off if
these concepts hadn't become 
branded? How about the womens movement, the brand of "roe vs wade" ? I
don't know, and I am not sure how to 
measure this. But it would be an interesting study...

Last thought, certain groups of anarchists would say that all language is
commodification, branded, dead.That once 
action or desire is put into words it is doomed. This thought can be
attibuted to old school situationists as well as 
back to the cave primitivist anarchists. A certain branch of Green
Anarchists look to culture itself as a the route off 
all oppression, and pine for pre-lingaul hunter gatherer clans. My point is
that these folks are always gonna out 
radical me- they're always gonna have a more cutting edge
political/cultural critique. While I find thier ideology 
completely illogical I also find it inspiring, and their actions
fascinating... and this in itself is the nature of art- and 
possibly the nature of their provocation. Media exists on a spectrum, and
while I tend to be interested in the more 
dangerious variety, I also will not discount or purge others for not living
up to my expectations. In a sense this is like 
shooting ourselves in the foot. 

Robby wrote:
>I am very  skeptical that Art, and artists when articulated as individual
> practitioners, abstracted from a political, social, or cultural base, can
> have an actual effect here
and
>While Fish Story is a solid and even innovative practice of documentary
>photography- it, like Sekula's practice- becomes a stand in for the real in
>the capitalist art marketplace, as he is bandied about as the last
>standing Marxist in contemporary art

Ryan wrote

> along the lines of Kenneth's questions, i'm also interested in the
> engagement with criticality as an "embodied" practice (to use Brian's
> phrase).

Ryan wrote
> this is what i've seen as part of the journal's project (not to say
> that for everyone else, of course). at some point, we have to evaluate
> the state of embodiment. is the materialization of a given discourse
> just producing books and conferences?

 i've been thinking about de Certeau's use of "tactics" v
> "strategy" in relation to the militaristic use of those concepts...
> (thanks to a recent discussion with the center for tactical magic)
> a lot of critically engaged practice has put much faith in the notion
> of tactics as a reactionary form of practice, whether of the direct
> action kind, or the unconscious everyday method of coping. but i'm
> wondering if it's not important now to develop notions of strategy...
> what would a "strategical media" look like?
> this is what i've seen as part of the journal's project (not to say
> that for everyone else, of course). at some point, we have to evaluate
> the state of embodiment. is the materialization of a given discourse
> just producing books and conferences? or is it interfacing with life in
> other ways? i certainly am not saying i know how to evaluate this (if
> it's even possible) but it seems the questions would have to be raised.
> as to the question about where commodification (fetishism) is
> happening... i think there are multiple ways that one could site that.
> certainly the publishing system, and what's been called the
> "academic-military-entertainment complex" on other lists recently...
> best,
> ryan
>

_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .