Re: [-empyre-] What is to be done .... continued

Christiane Robbins <cpr@mindspring.com> · Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:24:03 -0800

Well... I'm back, all is well and I wanted to continue on with the  
completion of my thoughts that were so unexpectedly interrupted -   
hopefully this will also somewhat address Chris's post from yesterday -
To be honest, try as I might, I am not at all certain what Peter  
Buergel is actually suggesting.  I’m unsure if should take his  
statement at face value.   If so, I  assume that he is viewing this  
context of a magazine for documenta 12– albeit an online magazine in  
which this very discussion will be catalogued, published, distributed  
and archived – as a tool of mediation for this suggested global  
cultural translation.  If so, could that be seen purely as one rather  
imperfect mode of communication, translation and global distribution  
via this on-line channel.
However, if Peter Buergel is referencing the formation of new art  
markets that reflect, as well as translate, globalism we must ask  
where individual artists see themselves within this frame.  I sense a  
reticence for artists themselves to step forward – individually - as  
if only the curator/ dealer/collector/critic/marketplace can ensure  
their identity and success.  This is becoming more and more evident  
in the online realm as the proliferation of portals take on the role  
of cultural gatekeepers amidst our information overload.  It is these  
external market bearers who then provide the only languages necessary  
to be translated.  More often than naught, they reflect the branding  
of the material world.  Relatively speaking and afraid of re- 
inscribing a cliché , most artists that I know are not particularly  
sophisticated or savvy when it comes to developing effective agency,  
external relationships, social engagement, or the implementation of  
the strategies associated with politics and business, etc.  In fact,  
I often witness the self-protective cocoon of the great shrinking  
artist when it comes to this realm.  But, increasingly we cannot  
remain nestled into the warmth of our complacency within the 21st c.
BUT a number of self-identified and non self-identified ( ie. the  
folk artists of "you tube") artists I know do possess the intrinsic  
and incalculable abilities of incisive perception, cogent and  
distinct analysis, representational strategies, and a discerning  
capability to impart significance. The convenient cliché is that our  
creativity and inspiration needs to guarded from the pedestrian  
forces that govern us.    However, we are often babes wondering  
through the dark woods of the socio-economic sphere – and we seem to  
like it that way. Our deliverance is that as babes, we do not yet  
know fear and subsequently, are not afraid to act.   And … act we  
must.  But we must do so all the time recognizing the agreement to  
which we have already signed.
As an artist – as a cultural producer – for some time now my question  
has always been, how am I complicit i all of this? How can I make  
sense of what is it that do and where I do it ?  How am I unwittingly  
and wittingly reliant on late capitalism and institutionalization for  
my identity?  Back in the early/mid 80’s ( when I was actually a baby  
myself ) I collaborated on some video art pieces including, Perfect  
Leader,” which was then coined “television art” as it self- 
reflexivity was a crucial conceptual underpinning.  The uncomfortable  
position (which to this day makes me squirm ) is the paradox of  
critiquing the system one is working within, the same one which  
enables one’s production ... and, of course, one is then still being  
sheltered and fed by that overarching structure. Can that still be  
considered a critique or is it merely a shape-shift into mimicry or  
worse yet, a feckless form of adolescent rebellion?
As a friend keeps reminding me ….  this can only happen in the art  
world. If this is true ( just for the moment lets consider this  
position ) how then does one take that knowledge, that cultural  
transfer and remain viable outside  the context of the art world?  Is  
it indeed preferable and/or necessary? It strikes me that various art  
systems have remained in a state of arrested development or arrested  
maturation - due to a blatant dependency upon a system of patronage,  
market dynamics and fluctuations, as well as a hermetically sealed,  
popularly-rendered mystique of difference and alienation.... and in  
the midst of all of this,  I continue to ask myself what is to be  
done ... what can be done ... what should be done?
But then I also ask myself… is this simply binary – is everything  
only seen as 0 and 1 s, black or white?  I find myself going back to  
graduate school cultural studies and revisiting Foucault whose  
strength laid in his ability to concurrently occupy the inside and  
outside .  He just seemed to do it as if it were the most natural  
thing to do in the world.  It is a position which I have struggled to  
make my own and it provides a priceless instrument with which to  
inhabit a world increasingly based on the regulatory, binary thinking  
of categorization engendered by the advance of technologies and the  
information implosion.

On Jan 16, 2007, at 1:23 PM, The Art Gallery of Knoxville wrote:
Thank you for the post -  I would like to see more conversation  
about this.
A relevant query here is whether or not the
construct of an exhibition such as Documenta is effective in
adequately providing a context for various art practices to function
as modes of transferable knowledge within the "global complex of
cultural translation?"

I was talking with a friend about this conversation, posed through
Documenta, who was immediately concerned: "Why does this have to be
done under Documenta?  Why can't there be an autonomous outside that
is preserved?"  This is something to be reminded of.
It is important to consider our own practice in terms of spatialized
resistance.  We need to maintain independent spaces - in order to
create a physical independence - an ability to act / participate on
our own terms.
--
Chris
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre

Christiane Robbins
J e t z t z e i t
Los Angeles  l  San Francisco
CA  l USA
... the space between zero and one ...
Walter Benjamin

The present age prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy to  
the original, fancy to reality, the appearance to the essence for in  
these days illusion only is sacred, truth profane.
Ludwig Feuerbach, 1804-1872,
German Philosopher