abstract art in abstract reality - cecilia bergamo
DESCRIPTION
Abstract art in abstract realityTRANSCRIPT
-
AbstractArtinanAbstractReality
FinalDissertation3September2012
Studentnumber:33229373Tutor:ProfessorAlexDttmann
WordCount:14.973
DepartmentofVisualCulturesMAContemporaryArtTheory
-
2
TABLEOFCONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................3
Methodology ................................................................................................................................7
1stMOMENT:Adorno .........................................................................................................................8
REALITY ...........................................................................................................................................8
ExchangeMania............................................................................................................................9
DominativeAbstractStructure ...................................................................................................10
Totality ........................................................................................................................................11
ART .................................................................................................................................................12
Autonomy ...................................................................................................................................12
Art=reality=abstract ................................................................................................................12
Selfdenial ...................................................................................................................................13
Negation .....................................................................................................................................14
Socialdimension .........................................................................................................................15
ObjectiveDimension...................................................................................................................16
StandingFirm..............................................................................................................................18
AdReinhardt ...............................................................................................................................18
2stMOMENT:Foster .........................................................................................................................21
REALITY .........................................................................................................................................21
Baudrillard ..................................................................................................................................21
SignValue ...................................................................................................................................22
Code............................................................................................................................................23
SimulationandHyperreality .......................................................................................................24
ART .................................................................................................................................................26
NeoGeo....................................................................................................................................26
Simulationism .............................................................................................................................26
Compliantreproduction .............................................................................................................27
Conventionalism .........................................................................................................................28
SherrieLevine .............................................................................................................................28
ADORNOXFOSTER ...........................................................................................................................30
Friction ...........................................................................................................................................34
TOMMAABTS ....................................................................................................................................37
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................................42
-
3
INTRODUCTION
Throughoutmyreadingsduring thispastyear,overandover I cameacross the idea
thatthereality,asweknowit,isanabstractreality.Forexample,IcameacrossAntonioNegri
defending that the reality we see today is abstract and circular, in which experience is
composed by a process of accumulation of abstract events, that even though render reality
palpable and solid, it nevertheless affirms it as superficial, selfaffirming and meaningless
(2011,p.5).IalsocameacrossAlanBadiou(n.d.)affirmingthat globalizationproposestous
anabstractuniversality,anuniversalityofmoney,communicationandpowerwhereweare
ledtobelievethateverythingispossibleandeverythingisimpossibleatthesametime.
Thisconceptofanabstractrealityalwaysremainedelusiveand thispuzzledmeas I
wantedtounderstandhowrealitycouldbealteredinsuchaprofoundway.
The concept also made me wonder what would the relationship be between this
allegedalteredrealityandworksofartthatareabstract.Howcanthesepicturesofnothing,
asProfessorVarnedoe(2006,p.1) jokinglyaddressedabstractworks,emergeorrelate from
our reality? How can a picture with no connection to the visible world be relevant in the
realityweexperience?
-
4
The explanations that the development of early modern abstraction in the work of
Pablo Picasso, Georges Braque, Wassily Kandisnly, Kazimir Malevich was fuelled by
revolutions in society and in consciousness are already common and accepted (Varnedoe
2006,pp.25).Intheriseofthemodernmantheseearlyformsofabstractionwereadvancing
theformalfragmentationandreassemblingoftheworld,givingshapeandcolourtoidealsofa
newsocialorder,envisionedthroughtheadvancements inknowledgeandtechnologyunder
theguidanceofinstrumentalreason(idem;Kuspit1998,p.131).
It is also common the explanations thatwith the GreatWorldWars and the rise of
totalitarianregimens, theweakeningof theseearlymodernaspirationshappenedsucceeded
by riseof abstract expressionism, inwhichmetaphysical or social agendaswere left behind
andindividualfreedomswerecelebrated.
This period was then followed by the rise of consumer society, mass culture and
entertainment, and a heavy politicized critique of abstraction came to dominate the 1980s
(Varnedoe 2006, p.21) opposing artists who believed in abstraction as all powerful and
dominating,asPeterHalley1,seeFigure1,andartistslikePhilipTaaffe,whosawabstraction
as inconsequential and thin (ibid.), a position rather evident in the tone of his abstract
paintings,seeFigure2,whichreduceabstractiontodesign(Foster1996,p.100).
Figure1:PeterHalley,Loop,1995,oilonlinen,162x228cm.
(Source:www.peterhalley.com)
1 Even though Halleyss abstract paintings have been questioned by Hal Foster, I believe his practice is relevant here for his openly declared his faith in abstraction.
-
5
Figure2:PhilipTaaffe,Blue,Green,1987,Silkscreen,collage,andacryliconcanvas,219.7x172.7cm.
(Source:Varnedoe,K.;2006;PicturesofNothing,p.21)
Obviously thisaccount isovergeneralized,buthelpful inaheuristicway inpainting
thepictureoftheuncomfortableplacethatabstractionstilloccupiestoday.
EmblematicofthissituationisthenewsoloexhibitionoftheAmericanartist,famous
forherprojections, JennyHolzer. Inhershowentitled EndgameatSkarstedGallery inNew
York in March 2012, the artist presented paintings that resembled censored military and
intelligence documents related to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and the situation at
GuantnamoBay(Jonhson,2012).Thesepaintings,seeFigure3, formallyandopenlyalluded
to types of modernist abstraction, including Kazimir Malevich, Ad Reinhardt and Robert
Ryman(Jonhson,2012).InareviewpublishedintheNewYorkTimes,ontheoccasionofthe
openingoftheshow,itwasnotedthatbyequatingthesepaintingstocensoreddocumentsthe
artworksaccusenonrepresentationalpaintingofcoveringupandblindingartistsandviewers
torealworldproblems(Jonhson,2012).
-
6
Figure3:JennyHolzer,TopSecret10,2012,oilonlinen,58x44inches.
(Source:SkarstedGallerywebsite)
Suchanopenattackon thepresupposed lackof relevanceorpuredetachment from
reality of abstract artworks reinforced my interest in exploring the relationship between
abstractioninartandthesocialhistoricalrealityoftheworld.
-
7
Methodology
Thegoalofthispaperwillbethentoanalyzetwodifferentmomentswhereabstraction
positioned itself as critical of the alleged abstract reality andby comparing the theoretical
background informing these two moments question how can contemporary abstraction
remainrelevantandoffertruecriticalresistancetothestatusofthings.
The first moment will be based on Theodor W. Adornos Aesthetic Theory,
posthumouslypublishedin1970,inwhichIwillfocusonthechapterentitledSituation.
The second moment will be build upon the work of Hal Foster. For this, I will be
focusing mainly on the text Signs Taken forWonders, first published in 1986 and in two
chaptersofhisbookfrom1996TheReturnoftheReal,namely ThePassionof theSignand
TheArtofCynicalReason.
SinceFosteralignshisunderstandingof realitywith JeanBaudrillards Iwilldirectly
recoursetosomeofhiskeytextsinordertobetterunderstandFostersposition.
By going in depth into the theories sustaining these twomoments, Iwill be able to
compare how these two authors understand reality and the role and relevance of certain
abstractartworksandexposeanapparentcontradictioninthelevelofcriticism(oropposition
tothestatusquo)thatthemovementfromAdornotoFosterwillexpose.
ToworkthroughthiscontradictionIwillrecoursetoThierrydeDuveandthenmove
towardsaconclusionbyexposingsomealternativesforcontemporaryabstractiontoremain
critical.
Lastly,Iwill lookintotheworkofartistTommaAbts,whoIbelieveembodysomeof
thesolidpossibilitiesleftforabstractiontopursue.
I am sure that as Brice Marden said abstraction is still in its infancy. Through
theoreticalresearchandtheanalysisofalivingartistsworkIhopetodiscussthepossibilities
opentocontemporaryabstractionandadvancethediscussionofitsrelevancy.
-
8
1stMOMENT:Adorno
REALITY
Adornoseestheworldthathelivedthroughasaverygloomyone.Fromtheopening
wordsof Dialectic ofEnlightenmentwe can grasphis disillusioned statewith the statusof
humanity,mainlywithin theWesternworld.Hehaswritten: enlightenment, understood in
thewidestsenseastheadvanceofthought,hasalwaysaimedatliberatinghumanbeingsfrom
fearandinstallingthemasmasters.Yetthewhollyenlightenedearthradiatesunderthesignof
disastertriumphant(citedinStanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophy,2011).
Considering thehistoricalmoment thathe lived through (WorldWar II, the riseand
fall of Nazi Germany, the catastrophic and antihuman actions carried out in the name of
reason and the ferocious advancement of capitalism and consumerism) his disappointment
withhumanityanditsdevelopment,orenlightenment,shouldnotcomeasasurprise.
InthesectionofAestheticTheoryanalyzedfortheessay,itisstillevidentinhisuseof
wordsthedisillusionmentwithreality.Heaffirms,alludingtoBaudelaire, thattheworldhas
lost its fragrance and colour, (2004, p.50), that reality is at its most grim state, that it is
developing into an abnormity (ibid, p.3) and that this is an age of incomprehensible horror
(ibid, p. 24) to cite a few examples. He also reiterates his disappointmentwith the level of
technologicalandproductivedevelopmentofsocietywhichinsteadoftransformingtheworld
intoabetterplacecreatesmoreinjustices.Hehasaffirmedthatthis isaworld inwhichthe
realpossibilityofutopiathatgivingthelevelofproductiveforcestheearthcouldhereand
nowbeparadiseconvergeswiththepossibilityoftotalcatastrophe(2004,p.42).
Even though IagreewithAdornoonsomeaspectsof thisdarkenedreality Iwillnot
dwellinit.
MyobjectofinterestforthisessayisAdornosunderstandingofthisrealityasabstract.
He has affirmed that in the empiricalworld (hiswording to convey the idea of reality) the
concrete continues to exist only as a mask of the abstract (Adorno 2004, p. 40). As I
mentionedbefore,thisisaconceptthatpuzzlesmegreatly.
Zuidervaart(1994,p.86),oneofAdornoscommentators,affirmsthatforAdornothis
abstraction is the essence of contemporary society and explains that Adorno conceives of
contemporary society as a functional totalitywhose abstract structure governs aprocess of
dominativeexchange,beingcapitalismthedrivingforcebehindthisprocess.
Inordertounderstandthedepthofthisaffirmationwewilltakeitbypartsandlook
into some Marxist ideas that informed Adornos understanding of how capitalism has
profoundlyalteredthenatureoftheempiricalworld.
-
9
ExchangeMania
Adornossocialtheory,beinggroundedintheMarxisttradition,acknowledgesthatit
was capital that changed theway people understand and relate to the world (Zuidervaart,
1994,p.67).
Adorno pointed out that in a capitalistic society, where everything is regulated by
exchangerelations,all thingsareturnedintocommodities(Adorno2004,p.23).Also,hehas
indicated that in the age of overproduction the commoditys use value has become
questionableandyieldstothesecondarygratificationofprestige,ofbeinginstep(ibid,p.22).
WiththeseaffirmationsAdornoispointingtoaprocessofcommodificationinsocietyandthe
substitutionofusevaluebyexchangevalue(Zuidervaart1994,pp.7278).
These two processes amount to a scenario in where first, value is no longer about
usefulnessbutaboutwhat somethingcanbeexchanged forandsecond for the spreadingof
thismentalitybeyondtheeconomicarena,sinceallthingsstartbeingtreatedascommodities,
fromarttosocialrelation.
Theoperationofexchangevaluetakingtheplaceofusevalue implementsanabstract
relationship of value, amarket one.Market exchange then becomes the golden rule against
whicheverythingismeasured.Thismentality,appliedtoallareasof lifecanthenrenderthe
experienceoftheempiricalworldasabstract(Adorno2004,p.39).
OneexamplethatIfindclarifyingofthisprocesswasgivenbyAdornointherealmof
howmusicappreciationhaschangedunderaworlddominatedbycapitalism,whichisaworld
of entertainment and commodified culture. Adorno points out that in these conditions, the
musiclistenernolongergoestoaconcerttotrulyenjoythemusic(orappreciateitsquality),
but rather, he goes to a concert worshiping themoneyhepaid for the ticket.His pleasure
comesoutofthesatisfactionofknowingthathisticketisconsolidatingtheeconomicsuccess
ofthemusicandthereforeestablishingitsexchangevalue(citedinZuidervaart,1995,p.78).In
this case the worth of the artwork, or themusic, becomes its economic worth or its price
insteadofitsusevalue,orquality.
TherearetwounderlyingconceptsthatareinformingAdornosunderstandingofthis
abstractprocessofcapital(Zuidervaart1994,p.72).
First isMarxs ideaof commodity fetishism,whichcanbeexplainedby theway that
commoditiesarefetishizedasbeingindependententities,withalife,andpowersoftheirown,
relatingtoothercommoditiesandpeopleasiftheywerebeingsofsomesort(Spickard2001).
AccordingtoSpickard(2001) this fetishismturncommodities,whicharenothingmorethan
products,intoenigmaticfetishesindependentofanyhumanagency,hidingthelabourpoured
intotheirproduction.
The problemwith this operation,whichMarx sees as an effect of capitalism, is that
commoditiesarethenturnedintousevaluesbymeansof theirexchange(Zuidervaart1994,
p.73)andstartbeingproducedtobeexchangedinthefirstplace(ibid,p.74).Whathappensis
thateven thoughcommodities,orproducts, cansurelybeproduced tosatisfyhumanneeds,
-
10
havingusevalue, theystartalsocommandingotherusevalues in theirexchange. Exchange
value, which is detached from a real need, starts having precedence over use value, which
originallywaswhysomethingwasproduced.Theinversion,orsubstitutionofvalues,iswhat
Adornoseesasresponsibleforimplementingaworldbasedonabstractrelationships(Adorno
2004,p.39).
The second underlying concept is the concept of reification advanced by Gyrgy
LukcsinhisbookHistoryandClassConsciousnesses,from1923,whichisanextensionofthe
pervasivenessofMarxsideasofcommodityfetishism(Zuidervaart1994,p.75).
In his theory of reification, Lukcs defended that the commodity is the central
structural problem not only of the capitalist economy but of capitalist society in general.
According to him, all forms of subjectivity and objectivity are organized around this
structuringcell(Zuidervaart,1994,p.76).Thisresults,ontheobjectiveside,inextendingand
sustaining the illusion that commodities have lives of their own, being independent
determinants of human life, and, on the subjective side, in reinforcing the idea that human
beingsareservantsof themarket,as if itwereanentitywithspecificdrives independentof
humancontrol(idem.).
InAdornoeyescommodificationandreificationchangedall layersof life,reordering
politics,cultureandsocialrelations(Adorno,2004,p.39).Reality,accordingtohimbecomesa
shell foranabstractworldgovernedbyimpersonalmarketexchanges(idem.)oranabstract
structurethatisfuelledbytheprocessesofcapital.Inhiswords,theapplicationoftheconcept
of abstraction in the vaguest possible sense, it signals the retreat from a world of which
nothingremainsexceptitscaputmortuum(idem.).
DominativeAbstractStructure
Thisabstractstructureadvancedbycapitalthroughmarketexchange,eventhoughis
abstractisnotneutralaccordingtoAdorno.Assaidbefore,heseesitasadominativeprocess
whereallhumanbeingsaresubjectedtothelawofcapital.
This domination is guaranteed through the inescapability from the law of capital.
Zuidervaart (1994, p.86) has explained that no one can escape the pursuit of capital, even
thoughnoteverybodypursuesitdirectly.Thismeansthattobeinacapitalistsocietyyouhave
tosubjectyourselftothelogicofmarketexchanges.AsAdornoputsis,thatpeoplearetrapped
inapositionofobediencetotheneedfortheexploitationofcapital(2004,p.27).
This dominative structure is also maintained by ideology which according to
Zuidervaartcanbeunderstoodasameansofcapitaltoobscuretheunderlyingtendenciesand
conflicts insocial formation (1994,p.69).Heexplains that ideology,under theconditionsof
commodification and reification, rather than justify indirect domination, lets people de
directly dominated in their conscious and unconscious experience (ibid, p.79). Because of
commodificationandreificationpeopledonotseethisstructure,orcapitalismasdominative,
-
11
ideologyveilstheinjusticesofthisstructureandthemarket issimplyseenasanimpersonal
uncontrollableentity(ibid,p.74).
Zuidervaarthoweverremarksthateventhoughthisstructureseemsunintelligible,itis
not,foritismodelledafterinstrumentalreason(1994,p.86).Theabstractstructureimpliesa
functionalprocesswhererelationshipsand the functionsof thesocialbodyaresubjected to
thelogicofcapital.
Even though logical, Adorno sees this process as something irrational since it is a
processthatrobshumanbeingsoftheirhumanity,reducingthemtovehiclesforprofitability
(2004,p.40)andconfirminghis initialdisappointmentwith theextent towhichreasonhas
beeninstrumentalizedforirrationalends.
Totality
Thissituationofveiledregimentationofhowlivesaretobelived,iswhatAdornocalls
asituationoftotaladministration(Adorno,2004p.23),wheretheabstractprocessofcapital
amountstoastatusofanallegedtotalcoherencewhichhidesthecontradictionsofadvanced
capitalism.
Adornoalsouses the term functional totality,being this totality,a realitywhere all
functionsarereducedtoonefunctionthatfunctions,beingprofitthelogicthatcommandsthis
function(Zuidervaart1994,p.86).
ForAdorno themore total societybecomes, themore completely it contracts into a
unanimoussystem(2004,p.39).Accordingtohim,inthistotalitythespellofexternalreality
overitssubjectsandtheirreactionshasbecomeabsolute(idem.).Thismeansthatthemore
totalthesystemis,themorepervasivethementalityofexchangebecomesorthemorereified
consciousness is. In this scenario, the abstract principle of market exchanges, comes to
organizesrealityandthelifethatpeoplelive,renderingtheempiricalworldabstract.
For Adorno, in this kind of reality art comes to occupy a prominent position in the
opposition again the abstract process of capital. He sees reason to hope in what he calls
authenticmodernartworks.
-
12
ART
According toAdorno, autonomousmodernartworks, areworks that even thoughdo
notaimatchangingpoliticalattitudes,yetoftendo(Zuidervaart1994,p.36). Herecognizes
that certain modernist works have sufficient experimental depth and technological
progressiveness to resist the commodification of consciousness and to expose the hidden
contradictionsofadvancedcapitalism.(ibid,p.42)
These autonomous modern art works stand out in a situation where, according to
Adorno,artiseithertotallycommandedbythemarked,whereartisconsumedasanyother
good (a mechanism explored by the culture industry) or by a false spiritualization of art,
wherethemodernsubjectseeks itsownprojection inthework, hopingtogeteasypleasure
outofit,tothepointofdimensionlesspuresubjectivity(Adorno2004,p.18;23;38,53).
In this scenario, Adorno is convinced of the effectiveness of autonomous modern
works.Accordingtohimtheseworksdeniedtheirownconcept,equatingthemselveswiththe
totalityinordertobeabletoopposeitthroughitsimmanentnegation.
Sincethisisaratherdensestatementwellworkthroughitbyparts.
Autonomy
TheideaofautonomyforAdornoiscentral.Forhim,themoreautonomousartworks
are,freeingthemselvesofanyexternalgoals,themorecompletelytheydeterminethemselves
astheirmasters(Adorno2004,p.23).
Ifartworksareproducedtoattendtheneedsoftheprofitdrivencultureindustry,they
arenotautonomousandtheycontributetothesmoothfunctioningoftheabstractprocessof
capitalism, or of the totality, hiding the fact that it is a dead process not revolving around
humanneeds(ibid,p.24).
In this scenario, by being autonomous, artworks are capable of mounting critical
resistancetothetotality,questioningitfromwithin.AccordingtoZuidervaart,suchworksby
appearingtohavealifeoftheirown,callintoquestionasocietywherenothingisallowedto
beitselfandeverythingissubjecttotheprincipleofexchange,bybeinguselessworksofart
recall the human purposes of production that instrumental rationality forgets (Zuidervaart
1994,p.88).
Art=reality=abstract
Another manoeuvrethatAdornoidentifiesintheseauthenticartworksisthatatthe
sametimethattheyaretobeautonomous,theyaretoequatethemselveswiththerealitythat
theyareopposing. Accordingtohim,since thespellofexternalrealityoveritssubjectsand
their reactionshas become absolute, the artwork canonly oppose this spell by assimilating
-
13
itselftoit(Adorno2004,p.39).Thiswouldmeanthateffective,trueartworks(orabsolute,in
hiswords)wouldequalthemselvestoreality,becominglikeacommodity.Inhiswords:
theabsoluteartworkconvergeswiththeabsolutecommodity.Themodern
pays tribute to this in the vestige of the abstract in its concept. If in monopoly
capitalism it is primarily exchange value, not use value, that is consumed, in the
modernartworkitisitsabstractness,thatirritatingindeterminatenessofwhatitis
and to what purpose it is, that becomes a cipher of what the work is. The
abstractness[]isaprovocation,itchallengestheillusionthatlifegoeson,andat
thesametimeitisameansforthataestheticdistancingthattraditionalfantasyno
longerachieves[]afterthecatastropheofmeaning,appearancebecomesabstract
(Adorno2004,p.28).
This means that by equating themselves with reality, these artworks become thus
abstract, reflecting a world organized aroundmarket exchanges, which convert real values
intoabstractones.ForAdorno,thedrivetowardsabstractioniswhatisleftforarttopursuein
aworldwherereasonhasfailed.
Selfdenial
However, by becoming abstract the autonomous modern artwork let go of its
traditionalaffirmativeessence(Adorno2004,p.2).AccordingtoAdorno,theabstractnesshas
nothing incommonwith the formalcharacterofolderaesthetic normssuchasKants (ibid,
p.28).
InthehisCritiqueofJudgmentKantstatedthatindealingwithaproductoffineartwe
mustbecomeconsciousthatitisartratherthannature,andyetthepurposivenessinitsform
mustseemas free fromallconstraintofchosenrulesas if itwereaproductofmerenature
(Kant1987,p.173).Artwassupposed to look likenaturebutat thesametime itwas tobe
taken as art. By looking like nature, hiding the fact that itwas somethingmade, and at the
sametimelookinglikeart,thistraditionalmimeticpractice,sanctionedtheprimacyofreality
(Adorno2004,p.2).Thisaffirmativeposture,giventhebarbarismthatAdornoobservedinthe
worldandthelevelofcommodification,becomesprohibitiveandartisticproductioncannotbe
continuedasbefore(Kratzsch2007,p.12).
In Adornos words: in face of the abnormity into which reality is developing, arts
inescapable affirmative essence has become insufferable. Art must turn against itself, in
opposition to its own concept, and thus becomeuncertain of itself right into its innermost
fiber. Yet art is not to be dismissed simply by its abstract negation. By attacking what it
seemed to be its foundation through the whole of its tradition, art has been qualitatively
transformed,ititselfbecomesqualitativelyother(2004,p.3).Forhimartrespondstotheloss
of its selfevidence not simply by concrete transformations of its procedures and
comportmentsbutbytryingtopullitselffreefromitsownconceptasfromashackle:thefact
thatitisart(ibid,p.22).
-
14
Validartworks, forhim,are then artworks [that]becomeartworksonlybynegating
theirorigin(ibid,p.4)andthiswouldmeanthatrelevantmodernartworks,havetoletgoof
their mimetic past and no longer seek to hide the fact that they are something made,
constructed,rathertheyaretostartconfrontingtheirownfeasibility(ibid,p.34).ForAdorno,
byassuminganegativeposture,insharpcontrasttotraditionalart,newartaccentstheonce
hiddenelementofbeingsomethingmade,somethingproduced(ibid,p.33).
Negation
Byenteringincontradictionwithitsownconcept,becomingabstractandconfronting
itsownfeasibility,theartworkstartsnegatingitself.
More than that, since Adorno touts modernist works as genuinely realistic
(Zuidervaart1994,p.40)inthesensethattheyaremadebyequatingthemselvestothereality
of capitalism, abstract andmade, by negating itself the work also negates the reality from
whereitemerged.
This ispossibledue to the fact that art contains something that itwill then come to
negate. Adorno explains that art negates the categorical determinations stamped on the
empiricalworld and yet harbourswhat is empirically existing in its own substance (2004,
p.6). Everything that the work negates is contained in itself, but rather than resolving
antagonisms, art at times expresses overwhelming tensions negatively through extreme
distancefromthem(ibid,p.47).
Inotherwords,withtheartworktakingonitsownskintobelikeacommoditythereis
a situation in which the work enters in contradiction with itself, revealing an immanent
negation. But since the work is operating like a commodity, this self negation exposes the
contradictory nature of the totality, or the controversies of the empirical world, which are
veiled by the design of capitalism. In Zuidervaart words this immanent negation of the
artworksrevealanegativeknowledgeofthesocialhistoricalreality(1994,p.40).
Stillaccordingtohim,thisprocesscanbeunderstoodasadefetishizingfetish,(1994,
p.91)sincetheartworkexposesthefetishcharacterofthecommodity,byinflictedonitselfa
processalike.
The immanent negation leads to Adornos remark that serious modern art is
necessarilyfragmentary.Accordingtohimthefragmentisthatpartofthetotalityofthework
that opposes totality (2004, p.57). The critical content of modern works of art surfaces
therefore in its immanent negation and for Adorno, artworks that do not transpire this
fragmentarynature,butareinpeacewiththemselves,theirconceptandtheworldarenothing
morethananemptyspinningofgears;teleologicallyittendstowardinfantiletinkering(ibid.,
p.37).
For him in artworks the criterion of success is twofold: whether they succeed in
integratingthematicstrataanddetailsintotheirimmanentlawofformandinthisintegration
at the same time maintain what resists it and the fissures that occur in the process of
-
15
integration(ibid.,p.8).Byexposingthefragment,theirreconcilableaspectoftherealityinthe
coreoftheartworknewessence,artspeaksforwhattheveilhides(ibod.,p.24).Thismeans
thatartexpressestheirreconcilabilityintermsofformandthereforeopposesthestatusquo
bymeansofform(Adorno2004,p.3).2Bymimingtherealityofthehardenedandalienated
(ibid, p.28), the artworks internal coherence is lost, and through the showing of this non
reconciledrealityintheformofthefragment,theartworkopposesreality.
Butonecanask:howcantheseworkstrulyopposereality?Isntthisabstractnessand
autonomydetachedfromsocialhistoricalreality?
Not nor Adorno. His understanding includes a social and an objective dimension in
modernartworks.
Socialdimension
The social dimension can be explained through Adornos recognition of the double
character of art: being autonomous (free from external objectives) but also a social fact
(Adorno 2004, p.6). He has stated that artworks always turn one side toward society, the
domination they internalize also radiate externally. (2004, p.23). This means that the
unsolved social antagonisms, or contradictions of reality, come back in these artworks as
immanentproblemsof form, containing two layers that sustainAdornos standof the social
dimensionofaestheticforms.
The first layer lays in the recognition of the artist as a social agent. According to
Adorno, the artist works as a social agent, indifferent to societys own consciousness. He
embodies thesocial forcesofproductionwithoutnecessarilybeingboundbythecensorship
dictatedbyrelationsofproduction,whichhecontinuallycriticizesbyfollowingtherigoursof
hismetier. (2004,p.55). ForAdorno, theworkof theartist,withall its idiosyncrasies lives
fromcollectiveforcesofwhichitisunconscious(ibid,p.53).
Thesecondlayer,corollaryofthefirst,impliestherecognitionofsedimentedcontent
in the aesthetic forms, produced through the artists metier (Adorno 2004, p.6). Adorno
defines metier as the totum of capacities through which the artist does justice to the
conception of the work and precisely thereby severs the umbilical cord of tradition (ibid,
p.54).Beyondpure subjectivity,Adornopoints out that this totum of forces invested in the
work [metier] is the potential presence of the collective according to the level of available
productiveforces(ibid,p.54).
2 The emphasis on fragmentation in the content of the Aesthetic Theory can also be observed in the form of Adornos writing. His essayistic way of writing and utilization of dialectics to thing through every aspect of the artwork makes it impossible to pin down precise concepts. KRATZSCH (2007, p.5) even defends that Adorno can be approach in terms of washing around, circling around concepts rather than honing a precise meaning for every proposition.
-
16
Accordingtohim,metiernotonlysetsboundariesagainstthebadinfinityofworksor
the abstract possibility of artworks (ibid, p.55) but also allows for social issues to be
embodied in formal problems. He defends that the development of artistic processes is
correspondenttosocialdevelopment(ibid,p.6),sincewhatinformsthesedimentedcontentin
theformalproblemsaresocialstrugglesdeeplyrelatedtolabourandproductiveforces.Inthe
social dimension, Adorno ties the struggles of the social reality to the core of the artistic
practice,andtotheoutcomeoftheartistswork.
ObjectiveDimension
Theobjectivedimension in autonomousmodern artworks comes fromwhatAdorno
calls the dialectic ofmaturity (Adorno 2004, p.54). This dialectical relationship has in one
poleexperience(orexpression,whichcanbeloadedwithindividualsubjectivemeaning)and
ontheotherexpertise(orconstruction,thatisobtainedthroughthemasteringametier,with
itstechniquesandmaterials).
For Adorno, these apparent oppositional sides are not corrective of each other. He
explains that construction is not the corrective of expression, nor does it serve as its
guarantor by fulfilling the need for objectivation; rather, constructionmust conform to the
mimetic impulses without planning, as it were and at the same time what survives of
expressionism as something objective are those works that abstained from constructive
organization(2004,p.55).Healsosaysthatatthesametime constructioncannot,asaform
empty of human content, wait to be filled with expression. Rather, construction gains
expressionthroughcoldness.(idem.).
This means that for Adorno, the strength of modern artworks does not come from
resolvingthisdialecticinamiddleground,whichforhimwouldachievenothingmorethana
dubious consensus (ibid, p.55) but from gravitating towards one of the extremes. For him
validarttodayispolarizedinto,ontheonehand,anunassuagedandinconsolableexpressivity
thatrejectseverylasttraceofconciliationandbecomesautonomousconstruction;and,onthe
other, the expressionlessness of construction that expresses the dawning powerlessness of
expression(ibid,p.54).
Ininvestingfullyinoneofthesides,theoppositesideisalsofulfilledinthisdialectic
relationship.Forexample,Adornodefendsthatabsoluteexpressionwouldbeobjective(ibid,
p.56). This means that works that take construction serious, end up being expressive. And
pureexpressiveness,giventodayssituationwouldbeobjective.
Eventhoughmakingartworksover40yearsafterAdorno, Isee inTaubaAuerbachs
description of her artistic process a way of better understanding how these 2 apparently
irreconcilable extremes (expression and construction) canoperate.The artist hasdescribed
herprocessassomethingcerebralbutatthesametimeassomethingcompletelyvisceraland
rightbrained(Bedford2012,p.104).Sheseesthismarriagealwayspresentinthemakingof
-
17
herartworks,andthethrivingofoneside,thecerebral,resultsinthegreaterevidenceofthe
otherside,thevisceral.
Inviewofthisdialectic,Adornoalsotouchesontheissueofexperimentalart.Forhim,
artisonlypossiblewhenitdoesexperiment(2004,p.47),buthisunderstandingdiffersfrom
thecommonmisunderstandingthatexperimentalartisabouttheartistsunconsciousorganic
labour, or by being surprised by the outcome of a work when the artist operates in an
unreflectedmanner(idem).EventhoughforAdorno,theelementofsurpriseintheoutcome
ofanartworkdoesnothavetoberuledout,itshouldbeunderstoodastheresultofanartistic
exploration where the artists has conscious control over materials and is conscious of its
aestheticexploration.AccordingtoAdornoyouhavetoknowexactlyifsomethingsounds,and
onlytoacertainextenthowitsounds(2004,p.48).
This concern relates to the fragmentary nature of serious modern artworks, which
Adornostressesthathasnothingtodowithacontingentparticularity(2004,p.57)butrather
hastodowiththefullunderstandingofartsconditionandthechangesinartsessencecaused
bythecurrentstatusofthings.
The remarks on experimentation also reflects on Adornos emphasis on mastering
somethinginordertodenyornegateit.Heaffirmsthat onlyassomethingmastereddoesit
bearwitnesstowhathasbeenliberated(Adorno2004,p.48).Adornoreiteratesthenecessity
oftheartistsoperatingconsciouslyandknowingly(p.47).Forhim,reflectionisarequisiteof
arttodaymeaningthatartmustbecomeconsciousofitsidiosyncrasiesandarticulatethem
(p.45), and operate with critical consciousness (p.47). For Adorno, these idiosyncrasies of
artists are sedimented in the canon of prohibitions, but they in turn become objectively
binding so that in art the particular is literally the universal. For the idiosyncratic
comportment,whichisatfirstunconsciousandhardlytheoreticallytransparenttoitself,isthe
sedimentationofacollectiveformofreaction(2004,p.45).
Allthisreiterationsstresstheimportanceofdominatingtradition,ofbeingawareand
groundedinknowledgeandpracticeasifonlythroughthatlimitscouldbeovercame.Since
traditiondependsoneconomic and social structures (Adorno2004,p.27) itsunderstanding
andmasteringallows for thesocialhistoricalconditionsberevealed in theartworks. In fact
Adorno,seesthehistoryofmodernartasastrainingtowardmaturity(Adorno2004,p.54)or
lettinggoofunquestionedandunconsciouspractices.
When it comes to materials Adorno defends that modern artworks must equate
themselveswithhighindustrialism,appropriatingitsrationale(2004,p.43).Healsodefends
that the substantive element of artisticmodernism draws its power from the fact that the
most advanced procedures of material production and organization are not limited to the
sphereinwhichtheyoriginate(idem.).ToillustratethisheusestheexampleofPaulKlee,who
throughartistictechnology,orconsciouscontrolovermeansandmaterials,appropriatedthe
industrialelementandinAdornowordsreturnedwithavengeance(idem).
-
18
StandingFirm
Finally,Adornoalsounderstandsthatthestrengthofmodernistautonomousartworks
comes from their capacity to stand firm. For him the radically darkened art (which he
understands as modern art) is en essence nothing but the postulate that art and true
consciousness of it can today find happiness only in the capacity of standing firm. This
happiness illuminates the artworks sensuous appearance fromwithin, offering a sensuous
enticementthatistheantithesesofthefraudulentsensualityofculturesfaade.(2004,pp.50
51).
InAdornoswordsbyenduring,artworksprotestagainstdeath(2004,p.35)andfind
happinessthatcomesfromthefeelingtheyinstilofstandingfirm(ibid.,p.18).
Bystandingfirm,consciousandknowledgeableofitstraditionandcurrentcondition,
the artwork endures its process of immanent negation and resists the abstract structure of
capital. Adorno describes such artworks as windowlessmonads (2004, p.54), that in their
autonomybringforththecontradictionsofasocialhistoricalprocess(Zuidervaart,p.89),and
resist conforming to the demands of capital, offering real opposition to the abstract reality
implementedbythelogicofcapital.
AdReinhardt
InviewofallthisIcannotbutthinkofAdReinhardt3,seeFigure4.Inhisseriesentitled
BlackPaintings thatdated from1954 to1967, allpaintingswereuniform,made througha
gridstructure,exploredhuesofblackandgreyandmeasured152x152cm(MoMa,2011).
Theobjectiveoftheartistwiththisserieswastopushabstractiontothelimit,ortothe
brink of silence, in Adornos words (2004, p. 50). His objective included purifying his
paintings of anything that was foreign to it, bearing no reference to anything outside
themselves (MoMa, 2011). By advancing this purification in the footsteps of geometric
abstraction, Reinhardt rejected the ideals of the Abstract Expressionists, and the deeply
subjective connotations of their work, that favoured emotionalism and the cult of the
individual.Insteadheproducedwhathecalledtheultimateabstractpaintings,anchoringhis
processincontrolandmasteringovermeansandtechnique(idem.).
Inthisprocess,IseeacorrelationbetweenReinhardtconsciouspracticeandAdornos
emphasisonautonomyandthedialecticofmaturity.
3 Adorno did not use the work of Reinhardt for his case nevertheless I cannot but see the correspondences between theory and practice.
-
19
The dialectic of maturity brings great stature to these works that were built on an
extensive formal research, an awareness of the historic tradition but nevertheless
encompassedalsoalevelofsubjectivitythatshowsitselfall themorerelevantwhenfiltered
throughthemasteringoftheconstructionmeansandtechniques.Reinhardthasdeclaredthat
hiswholeprocesswheretobeginandwheretoendwasworkedoutinhismindbeforehand
(Colpitt2002,p.158),whichcanbeunderstoodashimbeingincontrolofhisexperiment,not
leavingittochance.
Whenitcomestocolour,thereisalsoseeacorrelationbetweenAdornostheoryand
Reinhardts practice. In Adornos words: to survive reality at its most extreme and grim,
artworksthatdonotwanttosellthemselvesasconsolationmustequatethemselveswiththat
reality.Radicalarttodayissynonymouswithdarkart;itsprimarycolourisblack(2004,p.50).
Adornowas emphatic inmanymoments on the ideal of blacknessbeing oneof thedeepest
impulsesofabstraction(idem.). Accordingtohim,art thatdelights incolour ischildishand
only throughdark featurescanauthenticartoffer resistance to thesituationofdespair that
marksthecontemporarysituation(idem).
The level of concentration required from the viewer in Black Series also resonates
with Adornos critique of a commodified easy culture that reduced art to entertainment
(Adorno 2004, p.22). According to Lippard (1967, p. 56) there is a forced contemplation
required for theappreciationofReinhardtswork sincehisworksdemandmuchmore time
andconcentrationthanmostviewersareaccustomedor,inmostcases,willingtogive(p.56).
ReinhardtsBlackSeriesdependontimeandconcentratingfromtheviewertostartrevealing
itselfwithallitsdifferenthuesofdarkcolourandacrosslikeformation(MoMa,2011). The
viewer who expects instant pleasure and dont dedicate the time and effort to see these
paintings,loosewhattheseartworkshavetooffer(idem.).
ForAdorno,thisishowartcanresistinatimewhentheviewerhasbeenreducedtoa
consumer,whoexpects to get somethingoutofwhathe sees.Forhim, thisdemand to get
somethingoutoftheartworkisduetoaprocessofdeasthetizationofartcausedbycapitalism
and its all encompassing process of commodification (Adorno 2004, p. 23). This process of
deasthetization causes a reversal of the attitude of the viewer in front of the artwork; the
viewer assume a consumer attitude and expects to find an echo of himself in theworkno
longerseekingtoloosehimselfinfrontofanartwork(ibid,p.22).
By resisting to conform to this capitalist logic, resisting instant gratification, and
standingfirmonitsconditionofseriousautonomousart,Reinhardtsworksembodyawayto
offerresistancetothewaytheworldis.
ThisposturerelatestotheideathataccordingtoAdorno,seriousmodernautonomous
artworkshavethepotentialtoaffectsocialchange,eventhoughtheydonotaimatit.Forhim
only artworks that are to be sensed as a new form of comportment, a new praxis, have a
reasonforexisting(Adorno2004,p.14).
-
20
Reinhardtalsodeclared thatdespite the fact thathesought toremoveall references
from the external world from his pictures, he remained convinced that his art had the
potentialtoaffectsocialchange,eventhoughthiswasnothismainpursuit(Savvine2012).
It ismy understanding that both these position, stand for a belief that art can offer
truthresistancenotbyopenlydeclaringtocarrymessagesforsocialtransformations,butby
embodying in the particularity of its condition andpractice the state of theworld andonly
thenoppose itwith itsownmeans, in itsowncategory.By transpiringcontradiction if their
form,theseworksseemtoscreamallthelouderofthecontradictionoftheempiricalworld,or
oftheabstractreality.
Figure4:AdReinhardinhisstudiohangingoneofhisblackabstractpaintingstodry,1966.
(Photographer:JohnLoengard;Source:www.ica.org.uk)
-
21
2stMOMENT:Foster
REALITY
Hal Foster aligns his understanding of realitywith Jean Baudrillard, French theorist
renowned for his theories of the postmodern condition. In order to understand Fosters
argumentitisrelevanttolookdirectlyintoBaudrillardskeyideaswhichinformtheoperation
deployedbytheartthatFosterwilladdressascriticaloftheabstractreality.
Baudrillard
Baudrillardssocialcritique issomehowclose toAdornoandtheMarxist tradition in
themeasure thathealsoblamescapital for advancingaprocessof abstraction in theworld
(Lane2000,p.25).InhistextSimulacraandSimulationweread:
it was capital which was the first to feed throughout its history on the
destructionofevery referential,ofeveryhumangoal,whichshatteredevery ideal
distinctionbetweentrueorfalse,goodandevil,inordertoestablisharadicallawof
equivalence and exchange, the iron law of its power. It was the first to practice
deterrence, abstraction, disconnection, deterritorialization, etc; and it was capital
whichfosteredreality,therealityprinciple,itwasalsothefirsttoliquidateitinthe
exterminationofeveryusevalue,ofeveryrealequivalence(1981,pp.182183).
His account, however, takes ideas regarding commodification and reification to a
further level by bringing these Marxist theories together with structuralist theories (Lane
2000,p.25).
Structuralismcanbeunderstoodasanintellectualmovementfocusedonthetheories
of Ferdinand de Saussure (18571913) which defended that a sign was composed of a
signifier(soundimage)andsignified(concept)(Lane2000,p.15).Hismainissuethough,
wasthatthesesignscontainedanarbitraryrelationbetweenarealobjectanditssymbol,or
signified and signifier. For example, the sign that represents a cat and the real animal are
linkedbecauseofaconventionorasystemofsigns,thesignandthethinghavenointrinsic
connectionbetweenthemselves(ibid,p.16).
Butstructuralistsarenotonlyinterestedinthewaythatthesesignsystemsworkina
semiotic level,but theyare interested in lookingatwhole theoriesas systems(idem.)and
then deconstruct them by unveiling arbitrary connections between its significants and
signifiers.
Taking into account the depth and structural effects of this operation, Baudrillard
updatedthelayersofvaluesimplicatedincommodities(idem.)andstartedadvocatingthatthe
-
22
issuewasno longer the fact thatusevaluehadbeensubstitutedbyexchangevaluebut that
commoditiesnowrelatedtoeachotherintermsofitssignvalue(Baudrillard1972,p.80).
SignValue
The world from where Baudrillard is drawing context for his theories is not at all
different fromwhatwe see today, but he saw, in front of his eyes4, the rise of a consumer
societywithanendlessnumberofproducts,orgoods,becomingavailableforconsumersand
theriseofadvertisementpresentingtheseproductsastofulfiltheneedsoftheseconsumers
(Lane2000,p.29).
Baudrillard observed, though, that there was something else commanding the
exchange of products in this so called consumer society. He noted that, mainly through
advertisement,productswerenotbeingsoldandboughtfortheirutility,orusevalue,butfor
whattheseproductsstoodfor.Inotherwords,heexposedamovementinwhichobjectform
turnsintocommodityformthatturnsintosignform(Baudrillard1972,p.59).
Thissignform,whichBaudrillardunderstoodasthesumofideasorvaluesattached
to a commodity,was thenanew formof value that startedbeing taken intoaccount in the
constitution of value in a way that took priority over the object itself (ibid, p.79). In this
scenario,signvalue,ratherthanexchangevalueasinAdorno,startedcommandingallvalue.
Thesignthenbecameanintegralpartofacomplexpoliticaleconomy,alsocalledby
Baudrillardasthesystemofobjects.Accordingtohim,inthissystemofobjects,inorderto
becomeanobjectof consumption, theobjectmustbecomeasign andbydoingsoestablish
itselfinanabstractandsystematicrelationtoallotherobjectsigns(Baudrillard1968,p.22).
In this system of objects it is no longer an economic order that coordinates the
relationships and exchanges, but an order that has to do with social class privilege and
differentiation;economicpoweristransfiguredintosymbolsofstatus(1972,p.59).
AsAdornoobservedacontaminationofallareasof lifewithan economicmentality,
orwitha logicofexchange,sodidBaudrillard.Heobservedthatwith theconversionof the
object to a systematized status of signs all forms of human relation have consequentially
becomerelationsofconsumption(1968,p.22).Thisneworderaffectedallareasoflife.
In this new order, Baudrillard also explains that people start actualizing themselves
through consumption (1968, p. 12), being consumption the act of manipulating and
exchangingsignvaluesassignifyingsubstance(1968,pp.2122;p.80).
Thismeans, for example, that by buying designer clothes you are not proving your
economicpowerbutyouareaccessingaprivilegedgroup,whosestandingissymbolizedinthe
designer clothes youwear. By acquiring symbols of their aspirations or pretensions, in this
neworder,peoplethendefinewhotheyare.
4Richard Lane reminds us that the rise of the consumer society that Baudrillard saw was mainly in the modernization of France under the American model (2000 p. 29).
-
23
Code
Inthisconsumersociety,whereallrelationsarerelationsofconsumption,Baudrillard
emphasizes the existence of an abstract system of consumption which organizes and
differentiatesobjectsas signs, rather than individualexpressionsofneedandpleasure inor
for the object (Horrocks and Jevtic 2011, p. 22). In this case you do not buy products
necessarilybecauseyouneedthembutbecauseyouareattractedtothesignitcarriessinceit
mighthelpdefiningyouridentity.
Similar to Adornos idea of a functional totality, Baudrillard also talks about an
operationalaspectofthissystemthatfunctionsonitsownaccountinadementedandself
referential perspective (1995, p. 268). The abstract self referential system is what
Baudrillard calls the code; for it is effective, simple (1968, p. 19) and commands an
operational,apatheticworld(1995,p.273).Thiscode,accordingtoBaudrillard,liketheother
codesofvaluessuchasexchangevalue,isrationalyetabstract(1972,p.59).Accordingtohim,
throughthecode:
The sign value cannot admit to its own deductive abstraction any more
than exchange value can. Whatever it denies and represses, it will attempt to
exorciseandintegrateintoitsownoperation:suchisthestatusofthe"real,"ofthe
referent, which are only the simulacrum of the symbolic, its form reduced and
interceptedby thesign.Through thismirageof the referent,which isnothingbut
the phantasm of what the sign itself represses during its operation, the sign
attemptstomislead:itpermitsitselftoappearastotality,toeffacethetracesofits
abstracttranscendence,andparadesitselfastherealityprincipleofmeaning.(ibid,
p.92).
Inotherwords, this code,which isnot arbitrary as anyother mathematical code is
efficient in establishing a universal system (1968 p. 20) that hides its disconnection from
realityandaffirmsitsownreality.Baudrillardseesthissystemnotasalivedrelationbutas
anabstractedandannulledone(1968,p.22).
He also identifies that this dominant and totalitarian code is reinforced through
advertising.Heexplains that thecollective functionofadvertising is toconvertusall to the
code(ibid,p.19),manufacturingandmanipulatingneedsinordertoconvincepeopletojoin
inthesystemofdifferentiation,andbydoingsoreinforcesthecodewhereallindividualsare
describedintermsoftheirobjects(idem).
Inthiscode,orsystemthesignworksasanaccompliceofcapitalandasanagentof
abstraction. Baudrillard has declared capital to be a monstrous unprincipled undertaking
(2001, p. 176) and a sorcery of the social relation (ibid, p.177), commanding the life the
peoplelivebutforitsownmaintenance.
-
24
SimulationandHyperreality
It is a source of worry for Baudrillard the moment when the production of signs
becomespriortotheproductionoftheobject,orwhenthesignprecedesthemodel,becoming
one thing independent from the other. This inversion is what Baudrillard understands as
simulation(Lane2000,86).Hearguesthattherearethreelevelsofsimulation,beingthe3rd
level responsible for the production of signs totally detached from the real (ibid, p.30), ,
becoming independent and establishing themselves as reality on an equal stand with the
objectwhichoncetheyrepresented,seeFigure5.
Figure5:Levelsofsimulation.
Source:Horrocks,C,andJevtic,Z.(2011)Baudrillard:AGraphicGuide.pp.109110)
For Baudrillard, when signvalue precedes the object, usevalue is then destroyed
(1972,p.58),becomingirrelevant.Inthissituation,thesignbecomessignifiedandsignifiedat
thesametime(ibid,p.59),establishingitselfindependentfromtherealthingsandclaimingto
bearealthingonitsownright,establishingitselfasusevale.
Inthisoperationtechniqueandknowledgearedivorcedfromtheirobjectivepractice
and recovered by the "cultural5" system of differentiation (ibid, p.58). This means that in
5 According to Baudrillard the production of signs was traditionally associated with culture; works of art, for example, stood for something beyond themselves, beyond their use values, they were symbols of higher ideals or values. With all commodities becoming signs, everything then becomes cultural. (1972, pp.76 -77).
-
25
simulation,techniqueandknowledgearenolongeraimedatattendingrealneedsbutrather
theyareaimedatfeedingandmaintainingthesystemofsigns,orabstractsymbols,thatcome
torepresentonlythemselves.
Thecreationofsignsdetachedfromrealobjectscanbeexemplifiedinmanydifferent
ways,giventhatourwayofexperiencingandunderstandingtheworld ishighlyconditioned
by thismechanism.However,an illustrativeexamplecanbe the actofbuyingcoffee.Today,
anyrespectable,consciousandcaringworldcitizenwouldcertainlyprefertobuyfairtraded,
organicallygrowncoffee.Thesefeaturesamounttoacoffeethatstandsforwhatispolitically
correct, free of any chemicals, mindful of other human beings, and conscious of the global
socialandeconomicstruggles.Withsomanyadmirablethingtogofor,thequalityofthecoffee
risk becoming secondary. In this scenario, coffee production starts revolving around
sustaining these signs that are detached from the intrinsic quality of the coffee, its roast,
grinding,aromaandsoforth.
This is a simplified example, but helps understanding how the world starts being
organizedaroundsigns,thatareabstract,signifyingthemselvesbutstillimportantinhelping
peopleactualizethemselvesthroughtheendorsementofthesesigns,bethemthingstheybuy,
products,trips,houses,orevenwholelifestyles.
For Baudrillard, when simulation becomes the organizing principle of postmodern
consumer societies, reality becomes hyperreal. When the sign establishes its own reality,
realitybecomeshyperreality(Lane2000,p.30).
ForBaudrillardallofreality[hasbeen]absorbedbythehyperrealityofthecodeand
ofsimulation[beingnow]aprincipleofsimulation,andnotofreality,thatregulatessociallife
(BaudrillardSED,p.120).Forhim,hyperrealityistheactualizationoftheoperationalcodeof
consumption(Baudrillard,2001,p.170)thatestablishesasituationinwhich:
it is no longer a question o imitation, nor of reduplication, nor even of
parody.Itisratheraquestionsofsubstitutingsignsoftherealfortherealitself;that
is,anoperationtodetereveryrealprocessbyitsoperationaldouble,ametastable,
programmatic,perfectdescriptivemachinewhichprovidesallthesignsofthereal
andshotcircuitsallitsvicissitudes(idem).
Inotherwords, inhyperreality, the signbecomes real and reality isbetrayedby the
sign (ibid,p.184). Simulation,whichproduces this secondreality, threatens thedifference
between trueand false,between realand imaginary (1981,p.168),making it impossible
thentonegotiatewhatisrealandwhatisnot(Lane2000,p.86).
ForBaudrillardhyperrealityandsimulation[are]deterrentsofeveryprincipleandof
everyobjective(Baudrillard1981,p.179)andthismeansthatbyaffirmingtheirownreality,
hyperreality and simulation push away the reality of real things and use values, each time
moreconcealingnotthetruth,butthefactthatthereisntanythatistosay,thecontinuityof
thenothing(1995,p.272),arealityemptiedofitselforanabstractreality.
-
26
ART
Theartpracticesfromthe80sand90swerewellawareofthearbitraryrelationships
betweenobjectsandsigns,bathinginstructuralistanddeconstructivisttheories(Colpitt2002,
p. 181;Hopkins 2000, p.197).. In this atmosphere the practice of abstraction in art did not
have an underlying theoretical background orienting its efforts. Quite the opposite, the
practicesfromthe80and90sweremarkedbytheirpluralism(idem.).
There was, however, one group of abstract artists that adopted the theories of
Baudrillardandstartedoperatingbyit(Colpitt2002,p.186).Thisgroup,knownasthe neo
geo,whichstoodfornewgeometricpainting, includedJackGoldstein, JamesWelling,Phillip
Taafe,PeterSchuyff,PeterHalley,AshleyBickerton,MeyerVaismanandOliverWasow(Foster
1986,p.48).
NeoGeo
In the text SignsTaken fromWonders, Foster addresses theworkof the neogeos
andopenly attacks their strategy (Colpitt2002,p.186).Mainlyworking throughout the80s,
thisgrouphad,accordingtoFoster,aremovedrelationshipfromseriouscriticalabstraction,
whichheunderstoodastheworkofBriceMarden,FrankStellaorRobertRyman(Foster1986,
p.48). Instead, thegeosdeployedtheprinciplesofBaudrillards theoryofsimulation intheir
practice of making abstract paintings, which Foster understood as being an unsuccessful
manoeuvre,functioningincomplicitywiththeofficialculture(ibid,p.187).
Colpitt(2002,p.186)explainsthatBaudrillardwasavitaltheoreticalforceinthe80s,
sustainingthe ideathat intheadvancedcapitalistsociety worksofartaretransformedinto
signs (signifying, for example, theprestige that accrues to theart collector), independentof
their use value. Theneogeos, armedwith this idea, set out to represent this conversionof
everythingintosignvalueintheirpractice(idem.)andtoquestionthesignvalueattributed
toart.
Thisleadtothequestioningofthereifiedmodernistartworks(Foster1996,p.7186)
throughappropriation,treatingthetraditionofseriousabstractionasastoreofreadymades
to be appropriated, which, according to Foster, only confirmed a removed, ironical
relationshiptothisverysametradition(ibid,p.99).
Simulationism
The problem, according to Foster, was that instead of properly appropriating these
allegedreifiedworks,whichwouldimplyacopyandthereforetheconfirmationthatthereis
one model and one copy (1986, p.49), the neogeos simulated modern abstraction. This
strategy, which Foster calls simulationism, appropriated modernist abstraction in order to
mockitsaspirationtooriginalityandsublimity,ortoplayuponitsfailure(1996,p.101).
-
27
The production of artworks that are simulacra, according to Foster, called into
question theverynotionsof copyandmodel (idem.)but indoing so hardly contestedour
politicaleconomyofthecommoditysignasdefinedbyBaudrillard,onthecontrary,itplayed
intothisneworder inwhichpracticesarereducednot just to commoditiesbuttosimulacra
for exchange (1996, p.92). For foster, the simulationist strategy misses the point of
questioning thereifiedstatusofmodernworksand instead participate[s ]on theirempting
(1986,p.49).
Byproducingartworksthatarejustsignsofmodernistreifiedartworks,theneogeos
helped in further establishing the independence of the sign from the model. They also
presented themselves to be comfortablemanipulating these signs (Foster 1986, pp. 4950).
Even though their initial intentionwas to contest the system of signs, or the massmedia
economy,inoperatingbythesamerules,theneogeosendedupjoininginthesystem(ibid.).
Inthisscenario,inwhichthemythicalsignendsupbeingreinforcedcynicallyrather
than questioned (Foster, 1996 p. 92) Foster reminds us of Baudrillards remark about
simulationbeingtheworstkindofsubversion,forinthreateningthedifferencebetweentrue
orfalse(Baudrillard1981,p.171),itcanshortcircuitrealitybutstillcontinuetoreproduceit
bymeansofthereduplicationbysigns(ibid,p.185).
For Foster, simulationismwas hardly disruptive or critical of simulation as amode
(Baudrillard 1986, p. 55) but as a form of social control as important as ideological
representation(idem),ithelpedinestablishingtherealityofthesymbolratherthanquestion
it.
Inotherwords,withsimulationism,the linesbetweendeconstructionandcomplicity
blurred (Foster 1996, p. 101), and it became hard to see if the attitude is of defiance or
complicity(ibid,p.120).
Compliantreproduction
To illustrate thismixofoppositionandendorsement,Foster talksaboutapostureof
defiantcomplicity(ibid,p.103),oraparadoxbetweensubversionandoperationofthecode,
thatwaspresentinthepracticeoftheneogeos.
Foster accuses this posture of mirroring the processes of capital, which transforms
objectsintocommoditysigns,byacceptingthereificationofcriticalabstractionandreducingit
toastyle(Foster1996,p.187).Evenif the initialgoalwas toexposetheabstractprocessof
capital, with this posture, simulationists ended up playing along with it and according to
Foster,inthissituation,itbecomeshardtodistinguishcriticsfromconnoisseursofreification
(ibid,p.96),orplayerswhoarefororagainst.
-
28
Conventionalism
AnotherunderlyingtendencythatFosteridentifiesinmanypostmodernistpractices,
including the artists operating through simulationism, is what he calls a conventionalist
ethos,which canbedescribed as amodel that with thepermissionof a post structuralism
thatwasnotwellunderstood,ittendedtotreatallpractices(artistic,socialandotherwise)as
detachedsignifierstobemanipulated,ahistoricalconventionstobeconsumed(1996,p.91).
For Foster, conventionalism become a pervasive aesthetic of our new order of
capitalisminwhicha posthistoricalperspective isevinced,accordingtowhichartappears
strippedofitshistoricalcontextanddiscursiveconnections(ibid,p.104).
In this ethos art appears stripped of its material context and discursive
entanglements, or as a synchronous array of so many styles, devices or signs to collect,
pasticheorotherwisemanipulate(Foster1986,p.50).
For Foster, this dry post historical attitude can lock artists into an indifferent
pastiche[]orpassivepessimism(ibid,p.51).
SherrieLevine
Anillustrativeexampleofanartistthatoperatedundertheprinciplesofsimulationism
is Sherrie Levine. American, know for appropriations also described as conceptual act of
quotation(SimonLee,2012),theartistproducedinthemiddle80stwoseriesofpaintingson
wood,inwhichsherecalledtwodifferentkindsofmodernabstraction(Foster1996,p.100).
InoneseriesherworkrecalledtheanalyticabstractionofStella,Ryman,Mardenand
others,seeFigure6andabouttheseFosterremarkedthatherworkevokedthemodernsonly
tofallshortofitwhichistosay,onlytosuggestthatithadfallenshort,thatithadfailedon
itspromiseofpictorialpurity,formalreflexivity,andsoon(idem).Intheotherserieswhere
she evoked automatism abstraction, Foster remarked that she did so just to mock these
modernistworksasfalseorforced(idem.).
According tohim bothseries thuscitedmodernistabstraction,but inamanner that
draineditofaestheticvalue(idem.),demonstratingthatthesemodesofmodernabstraction
are no longer critically reflexive or historically necessary forms with direct access to
unconscious truths or a transcendental realm beyond the world they are simply styles
amongothers(Foster1986,p.48).
Levine,alongsidetheneogeos,throughsimulation,attemptedtooperatethecodethat
commands the system of the signs and ended up reproducing the reality that they were
addressing,reducingsimulationtothestatusofatheme(Foster1996,p.107).
-
29
Accused of being reduced to a stylistic reaction, their practice, instead of truly
questioningthesystemtheyinitiallysetouttoconfront,endedupoperatingcompliantlywith
it,emptingthecategoryofartofanyaestheticvalue.
ForFoster,theconventionalistoperationdeployedbytheneogoesnotonlyrevealsan
ahistoricalmodelbutalsoamountstoapracticethatcannotaccountadequatelyforanyart
(1986,p.49).Intreatingallartpracticesandformsassymbols,neogeosoverlookedquestions
of technique, material, tradition and the intricate sociohistorical layer that constitute the
artwork,masteringonlytheunderstandingandapplicationoftheabstractcodeofthesign.
Figure6:SherrieLevine,Untitled(LeadChecks:2),1986/1987,Caseinonlead,wood.152.4x101.6cm.
(Source:Varnedoe,K.;2006;PicturesofNothing,p.208)
-
30
ADORNOXFOSTER
The close analysis of Adornos and Fosters (through Baudrillard) understanding of
realityhas revealed thatbothauthorsunderstand it as somethingbecomingabstract.While
Adornopointedouthowthementalityofmarketexchanges,whichappliedtoallareasoflife,
contributed to a process of use values being exchange by exchange values, Foster took this
substitutiontoadifferentlevelhighlightingtheriseofthesignvalueabovethepreviouskinds
ofvalue.Bothauthorsseethecorrosiveeffectsofcapitalinorderingtheliveofpeopleagainst
equivalencesthathavenorealbearingsinreallife.
Inbothcasesthereistherecognitionthatthisprocessofabstraction,madepossibleby
capitalism, relies on a structure, or a code that is selfreferential and guarantees its
reinforcement by concealing the fact that it is detached from real humanneeds andhuman
values. On other words the system does not operate for the greater good but for its own
maintenanceonly.Also,bothinAdornoandFoster,theprocessofabstractionsubjectshuman
beingstothelawofcapital,insteadofofferingthemrealcontroloverthissystem.
Additionally,inbothunderstandingsofreality,economicprincipleshavepermeatedall
levels of life, fostering the implementation of abstraction in culture, finance and human
relationsingeneral.
When it comes to the abstract art that both these author address, the move from
AdornotoFostersuggeststhattheseartworks(modernseriousanalyticalabstraction, inthe
caseofAdornoandtheworkoftheneogeo,orsimulationists,inthecaseofFoster)operatein
radicallydifferentways,havingparadoxicallydifferentpositionstowardsreality.
While in Adorno, the works assumed a negative essence, taking on themselves the
contradictionsofreality,sufferingtheirfragmentationinordertoopposerealityfromwithin,
theworks in Foster have a rather affirmative essence; incorporating the abstract code and
operatingbythesamelogic.
While inAdorno, theworks are not reconciledwith the abstract reality, opposing it
throughtheirownnature, inFostertheseworksarenotonlyreconciledwith itbuttheyare
alsoreproducingthisrealitybemeansofsimulation.
WhileinAdorno,theworksstandfirm,consciousofitscondition,beingcriticalofthe
empiricalworldbylookinginward,inFostertheworksarereactions,oroperationalreflexes
oftheabstractrealityofthesign,makingthemcompliantwiththisreality.
Thismovefromnegationtoaffirmation,seemsverycontradictoryconsideringallthe
theory thatwas informing thepractices fromthe80s.Hopkinsdescribed thisdecadeasone
with highly professionalized critical and academicdiscourse (2000, p. 212). But thenhow
comeinaperiodofawarenessoftheory,ofquestioningofthevariouslanguagesgames(ibid.
p.198),ofdeconstruction,andthereforesuspicion,thecriticaledgeseemstohavebeenlost?
-
31
Howcometheseartiststhatweresoimmersedinthiscriticaltimesendeduprevertingtheir
practicesintoconformismratherthanopposition?
In a very simplified and even caricatured way, Thierry de Duve, by addressing the
changesinarteducation,exposesthatthedemiseofthemodernistmyth,whichaccordingto
him is epitomized in the triad creativity/medium/invention, came to be substitutedby the
triadattitude/practice/deconstruction(Duve1994,pp.1926).
Thismeans that the postmodern triad came to prominencewith the art education
system fostering a subversive attitude of young artists against the modernist rhetoric and
works of art, becoming it all about suspecting, questioning, and deconstructing rather than
masteringandthenpushingforward(idem.).
AccordingtoDuve,thisnewemphasisonattitude,waswhatledtheory(orsocalled
Frenchtheory)[toenter]schoolsand[thus]succeededindisplacingsometimesreplacing
studio practice while renewing the critical vocabulary and intellectual tools with which to
approachthemakingandtheappreciatingofart(1994,p.27).
Hepointsoutthatbydoingthisschoolsstartproducingartistswhowerepushingthe
rejection of both metier and the medium to the point where their only technique is the
appropriation of readymades or [] simulation [] denying imitation and invention at the
same time (ibid, p.26). This approach also led to the breakage of boundaries between
disciplines andmediums, leading to the rise of inter or transdisciplinary approaches to art
(ibid,p.28).
In this atmosphere, in which attitude came to be the word of order, operating
subversively, questioning notions of originality and authorship becamemore relevant than
masteringaspecificmedium,oroperatinginaspecificcategoryofart.
Duveexplainsthatthistendency,whichstartedasanideologicalone,characterizeda
newpoliticizeddiscourseaboutartanditsrelationtosocietywhichbecamefashionableand
associatedwithpoliticalcorrectness(ibid,p.27). Thisofcoursehadapositiveaspectinthe
sensethatitchargedartisticpracticeswithpoliticalconnotations(ibid,p.29),howeveritalso
hadadownside.
First,Duvepointsoutthatthecriticalattitudeofartistsbecamejustthatanattitude,
a stance, a pose, a contrivance (ibid, p.27). He is very sharp in his critique of this notion,
declaring it poor and the most tautological notion of all (ibid, p. 28). As he said before, it
becameamatterofpoliticalcorrectness.Accordingtohimtheexpressionartisticpractice
hasbecomearitualformula,conveyingthevaguesuspicionthathadcometosurroundtheart
world,while failing to designate referents in theworld (that is, actualworks) ofwhich one
couldbesurethattheworldhasceasedtoapplytothemsignificantly(ibid,p.29).
Hissharpcritiqueofthisapproachisdirectedattheriseofadeconstructionfeverina
generationthatdidnothaveanymodelsortruereferentials.Hehasstatethat:
rathermisunderstood andbadly assimilated, deconstructionhad apparently
become,inthe80s,amethodbywhichtoproduceartandtoteachit.Assuch,however
-
32
[] deconstruction is merely the symptom of the disarray of a generation of art
teachers who have lived through the crisis of invention and have never themselves
beensubmittedto thedisciplineof imitation.Theresult is thatstudentswhohavent
had the time to construct an artistic culture of any kind are being tutored in the
deconstructivesuspicionpropertoourtime(ibid,p.30).
Because suspicionwas being taught before anymastering,Duve also accuses all the
endemic practices of quotation, second or third degree referentiality, replicas (p.29), and
would add appropriation, of revealing a dryness, caused be the absence of models to be
imitatedorcontested(ibid,p.29).
The triad attitude/practice/deconstruction has watched its potential for negation
becomingconventional(Duve1994,p.31).Deconstructioninpostmodernityhasturnedinto
anexoticaffair(Hopkins2000,p.212)whichmadeitharderforarttoachieveanyadversarial
distancefromthesocialmechanismsintowhichitwasmerged(ibid,p.197).
Duvealsoadds that theanguishof thepostmodernist time is no longerof thekind
that nourishes true artists (it is fake, because it is reconciled with the present); and its
suspicionisnotfruitful(itisaimedattheotherandnotatoneself)(Duve1994,p.31).
ThissuspicionthatisnotfruitfulalsostronglyresonateswithFosterbringingintothe
discussiontheconceptofcynicalreason,whichcanbeunderstoodasaparadoxicalstructure
ofthoughtexploredbyPeterSloterdjik.Accordingtohimthisenlightenedfalseconsciousness
, is lessasatoyingwithfetishismthana coquettingwithschizophrenia,aformulationthat
captures the subject position ofmuch contemporary art (Foster 1996, p. 118). Foster also
lamentsthatthiskindofdismissiveknowingdrain[s]somuchenergyfromourculturallives
and our political lives alike (Foster 2012, p.7), and generates an atmosphere of moral
indifferenceandpoliticalnihilism(Foster2012,p.4).
Asseenbeforewiththesimulationists,Fosterwasalsowellawareofthedownsideof
deploying a deconstructive critique irresponsibly. He observed that exaggeration of the
epistemologicalscepticismofdeconstruction(ibid,p.119.)leadedtoapostcriticalcondition,
whichaccording tohim isabackfire. Forhim thepostcriticalcondition [was]supposed to
releaseusfromourstraightjackets(historical,theoreticalandpolitical),yetforthemostpart
ithasabettedarelativismthathaslittletodowithpluralism(Foster2012,p.3).
Aligned with Duve, Foster also sees the critical attitude falling into an automatic
value,oraselfregardingposture(Foster2012,p.6),acontrivanceaimedattheother.
All these remarks start sounding very descriptive of the posture of the neogeos:
marked by conventionalism, compliant with the system, reconciled with the present and
aimed at its outside rather than at itself, falling into a state of cynicism that little helps in
questioningthestateofthings.
Considering the urgency of the contemporary situation, I have to agreewith Foster
thatthisisabadtimetogopostcritical(2012,p.8).
-
33
Butwhen ideologycritiquecanlapseintocontemptanddeconstructioncanslip into
complicity (Foster 1996, p.119) what is then left for contemporary abstraction to pursue?
When practices seems to float free of historical determination, conceptual definition and
critical judgment (Foster 2012, p.1) how can art be truthfully critical again? How could
abstractionregainitsrelevanceandcriticaledge?
Fosterpointsoutthatoneofthewayoutsforthispostcriticalpredicamentwouldbe
thereadoptingofa quaseAdornianpositionthat insistsonthecategoryofart,butwiththe
forlorn sense that thisminimalautonomynowhold forminimalnegativity (2012,p.8). He
recognizesthedesolationtowhichthisoptionhasbeenrelegatedthroughpostmodernitybut
neverthelessindicatesitasapossibilityfortheregainingofcriticalnegativity.
Baudrillardhasalsodefendedsomethingsimilar.Eventhoughincredulousofabstract
art (Colpitt1981,p.183),hehasdefendedthat theonlyweaponofpower, itsonlystrategy
against this defection, is to reinject realness and referentiality everywhere, in order to
convince us of the reality of the social, of the gravity of economy and the finalities of
production (Baudrillard1981, p. 182). For that itwould bemandatory to eradicatewithin
oneselfeverytraceoftheintellectualconspiracy(Baudrillard1995,p.275).
Both these positions seem to point to an insistence on something real, solid, on use
valueandonthecategoryofart,notasemptysymbolsbutasautonomous,consciousentities.
Buthowtopursuitarealoppositiontothestatusofthing,basedonthis insistenceswithout
beingthemostnaveofall6?
IseeintheworkofeconomistStefanoHarneyaconceptthatcouldequipabstraction
to return to offer resistance to the abstract reality and to consuming abstract process of
capital. He offers the idea of offering friction to capitalismby standing still,which sends us
backtoAdornoandtheideaofthemonad,andhisinsistenceontheworkdrawingitsstrength
fromstandingfirm.
6 Foster cites Bruno Latour and his insight that the fetish of demystification can render one the most nave of all (Foster 2012, p. 5)
-
34
Friction
Harvey(2011)7defendsthatattendingthedemandsofcapitalmovement;a logistical
subjectisbeingcreated.Whenoperatinglogistically,thesubjectisconditionedtoengageand
operateaimingforabsoluteefficiencyorabsolutesurplusvalue,inMarxistterms.Thismeans
thatduetoamarketdemand,thenatureandboundariesofworkhavedramaticallychanged,
implying inwork no longer being justified in terms of content, as itwaswith the previous
modelofthestatisticalsubject,butintermsoftheabilityofconnectingareasoflifethatonce
seemeddisconnected.
Inthisnewmodusoperandi itallbecomesaboutskillsthatcanbelearned,adapted
anddeployedinwhateversituationthesubjectisfacedwith.Iwouldrisksayingthatitisno
longer about mastering one subject, one area, one profession but rather it becomes about
being able to engage across areas, to plug into different field of expertise and connect at
differentlevels.
For Harney this new tendency can be observed not only in the attention that the
subject of logistics has been given in business studies lately but also in the changes in
educationingeneral.Hepointsoutthatinuniversities,itiseachtimemorecommonthefact
that you have to produce you own set of knowledge in order to plug it in into whatever
directionyouchoose.Heexemplifiesthisbydefendingthattodayapoemisnottaughtbecause
ofitscontentanddepthbutratherbecausebylearninghowtoreadthispoemyoucanextract
aspecificskillthatcanbedeployedindifferentsituations.Againhere,theideaofcontentgets
overtakenbytheideaofbeingabletointeract,connect,orreactinacertainway.
Thisnewkindoflogisticalsubjectivityalsochangedourunderstandingofinnovation.
AccordingtoHarneysubjectsareconditionedtoseekinnovationnotincontentbutinthevery
abilitytoconnect,beingthisability toadaptamarketdemand.Thisattitude isdiametrically
opposedtothestatisticalsubject,whowasrequiredtoinnovatewithincertainlimits.
With the logistical subject there is a breakage of all boarders and areas that seem
incompatiblebeforestartmergingtoconstituteanewpanacea.Weseelanguage,financeand
cultureallmeltingtogetherandthelogisticalsubjectbecomingalabouringconduitforthings
thatlookedincongruentbefore,beingabletointeractorrespondprofessionally,academically,
orevenmorebroadlyasasubjectintheworld,acrossallthesedifferentspheres.
To oppose this demand of capital for adaptability, flexibility and absolute efficiency,
Harney points out that one would have to offer friction. This concept, according to him
involves the attitude of the subject to remain firm, stand still, and refuse to operate by
stimulus and reaction. He defends ways of living that are sticky, that embody certain
insistences.
Byrefusingtoadapt,connectoroperatebetweenareassubjects,fieldofexpertisebut
insteadchoosingtoremainwithinonedomain,youofferresistance.Thispostureofstayingin
7 Since all of Harveys references come from the same source, I will not keep repeating the source along this text. All quotes are extracted from the video cited in the references.
-
35
place,isaccordingtoHarneybecominghighlypoliticalinthewayitoffersadeadendforthe
fluentmovementofcapitalinlogisticalsubjects.
Thisabilitytoplugin,orbelogistical, isveryclosetotheattitudeoftheneogeoand
theirdeploymentofsimulationtoquestionthepretensionsofmodernartandabstraction.In
their case, a skill, deconstruction, appropriation and some cynicism was used to operate
logistically. They connected the systemof the sign, themarket, artmaking, advertising, and
with a highly theoretically equipped (or illequipped base) responded to the world by
connectingallthesethingsthatseemedincongruous.Theyoperatedasthelabouringconduit,
andbydoingsocompliantlyreproducedtheabstractrealitythattheythoughttobecriticizing.
Intheircasewealsocaninterpretthatcontentwasoverlookedandattitudeorlogisticswere
positionedasmainconcerns.
In my understanding, the attitude or the postcritical condition, as well as the
logistical subject reveal an approach to the world that I understand as circumstantial. It
focusesoncircumstancesandrespondstothesebymeansofreaction.Diametricallyopposed
tothis,therewouldbeastructuralapproach.
ThestructuralapproachiswhatIwouldpositionclosertoAdornosambitionforanart
that could effect social change. In operating structurally, art looks at itself and relies at the
mastering of its own domain. It becomes thus autonomous, and as Foster had suggested
before,minimalautonomywouldnowholdminimalnegativity.
Withinthequestioningoftheidiosyncrasiespertinenttoartsconcerns,initsconcept
andmaking, art couldoffermuchmore friction to the abstract process of capitalism than if
sellingitselfasaccompliceoftheprocessofabstraction.In itsautonomyartcouldrevealthe
contradictionsandanxietiesoftheworldallthemoreandthroughitsabstractness,reinforce
its autonomy and make space for the social and historical struggles of the world to come
throughinitsformalproblems,ratherthanthroughobjectivefigurativemessages.
To exercise the thinking about this possibility of operating structurally, relaying on
certain insistences, and offering friction to the status quo I will finalize this dissertation
lookingintotheworkofTommaAbts(seeFigure7,Figure8,andFigure9)whosepracticeI
understandasembodyingasolidalternativeforabstractiontoremainrelevantandcritical.
-
36
Figure7:TommaAbts,Lubbe,2005,Acryliconcanvas,48x38cm.
(Source:GreenGrassiGallerywebsite)
-
37
TOMMAABTS
GermanbornbutLondonbased,TommaAbtswas thewinnerof the TurnerPrize in
2006.Herworkconsistsofabstractpaintingsthathaveallthesamemeasure,48x38cm,and
astitlespropernamesthattheartistchoosesfromadictionaryofnamesfromaspecificregion
inGermany.Theselectionofthenamesisbasedonaphoneticconnectionbetweenthework
andthewordandresultsinconferringauniqueandwholesomeidentityforeachpiece(Abts
2004,p.16).
For the making of these paintings, Abts practice has been described as labour
intensiveandaresultofaprocessofaccrual(Doubal2011).AccordingtoCoombs(2011)her
paintings are developed over a long period of time, comprising far more complexity than
wouldappearfromthesurface.
In addressing her own practice, Abts has described it as based on a concrete
experimentationthatisanchoredinthematerialsused(AbtsquotedonBedford2012,p.101).
Involving incommensurable organizational principles (Hudson2009, p. 21), this controlled
experimentationworks,according totheartist, inremovinganyarbitrarinessfromthework
(Abts2004,p.16).
Neverthelessdespite this level of control,Abtshas shown tobe awareof something
that surpasses it. She has acknowledged in her process a combination of control but then
havingtoletgotogetbeyondwhatyouknow(Abts2004,p.16).
All these remarks aboutAbts practice, remindsme of Adornos dialectic ofmaturity
and his emphasis on the need for experimental art. Abts work reveals an insistence on a
conscious control over her means of production, which allows for something beyond it to
comethrough.
Another aspect of Abts practice that I find pertinent to be highlighted here is the
awareness thatherpaintingsdonotstand foranythingelsebeyondthem. Inaconversation
withPeterDoig,Abtshasconfirmed thisanddeclared that the forms inherpaintings dont
symbolize anything or describe anything outside the painting. They represent themselves
(2004,p.14).
Abtshasactuallydeclaredtobedistrustfulofthingsthatarenotquitethemselves,or
that pretend to be what is not, characteristics that she understands as effects (Coombs
2011).
In linewith these standpoints,Abts alsodeclared to seek toproduceworks that are
congruentwith itselfaimingat theworkbecomingselfsufficientand abletocontenditself
(Hudson 2009, p.18). In Hudsons words Abts works are about becoming an autonomous
thingintheworldthatcanbecome,ormaybeinherentlyis,congruentwithnothingexceptthat
verypainting(2009,p.23).
-
38
Despite this declared autonomy, Abtsworks has also been classifiedwork among a
group of abstract artists that reveal a great embeddedness in the world made possible
throughmaterialsandwork(Bedford2012,p.99).
These statements clearly reveal another correspondence between Abts practice and
Adornos theory. In this apparently irreconcilable relationship of autonomy and
embeddedness in the world, I see in Abts work a palpable example of how the work can
establishitselfasautonomousorasitsownmaster,butatthesametime,throughthelabour
poured into itsmaking, that involvescontrolover techniqueandmaterials, transpireadeep
connectiontotheworldandtothetimesfromwhichtheworkemerged.Inmyunderstanding,
thisautonomy,or purposefulmuteness (Hudson2009,p.18)ofAbtsworks isall themore
sounding.
Also, by distrusting what Abts addressed as effects, I see in her work a structural
approach.Withtheworkssettingouttobeonlythemselves,theyrefusetooperateintermsof
reaction,afteralltheyareonlyaccountabletothemselves,andlookintotheirownconceptand
conditionratherthansimplyatthecircumstancesaroundthem.
Finally, a feature in Abts works that I believe can bring together the aspects
highlightedbefore iswhat some critics havehighlighted as a potential of temporal latency
(Verwoert2008).
This featurehasbeenexplainedasthepositionthatAbtsslowworkandabstraction
takeinstandingfirm,refusingtoadapttoaideologyofperformancedefendedbytheadvanced
information capitalist society that we live in today, where agency is measured by the
professionalstandardsofahighperformancecultureinwhichtoperformmeanstoproveyour
abilitytoactualizeyourpotentialonthespot,anywhere,anytime(idem).
ForVerwoert, thispotential fortemporal latency inAbtsartworkscanbeevokedin
twofold way. On one hand its does so by allowing the latent memories inscribed in the
materiality of the picture to emerge in the moment wh