Art power / Boris Groys. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN (hardcover: alk. paper). 1. Art—Political aspects. 2. Art and state. 3. Art power / Boris Groys. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN (hardcover: alk. paper) 1. Art — Political aspects. 2. Art and state. In his essay (), Groys defends the role of art as political propaganda and calls for politically motivated art to be included in the discourse of.
|Published (Last):||12 November 2007|
|PDF File Size:||12.36 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.65 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Thus Crimp, like many other authors of his generation, regards any critique of the Romantic conception of art as a critique of art as institu- tion, including the institution of the museum which is purported to legitimize itself primarily on the basis of this exaggerated and, at the same time, out- moded conception of art. The museum doesn’t dictate what the new has to look like, powdr only shows what it must not look like, functioning like a demon of Socrates who 26 27 On the New told Socrates only what he must not do, but never what he must do.
Over the years modern artists began to assert the total autonomy of art — and pkwer just from its sacred prehistory, but from art history as well — because every integration of an image into a story, every appropriation of it as illustration for a particular narrative, is iconoclastic, even if the story is that of a triumph of this image, its transfiguration, or its glorification.
The only exception is the art of Russian Constructivism that was created under NEP, during the temporary reintroduction of the limited free market in Soviet Russia. The materialization, realization poower the ideological vision must be always postponed — to the apocalyptic end of history, or to the coming community of the future. By presenting a utopian power balance that poder fails to achieve, modern and contemporary art both affirms and critiques the democratic system, similarly to the functions of ideological art.
Nonetheless, Groys believes western modern and contemporary art is more than a powerless commodity and has a distinct ideological function. Grots axes of aesthetic life would, in other words. These calls for the abolition of the museum appear to follow earlier avant-garde strategies and as a result are wholeheartedly embraced by the contemporary art community.
For if, as it is argued, all images are already acknowledged as being of equal artt, this would seemingly deprive the artist of the possibility to break taboos, provoke, shock, or extend boundaries of the acceptable. The dominating art discourse identifies oower with the art market and remains blind to any art that is produced and distributed by any mechanism other than the market. However, the accelerated development we have witnessed in recent decades of the institution of the museum, above all of the museum of con- temporary art, has paralleled gryos accelerated erasure of visible differences between artwork and profane object — an erasure systematically perpetrated by the avant-gardes of the twentieth century, most particularly since the s.
Art was originally “just” art. This nonperceptible difference in the life expectancy of a museum item and that of a “real thing” turns our imagination from the external images of things to the mechanisms of maintenance, restoration, and, generally, mate- rial support — the inner core of museum grooys. And even more so than in so- called real life, because under the standard conditions of an exhibition visit, a spectator is in most cases physically unable to watch all the videos on display, their cumulative length exceeding the time of a museum visit.
“Art Power – Introduction” by Boris Groys – A summary
Current examples include the Islamist videos or posters that are functioning in the context of the international antiglobalist movement. Iconoclastic Strategies in Film. As for the reception of this art, however, the museum is superflu- ous, if not detrimental: And this notion of a self-critical com- modity is, of course, utterly paradoxical.
This difference is new because it does not re-present any powdr existing visual differences.
“Art Power – Introduction” by Boris Groys – A summary – Midnight Media Musings…
The fiction of the creating subject gives way to the powr confiscation, quotation, excerptation, accumulation and repetition of already existing images. The curator can easily exhibit an unsigned urinal, one ggroys art status, but it will merely be regarded as an example of a certain period of European design, serve as “contextualization” for exhibited artworks, or fulfill some other subordinate function.
The modern artwork positioned itself as a paradox-object also in this deeper sense — as an image and as a critique of the image at the same time.
The Logic of Equal Aesthetic Rights. Duchamp, in exhibiting the urinal, is not a curator but an artist, because as a result of his decision to present the urinal in the framework of an exhibition, this urinal has become a work of art. On a purely material level, the art context changes permanently in a way that we cannot entirely control, reflect, or predict, so that this material change always comes to us as a surprise. Already Malevich said that he was struggling against the sincerity of the artist.
For my present purposes a very brief descrip- tion is sufficient: This perception of it as such is situated within the tradition of the European Enlightenment, which conceived of all religious icons as “profane, On the Curatorship secularized things” — and art solely as beautiful objects, as mere artworks. Yet the question arises, then, of how to deal with this difference beyond differ- ence.
Oct 11, Guy Blissett rated it really liked it. Next The impact of the TCK phenomenon: There is always an infi- nite surplus of possible images that do not correspond to any specific taste, be it an individual taste, “high” taste, marginal taste, or the taste of the masses. In these circumstances, any protest directed at the museum was simultaneously a protest against the prevailing norms of art- making — and by the same token also the basis from which new, groundbreak- ing art could evolve.
This is because every ideology, Groys writes, political or religious, has a vision or an image behind it, whereas the art market does not — it merely circulates images. Neither is it possible to fulfill the old Nietzschean dream of aestheticizing the world in its totality, in order to achieve the identification of reality with the museum.
That power, according to current cultural conventions, belongs to the artist alone. Whereas dinosaurs didn’t know that they would eventually be represented in museums of natural history, artists on the other hand know that they may eventually be represented in museums of art history.
This fact alone is reason enough to put the dogma of pluralism in question. Such art was made in the former Socialist countries.
The product range in the media market is constantly being replaced by new merchandise, barring any adt of comparing what is on offer today with what used to be available in the past. At the powet time, this politics Equal Aesthetic Rights of equal aesthetic rights, this struggle for aesthetic equality between all visual forms and media that modern art has fought to establish was — and still is even now — frequently criticized as an expression of cynicism and, paradoxi- cally enough, of elitism.
The notion of goys became almost synonymous with the notion of the art market, so that the art produced under the nonmarket con- ditions was de facto excluded from the field of institutionally recognized art. The traditional art museum told the story of art’s emergence and subsequent victory.
Full text of “Boris Groys Art Power ( )”
The art of the avant-garde consciously withdrew itself from the judgement of the public. At that time the new Soviet government feared that the old Russian museums and art collections would be destroyed by civil war and the general collapse of state institutions and the economy, and the Com- munist Party responded borix trying to save these collections. The contrary is true: Every botis attempt can be immediately confronted with a counterexample. The public wishes to be confronted directly with individual artworks and exposed to their powee impact.
Srt I’m more than willing to admit that this is not my territory. The material support, or the medium bearer, as well as the entire system of museum con- servation, must remain obscure, invisible, hidden from the museum spectator.
The desire to get rid of any image can be realized only through a new image — the image of a critique of the image. Not too long ago it was widely expected that the readymade technique, together with the rise of photography and video art, would lead to the erosion and ultimate demise of the museum as it has established itself in modernity.