apropriation and politics

8/9/2019 Apropriation and Politics

1/11

appropriation and politicsin the te rritory of art

Gisele Ribeiro

In view of the events title, Recombinant Territories, one needs to ex-plain, before anything else, from whence, from which territory, spaceor field, this discourse will be voiced over. We shall take the territoryof art as place, considering not obvious that, as we speak of digital me-dia, we will necessarily be speaking of art. That is, it is of interest hereto think in which way art (including art as technology) can help us tothink problems related to digital media.

This is the reason why the need of this explicitation. And, perhaps asa provocation, instead of a de-territorialisation, this text may propose are-territorialisation1. Which doesnt mean that this territory is taken asa refuge for specific issues, such as defended by part of Modern Art.

What we will examine here, then, is the relationship between art andtechnology, from the point of view of art as technology. It is not so muchthe use of technology that is the starting point for this discussion, but artbeing technology. As Jean-Luc Nancy would say, art is technology, but a

technology without an end. But, after all, technology has no end.2It has been known for a long time that art has ceased to be defined andthought of grounded on the use of materials and techniques.3 Instead, it

1. DELEUZE, Gilles and GUATTARI, Flix. Mil plats, capitalismo e esquizofrenia, vol. 1. Rio de Ja-neiro: 34, 1995.2. NANCY, Jean-Luc, Jean-Luc Nancy e Chantal Pontbrian, Uma Entrevista. Arte&Ensaio maga-zine. Rio de Janeiro, nr. 8, yearly, November, 2001, p. 150.3. Marcel Duchamp, Ad Reinhardt, Joseph Kosuth, Rosalind Krauss, Ronaldo Brito, Thierry De Duve, etc.


2/11

50 | debates | vitria

is defined as a field of interest where anything can be posed as art. Thismeans that from the contemporary point of view there is no materialityor medium that, on featuring more or less advanced technology (or moreor less traditional) has a prioriits guaranteed access to this field.

But is also indicates that this access does not require a gift or specialmanufacture, genius or any special funding.

According to Belgian critic and theoretician Thierry De Duve inKant after Duchamp:

In face of a readymade, there is no technical difference whatsoever betweenmaking and enjoying art. Once this difference is erased, the artist has waived anytechnical privilege regarding the layman. The artists profession has been emptied

of all itsmtier, and, if access to it is not limited by any barrier be it institutional,social or financial one deduces that anyone can be an artist if so desired. 4The procedure attributed to Marcel Duchamp, derived from his art-

work gathered under the title ready-mades, widens thus the limits ofart through the logic of appropriation. We shall take, then, appropria-tion as the interest focus, since it is the ground for one of the currentdiscussions about the potency of digital media as artistic media.

Of course, as it can be realised in the preceding phrases, one does

not believe that there are means or media more or less potent for thearticulation of artistic problems, and we intend to establish, indeed, acounterpoint to this idea, from the discussion around appropriation.We sustain, then, that regarding the political aspect, appropriation doesnot guarantee a critical point of view or even a reflexive one. We shalltry to explicit, then, the subtle differences between a critical appropria-tion and the one we consider acritical, indicating also the ethical-politi-cal consequences of these differences.

If we consider the logic of appropriation in a wide sense, despitethe fact that it has become evident and extremely sharp in the Ducham-pian readymade procedure, it is possible to take it (from the very ready-mades) as something that also belongs to the logic of photography andof the phonograph, both technical reproduction devices invented in the

4. DE DUVE, Thierry.Kant Depois de Duchamp.In: FERREIRA, Glria, VENNCIO FILHO, Paulo.(ed.).Arte & Ensaios magazine, nr 5. Rio de Janeiro: Master dissertation in History of Art/Escola deBelas Artes, UFRJ, 1998, p. 128.


3/11

vitria | debates | 51

19th Century, which have invested in the possibility of appropriation viaimage or sound of anything in the world.

But, what that renders this logic conceptually so important in Du-champs work is the possibility of appropriation, without the need ofany elaborate technical reproduction device.

However, if we widen the notion of device, as stated by VillmFlusser, in his book Filosofia da Caixa Preta [Philosophy of the Black Box5],taking it not only as an object, for instance, the photographic camera,but as a system that also includes the photographer, the observer, theobserved and the industry, we realise that we do talk about a device, buta conceptual device, widened, the system of art.

With the readymade we have the idea of appropriation elevated to aprocedure that goes much beyond the material or technical aspects of agiven medium: we look at the incorporation of a reality translated intoanother by means of a conceptual displacement (not always physical,temporal or spatial).

Thus, Duchamp brings the art device close to the photographicand phonographic devices (later the cinematographic, videographic, in-fographic devices etc.), without it implying the explicit use of the pho-

tographic materiality, for instance.However, despite the fact that it waives any specific media, theDuchampian procedure does not waive the discussion about what wedo with such appropriations. Far from celebrating the art system, thisprocedure places it under a critical focus, rendering visible the powermechanisms that influence the meaning of the work of art.6

Starting off from there as Joseph Kosuth stated, all art (after Duch-amp) is conceptual (in its nature), because art exists only conceptually7

shouldnt we think about how to replace photography, and all images andsounds produced from the logic of appropriation under the critical focus?

5. FLUSSER, Vilm. Filosofia da Caixa Preta, Ensaios para uma Futura Filosofia da Fotografia . Rio deJaneiro: Relume Dumar, col. Conexes, 2002.6. DUCHAMP, Marcel. O Ato Criador. In: BATTCOCK, Gregory (org.). A Nova Arte. So Paulo: Per-spectiva, col. Debates, 1975.7. KOSUTH, Joseph. Arte Depois da Filosofia. In: Malasartes magazine, nr1, September-November.1975, p. 11.


4/11


If in Duchamps piece Fountain(Fontaine, 1917) the appropriation ofthe porcelain urinal bears the signature R. Mutt, 1917, added to the in-dustrial object, stressing the importance of the signature as inseparablepart of the meaning attributed to a work of art, at the same time as itquestions the idea of authorship as expression of an individual subject,is it not the case that we should step back and ask about what takesplace with photographic appropriations including the beginnings ofits experiences?

In the case of William Henry Fox Talbots photographs, in which heuses lace in contact with the paper, could we not ask, what is the differ-ence, in the end, between the lacework proper and the lacework taken

by him?8

If, on the one hand, we take that photograph as document, whichwould indicate its transparent feature, should we not investigatesomething about this lace? Who has designed the appropriated image?Some unknown lacewoman? Some will say that it does not matter whoor how the lace was made: the photograph is what matters.

So, on the other hand, if we take the photograph as an object, byits opaque character, should we not have to investigate the context in

which the photograph is being received, its distribution, circulation andconventions system? The here and now of its reception and in whichway this photograph places a critical focus on this system?

If we take the problem of the documentary today, we find two po-litical perspectives: some can state that Talbot has appropriated thelacewomans work, exploiting her and taking personal advantage, aswell as financial, since it masks the relationship with previous work inthe defence of photographys potentiality as specific medium; other can

argue that Talbot has given the lace visibility, valuing it and inserting itinto the system of valuable objects (a more Benjaminian position).

8. This kind of photography is interesting because it is so flat, separating positive and negativeareas, thus generating a relationship between the structure of the lacework and that of the pho-tograph. According to Douglas Crimp, the lacework and the photograph share the same problemof the positive and negative; and according to Geoffrey Batchen, it also shares the problem of thedigital: bit: 1/0. Cf. CRIMP, Douglas. Introduo: As Fotografias no Final do Modernismo. In: CRIMP,Douglas; LAWLER, Louise. Sobre as Runas do Museu. So Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2005.


5/11


6/11


cinema or even the notion of appropriation that it bears that is goingto necessarily transfer this power to the spectator.

For Benjamin, the reproduction techniques allow not only a wideraccess to images and representation by the masses, in the role of the ob-server, but also that this access would also generate the insertion of thismass into these representations, as the observed. We see then that theappropriation includes one more element in the power game between art-ist, spectator and institution, which is the appropriated subject/object,the observed, which for Benjamin will divide its role with the spectator.

Of course, then, the articulation between these characters and theirroles becomes more complex, rendering appropriation as agency be-

tween the artist/author/producer, spectator/reader/audience, appropriatedsubject/object, institution/contextand means/instrument. The political work-ings of this agency cannot logically depend only on the instrument oftechnical reproduction. (Again, many new discussions about documen-tary cinema today seem to deal precisely with this issue).

In a few further points in this text, Benjamin gives us clues of whathappens with his own discourse in the course of the 20th Century lead-ing up to this day. When, in Chapter XI he compares the painter to the

filmmaker, relating the first with the healer, or magician, and the secondto the surgeon, he indicates that the painter relates in a magic mannerto reality, whereas the cinematographist penetrates in depth in thevery structure of the given. According to him, the image of the realfurnished by cinema is infinitely more significant [] it only succeedsbecause it uses the instruments geared to penetrate, in the most inten-sive way, the heart of reality. We notice that magic, previously depositedin the space between the painter and reality, rests today exactly on what

is interposed between the cinematographist and reality, the medium/instrument. That is, the aura that Benjamin so much would liked tosee destroyed concentrates today in a more emphatic way in what heconsidered capable of destroying it, the techniques of reproduction, orbetter said, in the rhetoric about them (according to Phillipe Dubois10,always the new technologies). It is not a coincidence that Hollywood

10. DUBOIS, Philippe. Cinema, Vdeo, Godard. So Paulo: Cosac Naify, 2004.


7/11


8/11


tres linked to banks and telephony enterprises that invest heavily inthis art niche know very well what they do).

Thus, we can agree with American critic Douglas Crimp, when he states:the appropriation strategy is no longer a certificate of a specific attitude in

the face of contemporary culture conditions. [] Appropriation, pastiche, quota-tion these methods extend into virtually all aspects of our culture, ranging

from the most cynically calculated products of our fashion and entertainmentindustries to the more committed critical activities of artist [] If all aspects ofculture make use of this new process, then the very process cannot be an indica-tor of a specific reflection about our culture.11

In this sense, Sherrie Levines work in which, an exact or similar

reproduction of Walker Evans photographs are presented, for example,is very incisive as it deals with appropriation and its relationship withphotography to focus, in a critical way, on the very procedure. After all,what records all, also records itself. In the same way, what appropriatesall appropriates also itself. Photography turns against itself. It is the verysubject/appropriatedobject now.

The problem of the relationship between appropriation and rep-resentation (or exploitation and representativity) returns again here,

but in a very ironic way, since it does so in a double manner: the doubtrests not only on Sherries procedure, but also on Walker Evans photo-graphs. The artist does not construct for herself an immaculate place,neither alienated nor passive, but a place of visibility that allows forquestionings:

As she unashamedly steals existing images, Levine does not make anyconcessions to the conventional notions of artistic creativity. She makes use ofimages, but not to constitute a style of her own. Her appropriations only hold

functional value for the specific historical discourses in which they are inserted.[] Levines appropriation reflects the very appropriation strategy the appro-priation of the classic sculpture style by Weston; [the appropriation of workersby Walker Evans] the appropriation both by Weston and by Mapplethorpe [orEvans] by the institutions of high art, or, in fact, the appropriation by photogra-phy in general; and, finally, photography as a tool for appropriation.12

11. CRIMP, Douglas. op. cit., p. 115.12. Idem, p. 121.


9/11


Douglas Crimp also stresses how much this work does not claim aplace for the artist as an autonomous creator whose creativity is singu-lar (evidently in the face of these photographs, we can easily utter thatphrase: I also can do this) and in this aspect it includes the history ofart as part of the creative act.

Taking another kind of work that operates the logic of appropria-tion keeping the critical aspect, but in a very different manner, we canconsider the reflections on John Cages ideas taken further by artistsconnected to the Fluxus. The absence of distinctions between composer,performer and listener sustained by Cage who, in a Benjaminian style,compares the composer to the king and the conductor to the prime-

minister13

will manifest its most interesting consequences in the con-ceptual scores of George Brecht, Yoko Ono and La Monte Young.In his piece Water Yam,1963, Brecht thinks of the artwork as texts/in-

structions/scoresdistributed in cards inside a box, which can be executedin diverse ways by performers, institutions and spectators, now propos-ing another relationship between composer/artist/author/producer, per-

fomer/institution/contextand listener/spectator/reader/public.Banality, as well as complexity, of language as means/instrumentren-

ders its fetishisation as an instrument of advanced technology almostimpossible. The performer/listener is thought of as a critical appropria-tor of the work, being up to him or her the various decision, such as forinstance: to execute the work mentally, extracting from there a soundeffect; to execute the work using equipment or instruments to produceand then listen the sound effectively; or to perform its reading, bothmentally and orally, as an execution of the piece, considering the soundof language also sound production.

However, in works such as by Bruce Nauman, Ann Sofie Sidn oreven Ricardo Basbaum (to quote a few), which make use of means/in-strumentssuch as surveillance cameras, for instance, for the appropria-tion of the spectators image as part of the work, obviously unfold theproblems arisen regarding appropriation, using videographic or digital

13. The Master-Pieces of Western Music Exemplify Monarchies or Dictatorships. The Composer andThe Conductor: King and Prime-Minister. CAGE, John. O Futuro da Msica. In: FERREIRA, Glria;COTRIM, Ceclia (orgs.). Escritos de Artistas, Anos 60/70. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Zahar, 2006.


10/11


recent means, but not without discussing or pointing at the dangers ofappropriation as control and surveillance instrument. They do not cele-brate, thus, these means/instrumentsby placing more power in its hands.On the contrary, they render visible their use as instruments of power.

Using or not using photography, or any other means considered tobe technical or digital reproduction, the appropriation will not enable,by itself, a change or a critical and reflexive attention regarding the polit-ical structure of the art system. It is necessary more than this, as RonaldoBrito would say, its necessary that the technique ceases to be the sub-jects expressive means. On the contrary, it becomes the objective needof the artists to master a deep and generalised rationality so as to accom-

pany the determinations of the cultural system. The need to investigateits field of action on the level of critical conscience. [The contemporaryissue] is less malleable to simplifications, for it rejects formal schema orprivileged contents.14

The place of contemporary art is only and radically reflexive. 15

14. BRITO, Ronaldo. O Moderno e o Contemporneo (o Novo e o Outro Novo). In: BASBAUM,Ricardo (org.).Arte Contempornea Brasileira: Texturas, Dices, Fices, Estratgias . Rio de Janeiro:Rios Ambiciosos, 2001, p. 207-208.15. Idem, p. 212.


11/11


bibl iography

appropriation and polit ics in the

territory of art

BENJAMIN, Walter. A Obra de Arte na Era de suas Tcnicas de Repro-duo. In: BENJAMIN, Walter; ADORNO, T. W; VELHO, G. (org.).Sociologia da Arte IV. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 1969.

BRITO, Ronaldo. O Moderno e o Contemporneo (o Novo e o Outro Novo).In: BASBAUM, Ricardo (org.). Arte Contempornea Brasileira: Texturas,Dices, Fices, Estratgias. Rio de Janeiro: Rios Ambiciosos, 2001.

CAGE, John. O Futuro da Msica. In: FERREIRA, Glria; COTRIM, Ce-

clia (orgs.). Escritos de Artistas, Anos 60/70. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Zahar,2006.CRIMP, Douglas. Introduo: As Fotografias no Final do Modernismo.

In: CRIMP, Douglas; LAWLER, Louise. Sobre as Runas do Museu. SoPaulo: Martins Fontes, 2005.

DE DUVE, Thierry. Kant Depois de Duchamp. In: FERREIRA, Glria,VENNCIO FILHO, Paulo. (ed.). Revista Arte & Ensaios, nr. 5. Rio deJaneiro: Masters Thesis in History of Art/Escola de Belas Artes, UFRJ,

1998.DUBOIS, Philippe. Cinema, Vdeo, Godard. So Paulo: Cosac Naify, 2004.DUCHAMP, Marcel. O Ato Criador. In: BATTOCK, Gregory (org.). A

Nova Arte. So Paulo: Perspectiva, col. Debates, 1975.DUCHAMP, Marcel. A Propsito do Readymade. In: DUCHAMP, Mar-

cel, et SANOUILLET, Michel, PETERSON, Elmer (orgs.). The Writ-ings of Marcel Duchamp. New York: Oxford University Press/Da CapoPress, 1973.

HENDRICKS, Jon. Exhibition Catalogue: O Que Fluxus? O Que No! O Porqu. Rio de Janeiro: Centro Cultural Banco do Brasil TheGilbert and Lila Silverman Fluxus Collection Foundation, Detroit.2002.

KOTZ, Liz. Post-Cagean Aesthetics and the Event Score. In: KRAUSS,R., MICHELSON, A., BUCHLOH, B., et al. Octobermagazine, nr. 95,inverno de 2001.

OITICICA, Helio. Esquema Geral da Nova Objetividade. In: Aspiro aoGrande Labirinto. Rio de Janeiro: Rocco, 1986.

apropriation and politics

Documents