Although today's trend of
paying record-breaking prices for art work is criticized as
capitalist “commodification” and superficial trade of art, the
trend could well be an indicator of the faith in art work that the
art world has. But even more so, this expensive trend demonstrates an
attempt to “save” or “uplift” the figure of the artist in
society. Even if the artist in question is already dead, paying large
sums for his/her art work provides him/her with a legacy, a success
story and an “ordinariness” regarding his/her relevance in the
world today; the attempt is to make the artist feel safe. Paying
record sums is part of a wider age in the art world: the age of
showing concern for the artist.
One way in which the age
of the concern for the artist has come about is through
globalization. With globalization, what were previously close
relations in the art world have gotten even more intimate. The
artist, at the center of the art world of dealers, collectors, viewers
and students, is now exposed and revealed to these identities in
great detail. The artist is found to be problematic, not because of
any specific malady, but because the image of a “problematic
artist” can finally be properly employed given the possibility of
intimacy and care for the artist. A kind of parental impulse in the
art world can be satisfied by the artist figure who serves as the
object of concern/attention.
The artist's status
becomes more important than the art work he/she produces. The concern
for the artist has moved beyond just attention towards him/her to
outright scrutiny. In this scenario, the art work completely “hides
behind” the artist, the work is deliberately made obscure, and if
it happens to be displayed “prematurely” before the artist's
“problematic years,” its value is deliberately taken to be small,
for it has to be displayed at the right moment so that its trade
may prove “therapeutic” for the artist. Today the art world around the artist is too eager to help the artist.
As the display of the art
work becomes the final act for the artist, the art work no longer becomes the point of production of information and knowledge about the artist's life and health. Beyond his/her art work is just silence, with the art work being
“deterritorialized” from the art world, with the art work serving as
the final statement beyond the communicative and
enclosing/“territorializing” function of “art world language.”
The art work fosters no communication but brings about a silence, and
this silence is a result of complete ignorance towards the art work,
because the art world has replaced art work as the artist's
therapeutic object, with
the artist's safety as top concern over his/her creativity and
productivity.
True rebellion in the
art world today would be focused on experimenting with the timing of
the display of the art work: if the work is displayed “prematurely,”
before an artist's “problematic years” or even"creative years," then its value will be
lower in monetary terms, but the art work will also be very relevant as an
object indicating the condition of the artist's life, and so
premature display would produce communication about the artist
through the discussion of his/her art work. This would go against having the
art work stand as an end-point beyond which there is only an
unproductive and awed silence on the part of the art world.
No comments:
Post a Comment