On 06/27/2012 11:07 AM, Robert Jackson wrote:
Hi All, It's worth noting that Kosuth was a conceptual artist who explicitly followed in the lineage of Duchamp and the 'demonstration' of idea: that is to say, the conceptual delivery of art as information and the separation of 'art' from 'aesthetics' - (his famous Art Forum essay 'art after philosophy' says as much). Hardly any of these elements chime with the privileging of the discrete object in OOO.
The object in itself being accessible as simply the sum of its unique (fnarr) aesthetic properties valenced in terms of their efficacy at reflecting the ego of the gentlemanly spectator is a vision of OOO that would cause its proponents to clop furiously.
As Ian mentioned - The fact the OOO is threatening a lot of 40 - 50 year old structuralist-poststructuralist assumptions doesn't stop at philosophy or cultural theory. In the arts - pretty soon we'll start
Having been at art school in the early nineties I have very little time for PS but I'm constantly surprised at how different OOO apparently believes its dryly authoritarian poetics are from PS.
seeing bigger conflicts between proponents of the Duchamp lineage and whatever manifestation OOO and art happen to collide in. IMO Duchamp has a lot to answer for, especially in the dross of conceptual creative malaise which contemporary art can't get out of. Duchamp is now no
Neoconceptualism (80s...) and relationalism (90s...) are in no small part about the pastoral ventriloquization of objects (...commodities or resources, obviously including human resources...). OOO poses no threat to this order, flat ontology is as market friendly (with apologies to everyone who has a sad at the trivial fact of OOO's literal and metaphoric market congruity, which it shares with Theory's identity politics) as suspension of judgement was. It is a managerial Hameau de la Reine.
The error of Duchamp's reception by the art (market|world) is to assume that the ontological blasphemy of the creative act is repeatable. Badiou is useful here, or at least fun.
longer avantgarde - but what Greenberg accurately described as 'avant gardist'. It's consists not of sincerity but of demonstration - and its expiration date is nigh.
Duchamp is exquisitely ironic, introducing negative valences into aesthetics and negative space into the ontology of art. But he was reclaimed by the art market by the 1960s with the editions of his lost readymades.
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6261
Besides the inevitable disagreements/agreements on what objects are, or how they relate, I think OOO has brought depth back into the heart of discrete entities, with a realist equivalent twist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_container - Rob. _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
