Comments on: The Art of Dead Labor

By: Jeffrey Goldfarb

Jeffrey Goldfarb — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 21:37:00 +0000

But sometimes art works and provides a power for expression and creativity that can’t be done by other means. I think a recent case in point is the film Lincoln, much more than what its political critics and supporters imagine.

By: George Yudice

George Yudice — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 15:29:00 +0000

Could very well be that art is beside the point. That may be the reason why so many politically minded artists or art critics of the molecularist persuasion (Lazzarato, Holmes, Wright, etc.) latch onto contemporary protests (intermittents, zapatistasidnignados, occupy, yosoy132, Arab Spring, etc.) and see them as art. They have the life, passion and commitment that it is hard to find in contemporary art.

By: vince carducci

vince carducci — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 23:44:17 +0000

A couple of thoughts. First, I see this work functioning as a visual representation of a social movement, in this case the continuing struggle of labor in the face of global capitalism, something I think we might agree is a pressing concern now more than ever. (See all the posts on Madison, Wisconsin.) Working from Jean Cohen and Andrew Arato's work in (a href=http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=9036">Civil Society and Political Theory, it starts the ball rolling in terms of the first "I", identity, that people might see these images and recognize some aspect of themselves in them. It would be up to the movement to extend it into the next steps, i.e., inclusion, gathering a collectivity of like-minded subjectivities, and then influence, gaining the critical mass (the threshold between what Nancy Fraser calls weak and strong publics) to eventually achieve institutionalization, that is, change that becomes certified as the new paradigm. (As Cohen and Arato put it, "Laws are frozen politics.") This is basically what the labor movement did in the first half of the 20th century. You yourself note that the image might be the first step in getting someone to think about the issue. Isn't that an important aspect of engaging the public sphere? Doesn't someone need to start the conversation? If that's also preaching to the converted, so what? Isn't that another part of what needs to be done? The reinforcement of collective consciousness is not an insignificant thing. It's the reaffirmation of solidarity, a ritualized mechanism that's essential to maintaining a social order. What's more, there's more going on in the image than simply the message that Walmart keeps people poor. There's the visual culture of indigenous people that's being brought to bear and the various components of the print medium that provide a reinforcement of artistic intention. It's a more sophisticated piece of work than you give it credit for. I refer you to Walter Benjamin's essay "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." Therein is part of the answer to your question about what type of art is needed. None. There's the idea that "art" is an ethnocentric notion, it's an 18th-century European Idealist philosophical concept whose utility may have run its course. Its ritualist display function is over, in Benjamin's estimation, and politics now comes into play. (See also Arthur Danto and Regis Debray, as well as Julian Stallabrass's excellent little essay Contemporary Art: A Very Short Introduction.) The fact that we have appropriated the visual culture of all humanity over the millennia under the rubric "art" is a form of semiotic colonization. Finally, I don't see where the image prevents anyone from engaging the complexities of ideas. Have at it as you will.

By: Christian

Christian — Sun, 13 Feb 2011 22:38:48 +0000

Vince,

I wonder about the effectiveness of this type of art. Is it just preaching to the choir, or does it communicate a message that is actually convincing to those opposed to that line of thinking or those apathetic about those types of issues? The message does not seem very profound: Wal Mart keeps people poor. Perhaps this type of art will expose some people to these types of ideas for the first time. Perhaps this exposure will lead them to think about the issue for the first time. A world with a lot of this type of art might be a more political world. Yet, it’s less likely that this type of art will lead to in-depth dialogues exploring the complexities of the issues, with participants from various points of view. What type of art would indeed lead to this?