❴BOOKS❵ ✮ Sewn in the Sweatshops of Marx Author Thierry De Duve – Multi-channel.co

Joseph Beuys, Andy Warhol, Yves Klein, And Marcel Duchamp Form An Unlikely Quartet, But They Each Played A Singular Role In Shaping A New Avant Garde For The S And Beyond Each Of Them Staged Brash, Even Shocking, Events And Produced Works That Challenged The Way The Mainstream Art World Operated And Thought About Itself Distinguished Philosopher Thierry De Duve Binds These Artists Through Another Connection The Mapping Of The Aesthetic Field Onto Political Economy Karl Marx Provides The Red Thread Tying Together These Four Beautifully Written Essays In Which De Duve Treats Each Artist As A Distinct, Characteristic Figure In That Mapping He Sees In Beuys, Who Imagined A New Economic System Where Creativity, Not Money, Was The True Capital, The Incarnation Of The Last Of The Proletarians He Carries Forward Warhol S Desire To Be A Machine Of Mass Production And Draws The Consequences For Aesthetic Theory He Calls Klein, Who Staked A Claim On Pictorial Space As If It Were A Commodity, The Dead Dealer And He Reads Duchamp As The Witty Financier Who Holds The Secret Of Artistic Exchange Value Throughout, De Duve Expresses His View That The Mapping Of The Aesthetic Field Onto Political Economy Is A Phenomenon That Should Be Seen As Central To Modernity In Art Even , De Duve Shows That Marx Though Perhaps No Longer The Marxist Marx Of Yore Can Still Help Us Resist The Current Disenchantment With Modernity S Many Unmet Promises An Intriguing Look At These Four Influential Artists, Sewn In The Sweatshops Of Marx Is An Absorbing Investigation Into The Many Intertwined Relationships Between The Economic And Artistic Realms

10 thoughts on “Sewn in the Sweatshops of Marx

  1. says:

    , , , , , , , , , 4, 5.

  2. says:

    Way too much marxism, repetitive as well, and skims the surface for the most part, however there are some great lines And the bashing of Klein seems than justified Quotes Beuys legislator and outlaw, shaman and sham, utopianist of the future and embalmer of the pastThe name of this country where flaneurs and dandies cross paths with peddlers and ragpickers where rapins and carabins would be painters and medical students thumb their noses at philistines where the sins of the streetwalker are redeemed by the love of a young poet where humanity is humane in the brothel than in the church or palace where the underworld is the true aristocracy, tuberculosis the pardon for syphilis, and talent the only riches the name of this country that rings with all the cries of injustice and where the only one radically denied a visa is the bourgeois, that name is of course bohemia It is a literary and imaginary country where in a deformed image at once tragic and ideal, there was dreamed a humanity to replace the real humankind that peopled 19th century Europe, and that industrial capitalism had pitilessly set against itself by dividing it into two new antagonistic classes, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat The real name of bohemia, or better, the name of its correlate in the actual world, is the lumpenproletariat a no man s land into which there fell a certain number of people incapable of finding a place within the new social divisions expropriated farmers, out of work craftsmen, penniless aristocrats, country girls forced into prostitution.all social relations are, in the last instance, reduced to relations of production These will be free and autonomous only with the advent of class and stateless society, the communist society of which the proletariat is the avant garde.But all the will to emancipation and the desire for disalienation the 19th 20th centuries have carried have always meant that everyone is an artist, but the masses don t have the power to actualize this potential because they are oppressed, alienated, and exploited only those few whom we stupidly call professional artists know that in reality their vocation is to incarnate this unactualized potential Joseph Bueys, Raum 90,000 DMBeuys based art on will and thus on a principle of production, and Warhol based art on desire and thus on a principle of consumption Beuys believed in creativity and Warhol did not For Beuys art was labor while for Warhol it was commerce AW I started out as a commercial artist and I want to end up as a business artist To desire fame not the glory of the hero but the glamor of the star with the intensity and lucidity that Warhol did is to desire to be nothing, nothing of the human, the interior, the profound, nothing but image, surface, a bit of light on the screen, a mirror for the fantasies and a magnet for the desires of others a thing of absolute narcissism And to desire to outlive these desires as a thing, that is, not to be consumed.The American dream is a weak utopia in comparison with that of emancipation.Warhol was asked if he wanted to be a great artist, and he replied, No, I d rather be famous Beuy s double tomb was both royal and wretched, a dramatization of last rites for the bohemian, a vanishing historical type that the artist understood himself as embodying Beuys worked and wanted, in working, to actualize a creative potential present in every human being, not to produce exchange value That his work had a price would have to disappear with the coming of his economic system His artistic fame, far from being a privileged status, was meant to point the way of liberation for all to become fully what they already were Warhol, too, worked but in wanting to act like a machine, revealed the fact that in reality no artist works i.e., produces exchange value , and that the status of all artists is to exist as prized but valueless commodities, that their fame, far from being a proof of personal talent or the emergence of a universal creativity, is the price that their signatures will fetch when their work, over which their dealer has a monopoly, is in demand Klein sells wind runs the headline of the newspaper Nothing says that everyone is endowed with a productive faculty that is presently alienated but that defines or will define humanity in its generic essence And nothing proves that it is just, as a matter of principle, that everyone be an artist, or liberating that everyone will someday become one Is is as if he had watched Beuys play the pere Ubu of creativity and had understood that at the moment when the artist proletarian saw himself brought home to a bohemia as unreal as Jarry s Poland, the congruence of the aesthetic field with that of political economy had been perfect, complete, accomplished Etant donne this lesson, only one question remained how to make art out of that And I added Richard, Duchamp said That s not a bad name for a pissotiere Get it The opposite of poverty The signature acknowledges the double status of the nobody who proclaims himself an artist in becoming a member of the society On the one side there is the manufacturer, Mutt or Mott, who stands in for the artisan, and on the other Richard, the capitalist, the stockholder.Those who made the urinal neither made art nor tried to do so they were the workers whose creativity read labor power Mott bought on the labor market.Their situation and whatever they may do, whether they paint, write, compose, or are content to put the air they breathe in vials or to can other secretions of their labor power is to lead, against all odds, the life of an independent artisan Those who find it intolerable to be divided will identify with the proletarian in themselves without seeing that the capitalist is to be found there as well, and will look for the reconciliation outside, for example in social sculpture as did Beuys Or if they are masochists they will identify with the capitalist, without seeing that they exploit the proletarian in themselves as did Klein And if they are really clever they will take their stakes out of the game by making themselves into a machine as did Warhol.At the end of the story Mutt has sold the faucet under a new label to Arensberg for a price virtually without a ceiling Mott, who has gotten wind of the affair, just can t believe it He gets after his workers with a prod, yet never can he extract such surplus value out of them He shakes his head, muttering that even if he knows something about production, he understands nothing of Phynance Jarry s Pataphysics Yes, everyone is an artist no, artists don t work yes, the wish to proclaim oneself an artist is only a wish Yes the proletarians are alienated yes, the relations of production are reified.Duchamp could recall that his only utopia had been to establish a society in which the individual has to pay for the air he breathes, and now leaves to his creditors the bother of cutting off the air in case of nonpayment.

  3. says:

    , .

  4. says:

    , 1 , 2 , 3 4 5 , , 6 XX ,