When Greenberg says that abstract painting is “the imitation of imitating”, he uses the word “imitate” in relation to the Aristotelian theory of “Mimesis”, which describes a search for the perfect and timeless cycles of nature through symmetry and mathematical ideas. In art history, the representation of the visual appearance of things, or mimesis, was a tradition of academic Realism that focussed on depicting an aesthetically idealistic and cliché portrayal of mythical and legendary motifs. However, the avant-garde artists Greenberg describes are applying the act of mimesis to the disciplines and processes of creating art itself. This introspection allowed them to break the fourth wall and critically analyse the act of creation itself, and is the genesis of their abstraction, since their expression of the abstract matters more than what is being expressed.
2. What are the characteristics of the avant garde?
The avant-garde is a French term, meaning the “advance guard”, to describe artists who introduce experimental or unusual new ideas. This progressive ideology is characterised by aesthetic innovation, which is initially viewed as unacceptable by traditional society. Nevertheless, avant-garde artists push the boundaries of accepted norms and specialise in creating antisocial but necessary works that are far less accessible than institutionalised or populist media.
3. What is an example of a contemporary artwork that you would identify as avant garde and why?
An example of a contemporary artwork, that I would identify as avant-garde, is the ongoing “Image Objects” (2011) project by the American Post-Internet artist, Artie Vierkant (1986-). By regularly producing digital images and exhibiting them as sculptures, he distributes multiple copies of these physical/digital works as “Image-Objects”. These images are infinitely reproducible and result in objects that cannot be regarded as inherently greater than any of their original sources. After each exhibition, the officially documented installation views are altered before release, allowing the objects to shift and evolve aesthetically, splitting the viewer’s experience between the physical encounter in a gallery and the countless variations of the photos circulated online. By shifting the focus of the artist’s production away from the digital processes used to create and display them, Vierkant’s “Image-Objects” articulate a new relationship with technology, in contrast with preceding generations, that he characterises as “…a role more closely aligned to that of the interpreter, transcriber, narrator, curator, architect."
4. What are the characteristics of kitsch, according to Greenberg?
According to Greenberg, kitsch is characterised by objects which are industrially mass-produced and commercially designed to be a popular commodity. In contrast to the avant-garde, kitsch mimics its immediate predecessor with no regards to cultural ethics, by solely aiming to copy the beautiful, and not the good. By offering instantaneous emotional gratification without intellectual effort, kitsch is fake art expressing fake emotions to deceive the consumer into thinking they are experiencing something deep and serious.
5. What is an example of contemporary kitsch and why do you think so?
A great example of contemporary kitsch is the Louis Vuitton collaboration with Jeff Koons in 2017. This series of handbags and backpacks, featuring reproductions of iconic works by the Old Masters, displays the original artist’s name in gold lettering, alongside Koons’ initials paired with the iconic “LV” monogram. These high-end Louvre souvenirs begin at $585 for a key chain and range up to $4,000 for a carryall bag but Koons says that people can still “…walk by the windows of Louis Vuitton and enjoy them.” The chief executive of Louis Vuitton, Michael Burke, unwittingly reveals the kitsch though his pseudo-intellectualism, “People are going to think, ‘How dare they?’ But that’s good, because then you have to think, ‘Why do I think that?’”, and Koons unashamedly proclaims, “I hope somebody that sees the bag can emotionally feel this connectivity.”
6. What were the political uses for kitsch at the time the article was written (1939)?
When this article was written in 1939, the totalitarian regimes in Europe and Russia, were utilising kitsch as an effective propaganda tool for influencing their largely proletarian society. The encouragement of kitsch was an easy and inexpensive way for governments to communicate with their subjects, and flatter them by bringing all culture down to a level of simplicity that can be understood without effort or critical thought.
7. Compare those uses to the connection between kitsch and politics in the world nowadays.
Nowadays, political kitsch is designed to reassure and comfort the observer/consumer by making facile use of symbolism, to reinforce national mythologies and to exploit conventional, constructed political 'realities'. It colonises the receiver's consciousness and pacifies rather than provokes. In the US, political kitsch tends to play to 'homey American certitudes', as exemplified by Donald Trump’s campaign slogan “Make America Great Again”. By providing meaningless reassurances to coal miners that all will be well, Trump is avoiding confrontation with unpalatable truths, such as climate change and the shift towards renewable energy. Social media websites are also thriving with kitsch-theories of ‘fake news’ and ‘alternative facts’ because of their narcissistic and self-confirming structures.
References
Greenberg, C. (1939). The Avant-Garde and Kitsch. The Partisan Review: 34-49.
No comments:
Post a Comment