Collectivism after Modernism - autonomous learning - Blogs
Collectivism after Modernism - autonomous learning - Blogs
Collectivism after Modernism - autonomous learning - Blogs
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
18 Jelena Stojanović<br />
the collectives under scrutiny in this chapter strove to resist, or rather sought<br />
to reverse. Their primary if nonetheless utopian task was to negate the rhetoric<br />
that there were two avant-gardes 3 —one political, the other aesthetic—<br />
that are in turn divided along imaginary lines of demarcation and positioned<br />
by mutual subordination and subservience. This same utopian drive led them<br />
to challenge both ofWcial Marxist doctrine and institutionally established,<br />
artistic avant-gardism. They strongly believed that international collectives<br />
provided, inadvertently perhaps yet uniquely, the underpinning for both the<br />
aesthetical and the political avant-garde, and that the very existence of collectivism<br />
profoundly challenged any form of specialization, spatialization, or<br />
demarcation. As the Situationists explained in a text written almost twenty<br />
years later and coincidentally entitled, irony notwithstanding, “The Fall of<br />
Paris” (“La Chute de Paris”), the internationals and truly international collectives<br />
simply never existed and their time has yet to come. 4 Hence, these<br />
art “internationals,“ or more to the point, “internationaleries” in a droll<br />
rendition offered by Christian Dotremont, were inherently ambiguous formations,<br />
and their ambiguity was itself a form of negation and critique meant<br />
to subvert the dominant modernist discourse and its embedded cold war<br />
thinking. Simultaneously however, in a positive move, it sought to rescue<br />
whatever remained of public, collective subjectivity and the radical, political<br />
potential of internationalism. Therefore the very term internationaleries,<br />
and even more importantly the cultural practice it gave rise to, might be<br />
described as a “grotesque” manipulation of the modernist trope of international<br />
avant-gardism.<br />
My use of the term grotesque is based on the writings of Mikhail<br />
Bakhtin who deWned it as an ironic, performative tactic with a very important<br />
social role insofar as it both critically preserved and negated signiWcant<br />
contemporary issues at “moments of danger.” 5 It is this dual Wgurative/dis-<br />
Wgurative function of the grotesque as a rhetorical tactic that reverses or<br />
inverts the intended and established uses of internationalism. To “degrade”<br />
means above all not so much to propose new modes, as much as to expose<br />
the lack and inconsistencies of the old ones including art, the avant-garde,<br />
and even collective practice itself. Hence, the grotesque is a collective act<br />
that culminates in a carnival, a “borderline between life and art.” 6 Furthermore,<br />
Bakhtin maintains that insofar as the grotesque is also a speech act it<br />
is a spatial tactic as well. Its aim is nothing short of the reordering and rearticulating<br />
of the world as in a dialectical “change of gears.” As an upsidedown,<br />
inside-out movement the grotesque is probably best exempliWed by the<br />
well-known Situationist tactic of détournement. True to the logic of the grotesque,<br />
it was deWned in deceptively simple terms as a “reversal of perspective.”<br />
7 Through this grotesque mode of action the international collectives