07.01.2013 Views

Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship - autonomous ...

Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship - autonomous ...

Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship - autonomous ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

artificial hells<br />

exhibitions in Paris by Asger Jorn (Modifi cations [Peinture détournée] at<br />

Galerie Rive Gauche) <strong>and</strong> Giuseppe Pinot- Gallizio (Cavern <strong>of</strong> Anti- Matter<br />

at <strong>the</strong> Galerie René Drouin), both in 1959. Both shows sought to complicate<br />

traditional ideas <strong>of</strong> single authorship: Jorn by painting over existing<br />

paintings purchased in fl ea markets, <strong>and</strong> Pinot- Gallizio by producing<br />

abstract painting on rolls to be purchased by <strong>the</strong> metre, which he referred<br />

to as ‘industrial paintings’. In <strong>the</strong> same year, <strong>the</strong> experimental architect<br />

Constant Nieuwenhuys exhibited his model precinct maquettes at <strong>the</strong><br />

Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam. In 1960, however, <strong>the</strong> balance between<br />

artistic <strong>and</strong> literary interests began to shift: Pinot- Gallizio was excommunicated<br />

from <strong>the</strong> SI, <strong>and</strong> Constant resigned at <strong>the</strong> same time; both exits<br />

were <strong>the</strong> result <strong>of</strong> disagreements <strong>and</strong> denunciations stemming from contacts<br />

made in <strong>the</strong> art world. A year later Asger Jorn resigned, <strong>and</strong> after 1962 – in<br />

part triggered by Jorn’s bro<strong>the</strong>r Jørgen Nash setting up a rival ‘Second<br />

Situationist International’, <strong>and</strong> in part by Debord’s increased politicisation<br />

following his dialogue with <strong>the</strong> Marxist sociologist Henri Lefebvre – <strong>the</strong><br />

group became increasingly opposed to art as an activity separated from<br />

revolutionary praxis. 23 Membership tightened to <strong>the</strong> extent that artists were<br />

excluded for activities <strong>and</strong> attitudes that did not synchronise with Debord’s<br />

dem<strong>and</strong> that art be radical not solely in its subject matter, but also its form. 24<br />

Although some critics have disputed this division <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> movement into an<br />

early aes<strong>the</strong>tic position that evolved into a late political vanguardism, it is<br />

conspicuous that by 1961, most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> artists had left <strong>the</strong> organisation,<br />

ei<strong>the</strong>r voluntarily or by expulsion. 25 Fur<strong>the</strong>r evidence <strong>of</strong> this rupture is <strong>the</strong><br />

fact that art was no longer included on <strong>the</strong> programme <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> SI’s fi fth<br />

conference in summer 1961.<br />

Peter Wollen was one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> fi rst to advocate this <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> an artistic<br />

split in <strong>the</strong> SI in an early essay on <strong>the</strong>ir work: ‘The denial by Debord <strong>and</strong><br />

his supporters <strong>of</strong> any separation between artistic <strong>and</strong> political activity . . .<br />

led in effect not to a new unity within Situationist practice but to a total<br />

elimination <strong>of</strong> art except in propag<strong>and</strong>ist <strong>and</strong> agitational forms . . . Theory<br />

displaced art as <strong>the</strong> vanguard activity.’ 26 Critics still invested in <strong>the</strong> SI,<br />

such as T. J. Clark <strong>and</strong> Donald Nicholson- Smith (both <strong>of</strong> whom were<br />

excommunicated in 1967), argue o<strong>the</strong>rwise: for <strong>the</strong>m, it is precisely <strong>the</strong><br />

continual intersection <strong>of</strong> art <strong>and</strong> politics that makes <strong>the</strong> SI so distinctive. 27<br />

However, <strong>the</strong>y do not <strong>of</strong>fer any concrete examples <strong>of</strong> how that intersection<br />

was made manifest – in situations, images or text. (It is in fact Wollen<br />

who provides <strong>the</strong> most compelling evidence <strong>of</strong> this conjunction when he<br />

describes Debord’s writing as a combination <strong>of</strong> Western Marxism <strong>and</strong><br />

Bretonian Surrealism, <strong>and</strong> pays equal attention to <strong>the</strong> poetic aspect <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

group’s writing <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir political ambitions.) Tom McDonough, by<br />

contrast, emphasises that <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> a rupture circa 1962 is too simplistic:<br />

<strong>the</strong> SI were not against art <strong>and</strong> culture, he argues, but against <strong>the</strong><br />

production <strong>of</strong> commodifi able objects. He makes <strong>the</strong> point that collections<br />

82

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!