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