|
C99
Review: Neo-Avant-Garde
Benjamin
H.D. Buchloh, Neo-Avant-garde and Culture Industry: Essays on
European and American Art from 1955 to 1975, MIT Press, Cambridge
MA and London, 2000. xxxiii + 592 pp., £34.50 hb. in UK, ISBN 0262
02454 3
This book presents
a dazzling array of critical scholarship by one of the most rigorous
and challenging art historians of the late twentieth century. Neo-Avant-garde
and Culture Industry is the first of two volumes of Buchloh's
selected works, and contains nineteen essays, written between 1977
and 2000, on artists ranging from the post-minimalist sculpture
of Michael Asher and Richard Serra, the painting of Gerhard Richter,
Nancy Spero and Andy Warhol to the institutional critique of Hans
Haacke and John Knight. The second (as-yet-unpublished) volume will
assemble Buchloh's more general essays on aesthetic theories, movements
and practices.
What this first
volume of essays reveals is some of Buchloh's most convincing theoretical
statements about the degree of critical autonomy that artistic production
has from institutional, economic and political forces in the post
Second World war period. At a first glance, Buchloh's dense, theoretical
prose might suggest that the practice of art historical criticism
is a rather serious and specialised matter, reserved only for those
intellectuals familiar with the vocabulary of German 'Frankfurt
school' critical theorists.
Yet, Buchloh's
deliberate and consistent employment of critical terms and phrases
gradually reveals a restless commitment to articulating the particular
formal strategies that European and American artists of the post
Second world war generation have variously employed to counter the
total destruction of artistic production by corporate capitalism,
and an emergent cultural logic based purely on exchange and profit.
In doing so, Buchloh attempts to recuperate a critical public function
for contemporary artistic production in the face of American culture's
corporate privatisation.
Clearly, this
is no easy task. As Buchloh acknowledges in the introduction, the
essays attempt to 'articulate the actually existing degree of differentiation
operative in the works of the period' and to 'make these practices
transparent' (xxvi). By doing so, Buchloh traces the 'infinitely
more subtle and complex range of oppositions and resistances' prevalent
in the art practices of the neo-avant-garde (xxvi). In 'Marcel Broodthaers:
Open Letter, Industrial Poems', Buchloh argues that Broodthaers'
visualization of engraved poems into anodised aluminium effectively
counters the transcendent claims of conceptual artists such as Sol
Le Witt to escape from the economic and institutional frames of
artistic presentation through the use of language. 'Moments of History
in the Work of Dan Graham' further challenges the terms in which
conceptual art is generally understood.
Charting Graham's
use of photojournalism, performance and documentation in the late
1960s and early 1970s, Buchloh argues that Graham's use of different
'non-aesthetic' media (185) extends and radicalises the institutional
framework of artistic display rather than simply breaking with it.
By contrast, Daniel Buren's work for the Centre Pompidou in the
mid-1970s cynically reveals how the public function of the artist
is to maintain the 'myth of individual productivity at a time when
the working and living conditions of everyday life destroy individual
productivity' (121). As Buchloh further emphasises, the role of
the public artist is increasingly to operate as a cultural civil
servant for multinational corporate finance.
In the same
essay, Buchloh's assertion that public monumental sculpture 'seems
to occupy the same space and moment in history when memory as the
source of dialectical alteration of given reality is destroyed and
lost' (123) reveals another important concern that runs throughout
Buchloh's essays: the mnemonic function of public art and sculpture
in the context of post-Second World War Europe. This concern is
most forcefully articulated in Buchloh's searing critique of Joseph
Beuys' early performance work.
Focusing on
Beuys' mythic construction and subsequent documentation of his own
rescue from a plane crash by Tartars in Russia during World War
Two, Buchloh argues that Beuys perpetuates a collective social and
historical amnesia in post-war Germany, at a time when the historical
condition of memory in Germany was at its most fraught. By contrast,
the installation work of the French artist, Arman provides a mnemonic
counterpoint to the condition of national cultural amnesia. For
Buchloh, Arman's assemblage of found objects like dentures, reading
glasses and gas masks function as 'memory images of the first historical
instances of industrialized death' (274).
Buchloh's repeated
pronouncements on the fate of Marcel Duchamp's Readymades - that
they fall prey to the very institutional structures of artistic
display and aesthetic value which they originally attempted to challenge
- is re-articulated in the institutional critique of Hans Haacke.
Like Duchamp, the oppositional imperative of Haacke's work has been
increasingly co-opted by the corporate administration of aesthetics.
What is more, from the present historical moment, it appears rather
unfortunate that Buchloh claimed a marginal status for Haacke in
1988, when Haacke's most recent work has included commissioned public
art works on the façade and garden of the New Reichstag building
in Berlin.
The limitations
of Buchloh's European/North American-centred formalist critical
paradigm are further revealed in his unguarded statements on the
universal condition of identity. Buchloh is certainly correct to
emphasise how the global economic restructuring of nation states
have radically changed the traditional categories of identity. Yet
Buchloh's vocabulary strains to describe the particular historical
and geopolitical dynamics of cultural production outside of the
western-based, metropolitan art world. In a discussion of Irish
identity in James Coleman's Ploughman's Party, for instance,
Buchloh vaguely refers to 'temporally and geopolitically determined
forms of experience' in a passing reference to the 'stellar constellation
and the political emblem of Sinn Féin' (165). And in an essay on
the Argentinian artist, David Lamelas, Buchloh seems unable to articulate
the cultural and geographical specificity of Lamelas' formal practices.
Despite these
blind spots, Neo-Avant-garde and Culture Industry is one
of the most important documents of art historical scholarship in
the late twentieth century. In an age when light-box photo-conceptualism
and the aestheticisation of poverty continue to dominate the metropolitan-based
international art market, Buchloh's ongoing commitment to patiently
articulate specific forms of resistance in contemporary art practices
sets a high standard for future art historical scholarship.
Stephen
Morton,
Lecturer
in English Philology and Visual Culture at the University of Tampere,
completed the Whitney Museum of Modern Art Independent Study Program
in 2001. His book on Gayatri Spivak will be appearing in September
2002.
Do
you have an opinion on this article? If so, please click here for our comments form.
| No reader feedback so far - awaiting your input! |
|