SPRING 2021 - FICTION OF THE SUBJECT - SOLD OUT

‘I WRITE BECAUSE I DON’T KNOW WHAT I THINK UNTIL I READ WHAT I SAY’

NEWS: THE NAME OF THE ARTIST REMAINS AT THE CONTOURS OF ARTWORKS, SEPARATING ONE FROM THE OTHER, DEFINING THEIR FORM, AND CHARACTERISING THEIR MODE OF EXISTENCE (THE PRESENCE OF AN ARTIST’S NAME IS FUNCTIONAL IN THAT IT SERVES AS A MEANS OF CLASSIFICATION)

WHO’S AFRAID OF THE AUTHOR FUNCTION? DANTE ALIGHIERI AND PUBLIUS VERGILIUS MARO AT TATE MODERN

NEWS: IT IS THE ARTIST-FUNCTION THAT AUTHORISES THE VERY IDEA OF ‘AN ARTIST’

AN ARTIST’S NAME IS NOT SIMPLY AN ELEMENT OF SPEECH? ITS PRESENCE IS FUNCTIONAL IN THAT IT SERVES AS A MEANS OF CLASSIFICATION? A NAME CAN GROUP TOGETHER A NUMBER OF WORKS AND THUS DIFFERENTIATE THEM FROM OTHERS? THE ARTIST’S NAME CHARACTERISES A PARTICULAR MANNER OF EXISTENCE OF DISCOURSE?

NEWS: ARTIST DISSOLVES IN PROCESS OF COMPLETION OF WORK (AS IT IS EXPERIENCED AS AN ILLUSORILY AUTONOMOUS OBJECT WITH ITS OWN LAW OF FORM)

WHAT IS AN ARTIST? THE ARTIST FUNCTION; OR, HOW ASPECTS OF AN INDIVIDUAL, WHICH WE DESIGNATE AS AN ARTIST, OR WHICH MAY COMPRISE AN INDIVIDUAL AS AN AUTHOR, ARE PROJECTIONS, IN TERMS ALWAYS MORE OR LESS PSYCHOLOGICAL, OF OUR WAY OF HANDLING WORKS; IN THE COMPARISONS WE MAKE, THE TRAITS WE EXTRACT AS PERTINENT, THE CONTINUITIES WE ASSIGN, AND THE EXCLUSIONS WE PRACTISE

NEWS: ARTWORK KILLS ARTIST

IS THE ‘ARTIST’ THE IDEOLOGICAL FIGURE BY WHICH WE MARK THE MANNER IN WHICH WE FEAR THE PROLIFERATION OF MEANING?

NEWS: THE ARTIST FUNCTION REGULATES OUR MODE OF EXPERIENCE OF ART?

DISCOURSE THAT POSSESSES AN ARTIST’S NAME IS NOT TO BE IMMEDIATELY CONSUMED AND FORGOTTEN; NEITHER IS IT ACCORDED THE MOMENTARY ATTENTION GIVEN TO ORDINARY, FLEETING WORDS. RATHER, ITS STATUS AND ITS MANNER OF RECEPTION ARE REGULATED BY THE CULTURE IN WHICH IT CIRCULATES

NEWS: THE SUBJECT MUST BE STRIPPED OF ITS CREATIVE ROLE AND ANALYSED AS A COMPLEX AND VARIABLE FUNCTION

IN THE INTENTIONS WE PERCEIVE, IN THE ORIGINAL INSPIRATION WE RETROSPECTIVELY CONNECT, IN THE ‘TRAITS’ WE EXTRACT AS PERTINENT, AND IN THE COMPARISONS WE MAKE, WE ARE FOLLOWING CERTAIN RULES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ‘AUTHOR’ OF THE WORK?

HAS THE PHILOSOPHICAL UNDERSTANDING OF STRUCTURALISM, NOW BEST CONCEIVED OF AS A PHILOSOPHY OF THE SUBJECT - AS THE RETROSPECTIVELY PROJECTED OCCUPANT OF THE 'EMPTY PLACE' OF THE ‘ACTION OF THE STRUCTURE’ - HAS ENRICHED THE FIELD OF THE STUDY OF SUBJECTIVITY AS CULTURAL FORM?

SUBJECTS RESULT FROM ABSTRACT TEMPORAL PROCESSES OF SUBJECTIVATION; PRIMARILY AS CONSUMER SUBJECTS AND SUBJECTS OF DEBT (BOTH IMAGINARY SOURCES OF FREE ACTION), AND BEINGS 'SUBJECTED' TO THE PROCESSES AND CONDITIONS OF THE ACCUMULATION OF CAPITAL. AS INDIVIDUALS, WE ARE THE ‘FELT SITES' OF THESE CONTRADICTORY PROCESSES OF SUBJECTIVATION (CONSUMER CHOICE IS JUST A NEOLIBERAL MARKET-BASED VERSION OF 'FREEDOM’; THE EXPANSION OF CONSUMPTION AS A CONDITION OF THE EXPANDED REPRODUCTION OF CAPITAL - OR, THE COMMODIFICATION OF NOVELTY - IS THE MEANS FOR THE CAPITALISTIC APPROPRIATION OF DESIRE)

WHY FOR ADORNO IS THE ARTWORK A THING-LIKE QUASI-SUBJECT? (BECAUSE IT’S THE ONLY KIND OF OBJECT THAT BEHAVES LIKE A SUBJECT. ONCE YOU THINK OF SUBJECTS AS ALSO OBJECTS, THEN THE WHOLE QUESTION OF YOUR OWN SUBJECT-STATUS AND THE ARTIST'S RELATION TO THE SUBJECT-FUNCTION OF THEIR WORK IS FRACTURED. THE ONLY WAY TO THEORISE THE ELEMENTS OF FREEDOM AT THE LEVEL OF THE INDIVIDUAL IN ART PRACTISE IN RELATION TO THE AUTONOMY OF A WORK IS BY A PURELY RETROSPECTIVE ATTRIBUTION - TO SOME KIND OF ARTIST-SUBJECT - OF THE ACTION OF THE STRUCTURE THAT ARTICULATES THE PROCESS OF THE PRODUCTION OF THE WORK; SOME KIND OF RETROSPECTIVE CONFUSION OF WHAT FOUCAULT WOULD HAVE CALLED THE ARTIST-FUNCTION, WITH SOME INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEING, PHANTASMATICALLY IDENTIFYING THEMSELVES WITH THAT PROCESS (THAT INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEING SOCIALLY CATEGORISED AS 'ARTIST’)?)

THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE OBJECT? ‘SUBJECT', IN ITS MODERN (POST-KANTIAN) PHILOSOPHICAL SENSE, IS PRIMARILY ‘THAT WHICH ACTS'; BUT IT IS ALSO - STILL, SOCIALLY - THAT WHICH IS 'SUBJECTED' (IN THE SENSE OF BEING PLACED IN A SUBORDINATE POSITION) TO THE POWER AND AUTHORITY OF OTHERS; THE ASYMMETRY BETWEEN SUBJECTS AND OBJECTS IS SUCH THAT OBJECTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY SUBJECTS BUT SUBJECTS ARE NECESSARILY OBJECTS

THE ILLUSION OF ‘LIFE’? (A SCI-FI VERSION OF CAPITAL): WHAT WE CALL OUR LIVES IS, FROM A CAPITAL POINT OF VIEW, THE REPRODUCTION OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE ACCUMULATION OF CAPITAL. BUT WE HAVE A DIFFERENT RELATION TO THIS. WE LIKE TO THINK OF THIS AS 'LIFE’. BUT FROM A CAPITAL POINT OF VIEW, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE?

‘THE ONLY AUTHOR WHOM I MUST GRATEFULLY RECOGNISE AS AN INFLUENCE UPON ME AT THE TIME OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS WORK… (AND WHOM I INVENTED)…’: UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS, AND THROUGH WHAT FORMS, CAN AN ENTITY LIKE THE SUBJECT APPEAR IN THE ORDER OF DISCOURSE; WHAT POSITION DOES IT OCCUPY; WHAT FUNCTION DOES IT EXHIBIT; AND WHAT RULES DOES IT FOLLOW IN EACH TYPE OF DISCOURSE?

BOOK REVIEW: CAPITALISM: CONCEPT, IDEA, IMAGE: ASPECTS OF MARX’S CAPITAL TODAY