Isaac puts forth this meme inquiring into the nature of the historical obsolescence of works of art. The question he poses is “What [works of art] have fulfilled their historical purpose and can now be put aside permanently?” His question stems from this post about Birth of a Nation. I’m game. But, if you spell my name like an Eastern European Intellectual, you get that kind of a response.
While I think the obsolescence of a work of Art is an interesting idea, I find the fundamental premise of the question flawed. The idea that a work of art could reach the end of its social value assumes that it can some how be pulled out of its own historicity and as a result lose its value as a commodity in the production of late capitalist artistic works. In point of fact the very historical shortcomings noted about the work Birth of a Nation prove its enduring social capital.
With Re-Birth of a Nation, Paul Miller explores the role of Birth of a Nation as part of a larger social dialogue. It is critique through art and in its own way breathes new life into the decaying social value of the original. It reforms the original work as protagonist in an agon of historicity. The very potentialities of historical presence are called into question as an uncertain and relational ground replaces a once firm foundation. Questions abound as to which work is the true or authentic work. Is authenticity bounded by traditional notions of historical linear time? Or is it perhaps about something greater? Authenticity is not about determining which came first, but rather what explodes the heart of the idea out into the mind of the observer.
Culture does not operate so easily as to take an object, extract its total use value and then discard it. Culture allows for the decay of objects and their resultant transformation into something wholly new. Just as the most beautiful of flowers might grow out of a pile of dead and decaying organic matter, so too do beautiful works of art come about as a process of growth out of social decay.
Disco, dying the slow death of creeping cultural irrelevancy, was reborn at the Warehouse through the turntables of Frankie Knuckles and the “Mash-Up” with european synthpop as House Music. And the records never stopped crossfading. The cut, the remix, the mash-up. These are all means in which culture finds a way to reappropriate itself. To be born anew full of social value as a new art form.
This is the organic nature of culture often ignored in critiques following a more traditional modern interpretation of cultural use value. The rising popularity of DIY solutions is a testament to the aesthetic of remix culture moving beyond the turntables. Sure The Grey Album by DJ Dangermouse is a clear example of the reappropriating nature of cultural expression and artistic transformation. But so too is my roomates DIY 303 Kit as a remix of the very technology of remix culture.
No work of art of art ever dies. Rather the framing devices we have to conceptualize them reach an end. To see a work of art as dead speaks more to the viewer than to the work itself. And sure, to many it may well be dead. But this is only because its next use has yet to be discovered. When the framing device through which we view a work of art finds us nothing of value, perhaps we need to shift the paradigm through which we are observing these works. After all, one door closing is just another door opening. Which side are you on?
Tags: art, paradigm shift, theory, transformation
