How the West was Won: Images in Transit, 2001

7/28/2019 How the West was Won: Images in Transit, 2001

1/11

HowtheWestwaswon:ImagesinTransit

It is no news to anyone that the story of modern western art as told by its practitioners and

apologists, is a narrativeof origins andprogress. Twoof themost famous chapters in this linear

narrativeinvolve,respectively,travelstoa foreignland,andavisittoamuseum. Iam referringto

Gauguins sojourn in the islands of the Pacific inthe late19thcentury; the visit to amuseum is

PicassostotheTrocadroinParisin1906/7.Inthe1890s,thestorygoes,GauguinvisitstheIslands

ofthePacific,goesnative,andundertakesaradicalexpurgationoftheextraneousinhispainting

andsculpturewhich,accordingtothemodernistcreed,clearsthepathfor20thcenturyabstraction.

Picasso too, inspiredand liberated bymasks from Africa andOceania,moves from theexcess of

precepttothecrystallineessenceofconcept:hetoomakesaclearinginwhichmodernistabstraction

canburgeon.

IwantfirsttodiscussthesetwoepisodesintermsofthelongstandingromancebetweentheWest

and the primitive, and then to pit these notions against the ways in which images travel, in

contemporary art, and what such border-crossings may mean in terms of who controls the

disseminationandsignificationof images. I shall be showcasing,in this context, three exhibitions

held inLisbon in1998/9under thegeneralrubricTradingImages.Myprincipalargumentis that,

despiteundeniablechangesintheprocessingofnotionsofselfandotheroverthepastcoupleof

decades,thatis,despitesignificantdiscursiveshifts,theproductionanddivulgationofimagestoday

continues to reproduce a hegemonic structure, since western money and western standards

continue to control the flow of the mainstream. The bifurcation of the globe may be more

accuratelydescribedtodayasrunningalongthenorth/southaxis,butmyusageofthetermwestern

is generic and refers to Eurocentrism as an ideological orientation rather than to the West as a

geographicallocation.

Thetraditionofaromancewiththeprimitive,datingtoRousseausconstructionofmaninastateof

nature,anditsother,shadowyfacein19thcenturySocialDarwinism,hasaffected,explicitlynotonly

western artistic and literary representations since the19th century, but also,more recently, the

tourist industry which continues topromotea nostalgia fora purerandmore authentic social

existence. In the stereotypical image of the tourist in search of authentic experience, or in the

profitable industries of relics and authentic objects the world over, we see that despite

globalisation,theprimitiveandtheculturalothercontinuetoexerciserhetoricalpoweroverthe


2/11

cultureindustry.SinceEdwardSaidsgroundbreakingworkof1978,ithasbeenacommonplaceof

culturaltheorythat,likeorientalism,theprimitivismproducedbyEuropeinthelatterhalfofthe

19th century, suppliedthe necessary Other againstwhichEuropean rationalism reinforceditself.

Putanotherway,inthecolonialcontextswhichratifiedandreinforcedsuchotherness,theprimitive

stoodinthesamerelationtothecivilisedasthemargintothecentre.Temporalityandspatiality

are conflated in forgings of identity that endupvalidatingwesternrationalismandhegemony. In

Gayatri Spivakswords, when a cultural identity is thrustupon onebecause thecentrewants an

identifiablemargin, claims formarginalityassure validationfrom thecentre (Gayatri Spivak).This

mustbereadinthecontextofaEuropewhoseformationwasfiguredandtransfiguredfirstbythe

projectofcolonialismandthenbytheprojectofitsdismantling.

Toreturntothemodernisttaleofprogress:modernismisbothanexpressionofandheirtowestern

rationalism, thediscreetsealing offof disciplinesa descendentofEnlightenmenttaxonomies.The

canonicalversionofthestoryofmodernwesternartistoldasapatriarchal(andethnocentric)family

history:itsvisualschemeisagenealogicaltreewherefathersbegetrebellioussonswhoabsorbtheir

lessonsbeforemakingabreakaway.Inthisversion,extraneousinfluencetheJaponaiserieofthe

mid- to late 19th century, the primitivism of late 19th and early 20th century are figured as

exogamousmarriages, where theexotic orperipheralOther (knowledgeofwhom is garnered by

travelorinmuseums)isdomesticatedandbroughtintothefoldinordertoinvigoratethemoribund

centre:Inthisversionofthestory,thetrafficbetweennon-westernimagesandwesternartmoves

along a one-way street; theWest absorbs its Others into amonolithic, uni-directional narrative

structure.

Inthesymbolicstagingofselfandotheraffordedbytravelfromthe19thcenturyonwards,(astaging

ontowhich,asmanyhaveshown,areattachedtagsofbothgenderandethnicity)theprimitiveand

culturalother areconflatedand instrumentalised in theacquisitionofknowledge/power. In the

museum, theprimitive reaches us in fragments: these fragments, decontextualised,are easily re-

usedinaspiritofbricolage.Asfragmentssplinteredfromcontext,frombodiesandfromdiscourse,

these objects allow us to assimilate the production of the primitive or cultural Other into the

recognisableprocessesof20thcenturyart.HenceJamesCliffordspeaksofethnographicsurrealism:

thenotionthat below(psychologically) andbeyond (geographically)ordinary reality, thereexisted

another reality knowable by relativist ethnographic processes equatable to Surrealism. Prior to

Clifford, Lvi Strausshaddiscussed the science of theconcrete of primitive thought pense


3/11

sauvage asa kind of bricolage,an analysis indebted tothe principlesofcollage developedby

Surrealism.

Suchdissentingvoices,overthepasttwodecades,arere-tellingthemoderniststoryinwayswhichmakeadifference.Employinginterdisciplinaryconceptualstrategiesstrategiesthatcontaminate

the purity of disciplines correlative of post-Enlightenment specialisation and expertise such

narrativesreconstrueDadaandSurrealism, ratherthanCubism,as thefertilegroundoutofwhich

recentartproductionemerges.Surrealiststrategiesofjuxtapositionandnon-linearassociationhave

alsobeenemployedastoolsintheanalysisofthemethodologiesofmuseologyandethnographyas

wellastosupportthecontemporaryrevivalofFreudsconceptoftheuncannyandthelatetwentieth

centurysobsessionwithbodiesandtheirboundaries.TheidentificatoryboundariesofwhatArthur

Dantohastermeddistinctionandexclusionarealsocalledintoquestion.Inthisversionofthestory,

thedistinctionbetweenextraneousandintegralimagesoursandtheirsissuppressedand

replaced by the ostensibly democratic availability, through mechanical reproduction and global

diffusion,ofallrepresentations.Thepureproducts,inJamesCliffordsfamousappropriationofa

phrasefromWilliamCarlosWilliams,gocrazy.Here,thetradeinimagesisfiguredasmovingintwo-

waytrafficonaroadjammedwithsignpostsandbillboards.

These twostoriesaregiven voice atparticular historicalmomentsandare underpinnedbywhat

might,broadlyspeaking,betermedideologies.LookingatGauguinandPicassowithcontemporary

eyes,wemightnote theexotic orprimitivenon-westwassimply atreasure-troveof formsinto

whichwesternartistsdippedintheirdesiretoforgenewplasticvocabularies.Inafamousresponse,

PicassoonceventuredLartngre?Connaispas.Ifhepurposefullyborrowedthecylindricaleyesof

aGrebomaskfortheinversionofsolidandhollowformsinametalconstructionofaguitarin1912-

13,itisalsotruethathewaslittleinterestedinAfricaperse,orinthesocialcontextwhichgenerated

the.Succinctly,JamesCliffordputsitthus:forPicasso,thesemaskshadcomeinhandyformakinga

difference.

Thetruthisofcoursethatnotonlyis primitiveawesternconstructbutitisalsotheproductofa

particularcampaignofacquisition (eg. looting ofBeninbronzesin the1890s). So-calledprimitive

artefacts lost their authenticity as soon as the West got hold of them: no exchange without

contamination.AsCherokee artist JimmieDurhamhas succinctly put it in an essay on collecting,

perhaps every imperiumhasits official collection, andperhaps thosecollections alwaysbeganas

pilesofwartrophies.Withinthewesternaestheticcanon,suchexoticorprimitiveobjectswere


4/11

instrumentalised,andtheirsourcemythologisedasbeingmoreraw.Thenotion,forinstance,that

Africa lies outside or beyond the pale of history and that its cultural products are therefore

ahistoricalisclearlyarticulatedbyHegel:WhatweproperlyunderstandbyAfrica,istheUnhistorical,

undevelopedSpirit,stillinvolvedintheconditionsofmerenature.Lyingclosertoastateofmere

nature,suchproductswereseenalsoastappingtheprimevaldrivessuchassexandfear.

Weknowtodaythatineffect,themasksthatpromptedPicassoinhispaintingofthebrothelscene

thatishisDemoisellesdAvignonhadnothingwhatsoevertodowitheithersexorfear,butthatthey

werefiguredbyhiminaworkwhoseiconographicoriginlayinbothsex andfear:syphilophobia.This

associationofl'rtngrewithdanger,irrationalityandrampantsexualityreinforcesthecherished

dichotomy between primitiveand modern/ civilised fruit of colonialism, later reinforced by

ethnographies such Malinowkis The Sexual Life of Savages of 1929 or Lvi-Strausss La Pense

Sauvage(inbothcases,particularlytellingisthetheinthetitle).Theemphasisisontherationality

ofmodernity versus the irrationality, untramelled libidinality and timelessness of the primitive.

PicassoinaconversationwithMalraux,speaksofAfricanworksofartasobjectsofmagic,weapons

whichallowpeopletofreethemselvesofinternalforces.Lartngreiscannibalisedandingested

asameansofperforminganexorcism,atransformation.Theideaoftheuseofanexternalobjectto

releaseinternalforcesisnotdissimilartoFreudsideaofafetish.

Since the late 1980s, attempts have been made to contextualise, politicise and historicize both

primitiveartandthecontemporaryproductionoftheso-calledculturalperipheries.Oneofthe

explicitaimsofJean-HubertMartinsMagiciensdelaTerreexhibitioninParisin1989,wastoredress

theimbalanceofWilliamRubinsgiganticundertaking Primitivismin20thCenturyArt:Affinityofthe

TribalandtheModernheldatMOMAinNewYorkin1984.WhereRubinsshowtracedanddated

themodernworkssometimestotheweekorday,theprimitiveworksinhisshowweredatedby

the century, and were presented as artefacts of anonymous authorship. Martin took care to

identify,name,anddateallworks,whethertheirprovenancewastheFirstorThirdWorld,butinso

doing in refusing todifferentiatebetweenthetwo wasaccusedofnewtreacheries: ofbeing

ahistoricaltoo,butinhiscaseofrepressingcontextanddifferenceinthenameofglobalisation.In

turn,then,MartinsshowwasitselfsubjecttodeconstructiveresponsesinexhibitionssuchasDan

CameronsCocidoyCrudoattheRainaSofiainMadridin1994,OctavioZayaandAndersMichelsensInterzones in Copenhagen and Uppsala in 1996, Okwui Enwezors Trade Routes: History and

Geography in Johannesburg in1997 andcountlessotherexhibitionsand bienale (Havana Istanbul

Melbourne)thatproliferatedallovertheworldinthe1990s.


5/11

Asglobalisationbringsabout a destructionof thelocal, thecategories of theprimitive and the

culturalotherloselegitimisation.The effects ofthisaremulti-layeredandsometimesnoteasy toclassify.Theeffacementofdifferencesbetweenculturesisreplacedbydifferenceswithinculture

ethnic,class,genderandsoforth.Similarly,thereisalogicofre-placementthatcontinuestocross

not only spatial linesbutalso temporalones anotherplaceandanothertimeare contiguousor

indeedoverlappingconcepts.Sowehaveinfinitevariablesofsamenessanddifference,affinityand

conflict,crossingspatialandtemporalboundaries,ormeetinginborderzonesorcontactzonesthat

aresometimesnoteasytodetermine.Thuswemayhaveneighbouringdiscourseswithinthesame

culturalcontextseemingforeignandexoticised,or,theopposite,discourseswithaffinitiestravelling

acrossspaceandtimetomeetinanobjectofexhibition.Ifprimitivismconflatedtheideaofanother

placeandanothertimesomeplaceelsebecomingalsosomeothertimeinthepresentversionof

globalisation,thereisakindofall-overdiscursivepresentwhichrenderseverything,independentof

timeorplace,simultaneouslyavailableasspectacletotheubiquitoustravellerconsumingculture.

In this context, the items of modernist faithGauguins sojourn in the islands of the Pacific and

PicassosinterestintheTrocadroMuseummaybere-articulated.KirkVarnedoedeconstructsthe

powerfulcause-and-effectsequenceofthesenarratives.HearguesthatPicassosabsorptionofthe

genericallytermedlartngrewasnotameansofincorporatingtheforeign,butrather,ofexploring

and re-iterating neglected or repressed aspects of his own work, notably his caricatures and

sketchbookdrawingsakindof tusslebetweenhighartandlowlyartefactwithinhisownoeuvre

(the finished,publicpaintingversustheraw,immediatesketchbook). Inthisview,theDemoiselles

becomesthesiteforthestagingofthisinternalcontest.

WithregardtoGauguin,Varnedoeisnotaloneinarguingthathisimageryhadlittletodowithdirect

observationsofTahitiansociety.HeanalogisesGauguinsmethodsofpicturemakingwiththetransit

oftheprintedclothsusedbyTahitianwomenbetweencentreandperipheries.Henotesthatthis

fabric, rather than exemplifying the exoticismof local artefacts, wasin fact imported into Tahiti

fromplaceslikeFrankfurtorManchester.TheTahitianscenes,Varnedoetellsus,aretrumpedup

withlocalcolourmuchasthepatternedfabrics[which...]wereactuallytextilesmadeinplaceslike

ManchesterandFrankfurt,withdesignsthoughttoechoSouthSeasstylebutconsideredtoocrude

for European tastes. One might add that the cotton itself reachedManchester from places like

Somalia.Indeed,thisanalogyhasapertinencethatVarnedoedoesnotmention:themanufactureof


6/11

cottonclothinthe19thcenturyprovided(quotePaulE.Lovejoy)aclassicexampleofwhatcameto

becalled triangular trade:cotton goodswere profitablyexchanged for slaves inAfrica; theslaves

weresoldprofitablyinAmerica,partlyinprofitableexchangeforcotton;andinBritain,thecotton

wasprofitablymanufacturedintocloth.

Similarly,ithasbeenconvincinglyarguedthatGauguinsimagesaredrawnfromtheParisianartistic

andliterarymilieu;certainly,themarketforhisTahitianpaintingswasParis.Varnedoenotesthat

Gauguin, evenprior tohis trip to the islands, promoted a scrapbook stylewhich destabilised the

establishedhierarchiesofWesternart,splicingtogetherinfluencesfromDaumier,Giotto,Javanese

carvingsandthedrawingsandprintsofthe19thcenturyJapaneseartistHokusai.Inthisversion,we

seetheartistnotaseyewitnessreporterofexoticlandsbutasabricoleurwhopatcheshisimages

togetherfromobservation,memory,photographs,literaryallusionandartefactsofvariouscultures.

Whatwehave,then,isaneclecticpracticebothinGauguinandinPicassothat,inreinforcing

what had appeared to be trivial marginalia (the bricolage of sketchbooks), makes foreign

alternativesanalogouswithinternalreforms.

Iwantnowtoleapforwardinspaceandtimeandlookbrieflyatthreeofthefourexhibitionsinthe

cycleTradingImagesheldatthePavilhoBrancoinLisbonthrough1998andearly99,becauseit

istiedintothedeconstructive,discursivestrategieswhichhaveaffectedartinstitutionsgloballyin

thelastdecadeorso.BearinginmindthereadingofGauguinandPicassosinstrumentalisationofthe

primitiveandtheculturalother,Iwanttoqueryifandhowthenotionoftheculturalotheris

givenvoiceintheworkofthreecontemporaryartists.Ifclaimsfortheautonomyofarthavemarked

the rhetoric of Modernism sustaining the boundaries between art and the experience of the

everyday postmodernism, (nourished by the dissemination of poststructuralist thought, by

feminismand by Lacanian psychoanalysis, by social anthropology and cultural studies) ostensibly

undermines, as Marcus and Myers put it, the institutional authority that has underwritten

intellectualpracticesindiscretedisciplines,includingmuseology.

AdrianaVarejoworksaroundquestionsregardingherownidentity:whatitmeanstobeBrazilian;

inotherwords, theconstructionofBrazilianethnicities. Privilegingwhatmightbe termeda first-

personsubjectposition,sheconstructsherworkaroundresearchintothephysical remainsof the

colonialproject, itsvestiges inworksof art, architectureandartefacts. Varejodiffersfrommany

artistswhoworkinthisparticularfieldofactivity(inHalFosterssuccinctformulation,theartistas


7/11

ethnographer) by harnessingherat timesManichaeanpolitics toa careful, almostold-fashioned

senseof facture. She has at her disposal greatmimetic facility: her aptitude for trompe loeil is

noteworthy whether in the rendition of irregularities of tiles laid on walls, of the elaborate

decorativepaintedmotifsofthesetiles,ofseascapesorconventionalportraitgenres,orwhethershe

takesonthenaivestyleofvotiveimagesandcolonialpainting.

Varejosworkisentirelybuiltaroundthecirculationandarticulationofreadymadeimageswithin

Braziliancultures.HerrepresentationoftheBrazilianbaroque,withitsrichheritageofmadeobjects,

castsacriticaleyeonthemakingofBrazilianheritage(whichincludesEuropeandominationandthe

slavetrade):atwhatcost atthecostofhowmanyhumanlivessuchan identitywasforged.In

severaloftheworks,thesmoothskinofthetrompeloeil surfaceofthepaintingis literallyripped

apart:thecanvasspillsopenrevealing,asitwere,theworksgoryentrails,anextraordinaryunder-

surfaceofimpastoredsandbrowns,theflagellated,evisceratedcorpseofwhatoncewasthesmooth

architecturalbody.Overlayingtheornamentalrhetoricofdiscoveryandconquestwithalacerated

corporality,orcirculatingsubversivelyamongtherepresentationsofthevariedethnicitiesofBrazil,

Varejoallowsthebodytoemergeasapowerfulmetaphorandasthesignifierparexcellenceinall

herwork.

TheChileanartistEugenioDittborniswellknownforhisAirmailPaintingswhichhebeganmakingin

1984.Havingdecidedtoremain inChileratherthangointoexile,Dittobornselectedformofart-

productionworkswhicharefoldedandpostedinspeciallymadeairmailpackagestotheirdifferent

international destinations itself becomes a political act. An act of memorialising and

communicating;aboveallanactofexchange.Transitisintrinsicnotonlytotheworkscontentbut

also to its material existence, as is the problematised relationship between countries that are

purportedly economically and culturally peripheral and an empowered, if idealised, hegemonic

centre.LikeVarejo,Dittbornutilisestheprinciplesofcollageorbricolage,aprocedurewhich,in

Varnedoes terms,might be likened to the sketchbooksof Gauguin and Picasso. However, while

therecanbenocoherentargumentmadetosupportthenotionthateitherPicassoorGauguinused

suchformsofbricolageinwayswhichwereself-consciouslycriticalofthecolonialenterprisesuch

an argument would be nothing short of anachronistic both Varejo and Dittborn poach

readymadeimageryinordertoexaminetheirideologicalunderpinningsandpoliticallegacies.


8/11

DetourandtransitarecentralconcernsinDittbornswork.Thepersistenceofthecreasesandfold-

marks in the exhibited works expose the traces of the works passage through time and space.

Moreover,therelationshipbetweeneventswhicharespatiallyandtemporallydistantisseminalto

Dittbornsworkwhichispackedwithallusionstoco-incidence,whethertemporalorspatialDepth

and surface, like distance and proximity, become filled with significance; thus, writing and

archaeologyarethetwinfacesofasingleandsingularneedtouncover/discover.

Therelationshipbetweentimeandthings(withitsdensesuggestionsofmortality)isalsounderlined

by thenatureof theobjects themselves.Simpledrawings appropriated from a childrensmanual

evokeearlylearningandnamingprocesses,Drawingandwriting,mark-makingandcollectingimages;

theseworks,atoncepalimpsestsandmissives,becomerepositoriesofmemories.Dittbornreveals

several strata ofmemory theconstructionofanthropological,historical, collectiveand personal

memorythroughtechnologieswhichmovefromthepersonal,autographictraceofthedoodleorof

handwritingtomechanicalreproduction,andparticularlyphotographyandphotocopy.Smallevents

are salvaged fromoblivionandgivenbodythrough formsof representationthat inthemselveslay

baredominantmodesofclassificationandlegibility.Photographyasatechnologywhichhasbeen

usedtotakepossessionoftheexoticisshowntobeembeddedinpowerpolitics,particularlyasa

historicalmeans of documenting Latin American visuality.Dittbornswork in itsephemeral yet

stubborn material presence exposes the intersections of various conflicting discourses and

representationalgenres.HisHistoriesoftheHumanFacelayingbaretheconventionsofportraiture

fromcaricature tophotography renderintovisualsignsthe tensionbetweenmaskandidentity,

imageandidentificationwhicharticulatesthefantasyoftheportraitwithinwhatHomiBhabhahas

identifiedastheambivalentnarcissismofthecolonialpsyche.

AustralianartistNarelleJubelincreatesatensioninherworkbetweenthecontradictorystrainsof

the political and the aesthetic, underpinning this tension with the notion that the modernist

programmecannotbeseenindisembodiedandhermeticallysealedaesthetictermsalone.In Ecru,

thedeconstructionofmodernismas anauthoritariandiscoursewas self-consciouslypitted against

the crisp architecture a white pavilion which epitomisesmodernist design. Always minutely

researched,thequietimpactofthisworkreliesontheconfrontationbetweenitspolemicandviolent

contentand apresentation that ispristine andelegant.Oneof therecurrentvehicles in Jubelins

workistheuseofneedlework,whethersewing,weavingor petitpointembroidery.Unlikepainting

or sculpture, these are traditionally unacknowledged and labour-intensive forms of expression

performed, usually anonymously, by women. Themythical relationship between such crafts and


9/11

story-telling amongst women is manifest linguistically in the analogies between spinning and

telling(spinningayarn,)AndJubelinsartis,subtly,alwaysaformoftelling .

In Ecru, the story she tells is one of war and suffering, forging subtle analogies that underlinequestionsofculpabilityandresponsibility.AnAustralianartistworkinginawhitepavilioninPortugal,

weavingtogethernarrativeswhichinvolvenotonlyAustraliaandPortugalthroughthatwhichlinks

them:Timor,IndonesiaandEngland...Jubelinsconceptualframeworkisbasedonextensiveresearch

on the suffering of the East Timorese people, and indeed on Australian, American and British

culpabilityinthismatter,usuallyrepressedbythepress.

BasingherinstallationonabookbyAustralianwriterMicheleTurnerwholikeJubelinherselfisof

theopinionthattoknowmeanstobearresponsibility,andhencetobeobligedtobearwitness,

Jubelinfocuses,fromTurnersaccountofhundredsofTimoresesurvivors,onthetestimonyofone

FtimaGusmo,wholostthreeofherfourchildrenandsufferedotheratrocitiesinhernativeland.

JubelincoveredthewindowsofthePavilhoBrancowithFtimaGusmostestimony.Thistext,in

Jubelinshand,coversthewindows,upstairsanddown,ofonesideofthepavilion;ontheotherside

ofthebuilding,thetexttranslatedintoPortugueseiswritteninthehandofAlexandraCostaeSousa,

whotranslatedTurners textsfromEnglishintoPortuguese.OneTimoresewoman(Gusmo), Two

Australian women (Turner, Jubelin), one Portuguese woman (Costa e Sousa); several native

languages:narrativesandtranslations,transcriptionsarecrossedover,plaitedandwoventogether

so that we are given not a single (official) narrative thread but a polyphony of feminine voices

bearinghorrificwitness.Thewritingonthewindow,partgraffiti,partillusorylacecurtain(fromthe

outside,thewritingcannotbereadandcoalescesintoakindoflacyweave)was,dependingonthe

light,moreor less difficult to read: thespectatorwasobliged tobecomeanactiveparticipant in

deciphering,intheresponsibilityofknowing.

Upstairs, Jubelin presented tinypetit point renditions ofmodernist architectural icons in picture

frames:ManyofthesebuildingshavebeenrecentlyacclaimedbyUNESCOaspartofworldheritage.

Thesepetit point photographs are placed on round side-tables designed in 1929 by Giuseppe

Terragni,andtodaywidelyavailablecommercially.Jubelinleadsusrhetorically,ifsottovoce,tothe

conclusionthatdesign,likearchitecture,isnotneutralbutissteepedinideology.Thelastpartofthis

project consistedoftworoundtables suspendedoffthegroundanddisplayingitemsofcutleryof

acclaimedmodernist design. The round tables, with overtones of international negotiation, are

formallyechoedbythesmallertablesupstairs:aneatoverlappingofthehistoricalandthedomestic.


10/11

The cutlery itself much of which extends beyond the modernist axiom that formmust reflect

function seems tobe an ironicand domesticationof theinstruments ofviolence implicit in the

testimonyofFtimaGusmo.Alsoplaceduponthetablearethetranscripts,againinJubelinsown

hand, from a trial which took place in Liverpool in 1996 (this part of the work was shown in

Liverpool), knownas thetrialofthe PloughshareFour.Writtenontranslucentpaper,thesetexts

seem tominiaturise thetranscriptsonthe glasswindowssurrounding them.Thecase inquestion

was one inwhich fourwomen stood trial and were, to much jubilation, acquittedby the local

Liverpool jury fordestroying aHawk Aircraftof thetype sold by theBritish government tothe

governmentofIndonesia.Onceagain,subversivewomensvoicesvoiceswhichwillnotacquiesce

toviolence,voiceswhichwillbearwitnessareattheheartofJubelinscritique.

The marriage of exquisitely elegant formal means with such inflammatory content is the

contradiction upon which Jubelins work is built; like Dittborn and Varejo, but using different

conceptualandmaterialprocedures,Jubelininvitesthepublicnottopassivespectatorshipbuttoa

pertinentandtimeouscriticalandultimately,compromisinginvolvement.

ThethreebodiesofworkIhavediscussedall,indifferentways,employdeconstructiveidiomsbased

onthepresuppositionthatartmust,inthefirstinstance,mean,itmustsignify,beaboutsomething:

this strategy is in the first instance a contestation of the formalism that marks modernist

aestheticism.VarejoandJubelin,inverydifferentways,highlightthewaysinwhichwomenhave

traditionallybeendeniedaccesstothespaceswhereknowledgesareconstitutedanddisseminated

andrevealhowtoenterthatspaceofknowledgeisanactofpersonalandpoliticalrisk:feministand

postcolonialareintricatelyandintimatelywoventogether.Thisis,perhapsevenmoreinterestingly,

trueinDittbornsworktoo,asheusesanidiomthatside-stepsanyformheroic,self-affirmation.This

motion towards meaning nevertheless continues to seek, in the last analysis, validation from a

centrewhich,if shifting, islocatedin theculturalhegemoniesofthewest/north.Underlyingmost

suchworks,thereisanagendafortheaestheticallycorrectevenatatimewhentheaesthetichas

loststatusasarelevantcategory.

OfthethreeexhibitionsIhavediscussed,Varejosmakesthemostimmediateandphysicalappeal

towhatiserroneouslyandpatronisinglytermedthegeneralpublicbutherworkruns,asInoted,

the risk of ideological Manichaeism. Jubelin runs the contrary risk: the rarefied subtlety, the

complexityof theconnections runthe dangerofover-conceptualisation, reinforcing thegospelof

rationalityuponwhichwesternculturalhegemonyhasconstructeditself.ItisDittborn;perhaps,who


11/11

treads the fine line between them. The main questions raised by all these shows hinges about

mattersthatcannot,perhaps,findclosure.Thisistheoldproblemofengagart,somethingWalter

Benjaminwasawareofwhen, in 1936,hewrotehisessay The AuthorasProducer, butalready

implicit in Thework of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. One of the reasons for the

tensionsexistentin theveryconceptof engagart art that isideologicallycorrectis thatof

artists belonging to a privileged class and that therefore, with regard to the cultural other, all

speakingisspeakingfor;perhapsforthisreason,themostconvincingworkarises,asTrinhT.Minh-

hasuggests,whenartiststakeonboardaknownsubjectpositionthatis,taketheirownsubjectivity

ratherthantheoryasstartingpoint.IftheWesthasbeenstructuredbyitsothers,itisalsotrueto

saythatthevoicesoftheseotherscontinuetoheardwhenchannelledbackthroughtheWest,and

aretransformedintothemorecharismaticorphotogenicformsofexpressionstillprivilegedinthe

conceptofmajorart.Contrariwise,whenDeleuzeandGuattaripraiseminorliterature,theyseem

to be celebrating truly deterritorialised discourse as discourse not embedded in either place or

conquest,Whatwehave,alas,isthecirculationofimageswhichtravelbetweenexhibitionvenues

andcirculateamongartpublications,imagesthattravelbackandforth,aretranslated,transliterated,

transposed,filteredback:atwhatpointcantheroadalongwhichthistrafficpassesbecometrulya

highwayalongwhichinformationmovesfreelywithoutlegitimisationfromaculturalcentre?

RuthRosengarten

2001,forTradingImages

How the West was Won: Images in Transit, 2001

Documents

Transcript of How the West was Won: Images in Transit, 2001