krzystof wodiczko - strategies of public address

8/9/2019 krzystof wodiczko - strategies of public address

1/4


2/4

42

KRZYSZTOF

WODICZKO

The aim

of critical public art

is

neither a happy self-exhibition nor a

passive

collaboration with the grand gallery of the

city,

its ideological

theater and architectural-social system. Rather, it is an engagement

in

strategic challengesto thecity

structures

and mediums that

mpHiafp

our

everyday perceptionof

the

world: anengagement

throughaesthetic-crit

ical interruptions, infiltrations and appropriations thatquestion the

Embolic,

psychopolitical and

economic operations

of the

city.

To

further clarify my position on public

art,

I must also express my

critical

detachment from the apocalyptic visions of urban design

and

environment

suggested by

Jean

Baudrillard in

terms

of cyberblitz and

hyperreality : however brilliant

his

metaphorical-critical

constructs

may

be,

they

cannot account for the

complexity

of symbolic, socialand

economic

life

in the contemporarypublic domain.

For Baudrillardthe Bauhaus proposed thedissociation of

every

com

plex subject-object relation intosimple;

analytic,

rational éléments

that

can

be recombined

in

functional

ensemblesand

which then take on

sta

tus as the environment. ^

Today,

however,

we

are beyond even

this:

[W]hen the still

almost

artisanal functionalism of the Bauhaus is sur

passed in thecyberneticand mathematical design of the

environment...

weare fceyond theobject and its

function

Nothing retains theplace

of the critical,

regressive-transgressive discourse

of

Dada

and

of sur

realism. Andyet

this total

vision

omits

thepowerful

symbolic

articula

tion of twoeconomically related but

distinct

zones

in

the contemporary

city: state architecture and real-estate architecture.

The

two work

in

tandem: state architecture appears solid, symbolically full, rooted in

sacred historic ground, while real-estate architecture develops freely,

appropriating,

destroying, redeveloping,

etc.

A monstrous

evicting

agency,

this architecture imposes the bodies of the homeless

onto

the

bodies —the structures

and sculptures—of

state architecture,

especially in those ideological graveyards of heroic history usually

located in downtown areas.

Now in the current attempts to revitalize—to

gentrify—the

down

towns,

cities legally protect

these

graveyards as

meaningful

ideological

theater,

not

as

places of

cyberblitz

where the

end of signification has

been

reached. In this regard Marc Guillaume is only partially correct

when

he

states

that the

contemporary

dovratown is just

a

signal system

for

touristic

consumption:

The obsession with patrimony; he conservation of a few scattered

centers, some monuments

and muséographie

remains, are

justsuch

STRATEGIES OF PUBLIC ADDRESS

43

attempts

[to

compensate for the loss of social representation in

urban

architecture].

Nonetheless, theyare all in vain.These efforts

do not make a

memory;

in fact they have nothing to do wdth the

subtle art of memory.

What

remains are

merely

the stereotypical

signs

of

the

city, a

global

signal systemconsumed by tourists.^

And

yet

it

is

still

possible to

establish a critical dialogue with state and

real-estate architecture or even,as described byGuUlaume,

with

monu

ments to pseudomemory.

Not

only is

it

still possible,

it

is urgently

needed—that

is,

if we

are

to

continue

the unfinished businessof the

sit

uationist

urban project:

People will

still

be

obliged for a

long time to

accept the

era of reified

cities.

But

the attitude with which they accept it can

be

chapged

immediately. We

must spread

skepticism

toward those bleak,

brightly

colored

kindergartens, the

new

dormitory citiesof both

East and

West.

Only a

mass awakening

will

posethe question

of a

conscious

construction

of the

urban

milieu...

The

basic

practiceof

the theory

of

unitary

urbanism

will be the

transcription of the

whole

theoretical

lie

of urbanism, detourned

[diverted, appropriated] for the

purpose

of de-alienation: wecon

stantly

have todefend ourselves

from

the

poetry

of the

bards

of con

ditioning—to jam their messages, toturn their songs inside

out.^

Of course, the

situationist projectof intervention

now requires

critical

evaluation;

some

of its methods and aims seem too

Utopian,

total

itarian,

naive orfull

of avant-garde

aestheticism

tobe

accepted today. In

this

respect we can learn much

firom

past andpresent avant-garde prac

tices, whichI will schematize below n

terms

of their relationshipsto:

the

cultural

system of art and

its institutions; the larger

system of

culture

and

its institutions;

the system of everyday life ; and

mass or public

spectacle and

the city.

HISTORIC AVANT GARDE (1910-1940s): futurism,

dada,

supre-

matism,

constructivism,

surrealism. Artistic interventions

against

art

and

its

institutions;

critical and self-critical manifestations of

the

rejec

tion

of

its

cultural system. Discovery

of directpublic

address:

e.g.,

futur

ist synthetic theater, evenings, actions and manifestoes. Discovery of

media art;discovery of critical

public

art

as contestation. Rootsof situa

tionist aestheticism (rejected by new avant-garde as

well

as by engaged

and

neo avant-gardes).


3/4


4/4

44

KRZYSZTOF WODICZKO

SOCIALLY

ENGAGED AVANT-GARDE

(1920-1930s):

Brecht,

Grosz,

Tatlin, Lissitzky, Vertov, Alexsandr Bogdanov, Varvara Stepanova^

Lynbov

Popova, Galina

and Olga

Chichagova,

Heartfield,

etc. Critical-

affirmative action on culture and

its institutions;

critical transformation

of the institutionsof the cultural system of art. Engagement in mass

publications,

design,

educatibn systems,

film

(Kipo-Pravda,

Kino-Oko),

opera, radio, theater ( epic form,

estrangement

technique),'

agit-prop, proletcult, spectacles, Novy

Lef (Sergei Tretiakov's

affir

mative intervention).

Roots of

present

affirmarive

interest in media

cultural programs and public

domain;

also roots of

situationist

inter

ruption

and détournement.

CRITICAL

NEO-AVANT-GARDE

(1960-1970s):

Daniel Buren, sup

port-surface artists, Hans Haacke, etc.

(Missing

reference: British pop

art.) Critical-affirmative action on art and its institutions; critical and

self-critical manip ulation of

its cultural

system. Artistic attack onart

as

myth

of

bourgeois

culture; critical

exposure of

structural

ideological

Imks

between institutions of bourgeois art and culture—politics, ethics,

philosophy, etc. Critical infiltration of museumsasofficial p ublic specta

cle,

but no

significant attempts toenter mass spectacle, popular culture

public

design.

SITUATIONIST

CULTURAL

AVANT-GARDE

AS

REVOLUTIONARY

FORCE (1960-70S): Henri Lefebvre, Situationist International,Guy

Debord, etc.

(Missing

references: Huxus,

punk

rock). Cultural revolu

tionary intervention

in everyday

life and its institutions (environment,

popular media, etc.);critical and self-critical abandonm ent of art as cul

tural

system and

of avant-garde art as specialized procedure. Public

intervention against spectacle;

tendency

toward

alternative

spectacle.

Creation of situations

concretely

and

deliberately

constructed by the

collective organization

of

a

unitary

ambience and game

of

events ;

manipulation of popular culture against

mass

culture. Organization of

dérive

(drift), urban wanderings

to contest modem structures, domi

nant architecture, city

planning (surrealist

tacrics).

Influence of

postmarxist cultural

studies and

sociology;

the

city as rediscovered

and

magnified festival to

overcome

conflict

between

everyday

life and

fes

tivity. Attack onpassive reception ofthe city: Our first task is to enable

people to stop identifying with

their

surroundings and with model pat

terns of

behavior.

PRESENT

CRITICAL

PUBLIC ART:

NEW

AVANT-GARDE AS INTEL

LIGENCE :

Barbara Kruger,

Dara Birnbaum, Alfredo Jarr, Dennis

STRATEGIES OF PUBLIC ADDRESS

45

Adams, Dan Graham, etc;

also

Public

Art

Fund

(New York),

Public

Access (Toronto),

Art Angels

Trust (London), etc. Critical-affirmative

action on

everyday

life and its institutions (education,

design,

environ

ment spectacle and m ass

media, etc.);

critical transformation

of

culture

from within. Critical

collaboration

with

institutions of mass and public

media,

design

and

education

in order

to

raise consciousness (or

critical

unconscious) regarding urban experience: to

win

time and space in

information, advertising,

billboards, lightboards, subways,

publicmon

uments and buildings, television cable

and

public channels, etc. Address

to passive viewer, alienated

city-dweller.

Continuous

influence of

cul

tural

studies enhanced by feminist critique of

representation.

References

1.

Jean Baudrillard,

Design and

Environment

or

How

Political Economy

Escalates into

Cyberblitz,

in

Por a Critique of the Political Economy of

the Sign

(St. Louis: Telos

Press,1981), pp.185 203.

2. Marc Guillaume, in

Zone

1/2(1986),

p. 439.

3.

See

Situationist

International

Anthology ed. Ken Knabb (Berkeley:

Bureau of Public

Secrets,

1981).

krzystof wodiczko - strategies of public address

Documents

Transcript of krzystof wodiczko - strategies of public address